[c03]

This is a great point where nationality does not reflect political values. Many Americans exist that do not carry the opinion of their government, as do many Russians.

If a global set of "Don't be an asshole" values could be defined, put into words, shared and progressed, it would have much greater value to a consumer and the world than merely going back to nationalism and protectionism.

[rapnie]

But it is not nationalism as the set of common shared values aren't bound to nations. And neither is it protectionism in the traditional meaning of the term. If you don't participate in upholding the value system (or worse actively seeks to destroy it) then you don't get to reap the benefits. I read this "buy European" initiative as a "don't buy American" in light of the current political situation. Withholding trade is an incentive to US voters to fix their system and tap into the benefits once again as a reward.

[johngladtj]

That's called pan nationalism a superset of nationalism

[a12k]

> Many Americans exist that do not carry the opinion of their government, as do many Russians.

I can’t speak for Russia because I have no data, but most Americans don’t carry the opinion of this government.

[Goto80]

If that is the case, how did this government get a majority?

[greedylizard]

The electoral college rigs the game. If one person equaled one vote, American government could look significantly different right now.

[philistine]

Those are sufficient excuses that prevent countries from signing free trade deals with other nations: we don't trust the health of your political system to sign a free trade deal with your nation.

[walls]

It would still have trump at the head of it.

[tacticalturtle]

In a world without an electoral college, I’m not sure you can say this.

Almost every state is winner take all in electoral votes.

I suspect there are a lot of discouraged voters who don’t vote, because they live in states where their opinion is overrun by the political slant of the state’s majority.

In a direct popular vote, their vote counts a lot more.

[alistairSH]

Trump might be in the WH, but Congress would possibly not be controlled by the GOP.

[ajuc]

They don't support imperialism, but they also don't care enough to be against imperialism. They care about egg prices or their favorite culture wars more than about people dying elsewhere.

It's egoism, simple as that.

[consteval]

I think it’s more complicated - this feels like a psychology and biology issue.

Those things are naturally closer to them which then means they generate stronger emotions. Just intuitively, emotions fuel pretty much all decisions. I mean, if heroin didn’t feel good people wouldn’t do it. If fast food didn’t taste good people wouldn’t eat it. Conversely, negative emotion create patterns of behavior.

Our behavior is complex and choice is a spectrum. I don’t really choose to brush my teeth, it just kind of happens. I can stop, but I don’t. I look around me and nobody stops brushing their teeth. Perhaps brushing our teeth is so popular because it creates positive emotions. Less shame, less worries, more comfort.

I think, those in power harness this quite effectively.!

[atwrk]

Voter suppression: https://www.gregpalast.com/trump-lost-vote-suppression-won/

[re-thc]

> how did this government get a majority?

That's not what people voted for (agreeing with the government). They were given choices and to pick what they felt they preferred.

[ajuc]

People have choosen to believe obvious lies because they wanted them to be true, not because they thought they were true. It's as much their fault as the politicians who lied to them.

[re-thc]

> because they wanted them to be true

This assumes they even know what the truth is. We have discovered that a lot of people don't know how tariffs work for example.

[ajuc]

They know enough to understand which way should their ignorance be pointed to support their worldview.

I've seen this countless times, I'm from eastern Poland, we had our own MAGA ruling for 8 years, and eastern Poland is where most of their voters come from.

When it benefits these people - they understand enough to know what the mainstream opinion is and they don't oppose it.

When it does not support their worldview - they suddenly stop believing the experts or forget what the expert opinion is.

Ignorance is not the root cause. It's a protection mechanism.

It's fascinating to watch at first, but after 8 years of this I'm just tired.

[anal_reactor]

It did because that's exactly what people want, it's just that many people will tell you otherwise because they live in an information bubble and cannot believe that there exists voters outside of their bubble.

[FirmwareBurner]

Same with opinions on HN. People here don't realize they're in a bubble and their opinions aren't representative for the masses. If you tell them that you get downvoted and flagged.

[croniev]

I'm sorry but it sounds like you were trying to spread conspiracy theories, the way you are putting it. Do you have some examples?

[fsflover]

Maybe something like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43068557 and this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43264608

[alistairSH]

Trump won 49.x% of the vote.

But the US doesn’t have direct presidential elections. It has an archaic, anti-democratic system called the Electoral College, which grants land in Wyoming greater relative weight than people in Texas.

[ryandrake]

Don't forget: Only about 2/3 of eligible voters voted. So those 1/3 who didn't vote, effectively voted for (or at the very least, condoned) the winner.

They didn't physically vote, but by not-voting, they are literally saying "I'm OK with whoever wins."

[ben_w]

A mixture of things. Dishonesty — which is broader than just "lying" — for one. One of Trump's talking points during the election was "never started a war", and now: https://theconversation.com/trumps-threats-on-greenland-gaza...

But also, people can change their minds between elections: https://eu.providencejournal.com/story/news/politics/2025/03...

[DougN7]

A huge number felt they had to vote for the lesser of two bad choices. I think many that voted for Trump were naive and are genuinely surprised at what they are seeing. At least I’d like to think so, despite what you might find on forums.

[c03]

My point was that a company, and thus products and employees, do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the government of which it is based.

Besides taking ethical actions, how do you signal that that you share a certain set of political values with your consumers and shareholders, instead of your "somewhat arbitrary" law makers. It is a big shift, and not always an option, to move physical factories, workplaces, etc.

[croniev]

I agree, but there are also cases where it is blatantly clear that companies are not only on Trumps side but taking initiative themselves to corrode our political culture, and people here in europe are too comfy to make a switch, apart from a lack of similar alternatives.

X and Meta are most obvious, and I don't know about google's involvement, but have been trying to convince people to move away from it for years. It's a similar situation with streaming services.

[philistine]

Ultimately it doesn't matter. We haven't blocked trade only with the segment of Iranians who support their government's nuclear program. We blocked trade with all Iranians, and put extra restrictions on specific government actors who enact nuclear policy.

Same thing with Russia. Or Syria. Or North Korea. In foreign affairs, all the citizens of a nation are collectively held responsible for the action of that state.

Which is to say: stop hedging. This is your government. You cannot wash your hands of this mess because you voted for Kodos. It's your mess, admit it, and see what you can do to fix it. The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing.

[hayst4ck]

> If a global set of "Don't be an asshole" values could be defined,

The history of "rights" is what you're looking for, and this would come in the form of a list of rights.

You would probably get a lot out of reading The Declaration of the Rights of Man (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/rightsof.asp), as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...).

Thomas Paine wrote about the philosophy of rights as well, and you would probably get a lot out of reading his works such as The Rights of Man (https://www.ushistory.org/paine/rights/c1-013.htm)

Something being a right means that law does not grant it. If law granted it, it would be a privilege rather than a right. Governments exist to protect rights, but they don't grant rights. That's the solution to the bootstrapping problem for non authoritarian forms of government and why it is always OK to defend your rights, even if they are illegal under a specific form of government. America's founding document, the declaration of independence, is explicit about this idea.

> shared and progressed

No, this is where you are wrong, you didn't use the word defend, and that's really where the problem with liberal ideas starts and ends. They must be defended, at personal cost, with force.

Defending an idea that can't reward or punish you will not be as profitable or safe as defending a man who can reward or punish you. It is much easier for a man to build an army than for an idea to build an army. It will always be painful to defend your rights in the short term, but if you don't you will never have rights in the long term.

Solidarity, risking your own safety and well being for the benefit of someone else, is the only way to achieve a world you want to live in, but some of the builders of that world won't get to experience it, and that's a hard sell to people who just want to see their kids smile.

[parski]

Hear!

[ajuc]

> Many Americans exist that do not carry the opinion of their government, as do many Russians.

Their taxes still support their governments and so do your purchases if you buy there.

[roenxi]

> If a global set of "Don't be an asshole" values could be defined, put into words, shared and progressed...

Being a cynic, I expect the speeches to start with that then smoothly translate into "and therefore we have to spend more money on waging war in foreign countries". The US is exemplifying some of the best international values right now of trying to find a sharp end to all the meaningless dying we've been seeing for the last few years.

If it takes nationalism to make people serious about avoiding WWIII, so be it. Vote nationalist.

[anal_reactor]

> The US is exemplifying some of the best international values right now of trying to find a sharp end to all the meaningless dying we've been seeing for the last few years.

It's not rape if you agree to it.

[c03]

If nuance is that hard to equip, then please do, but please be keenly aware that this is your own choice. No one will save you from your own actions.

[touwer]

You mean rape, fraud, corruption, narcissim, tax the poor, cut social welfare, suck up to the agressor, anti-tolerance, etc?

[galfarragem]

> Many Americans exist that do not carry the opinion of their government, as do many Russians.

As do many Europeans...