Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ceejayoz 43 days ago
I have very little patience for bothsidesism at this point.
2 comments

Your side is not the only side.
Obviously.

"Bothsidesism" posits that the two sides are broadly similar. The last few years have debunked that concept pretty conclusively.

It also posits that there are only two sides.
In the US, that is functionally the case, and likely to remain that way.
Yes but OP made a good point (model censorship going too far in the name of "woke"ness) and you shut them down.
Yes, because it's disingenuous bullshit.

As it was with "campus protests violate free speech!" from the folks who immediately turned around and banned voluntary diversity programs at universities.

As it was with "Twitter bans violate free speech" from the folks who bought it and banned @elonjet and the word cisgender.

Are people not allowed to suggest models may be too censored? Is that idea censored?
Am I not allowed to suggest it's disingenuous bullshit to pull the "both sides" thing?
why? Most regulations (ADA, affirmative action, etc.) fall into the "not woke enough" category of model regulation. Current administration aside, complaints of this sort are more likely. It’s absurd, really, to believe there would be a regulation governing a model being too woke; regulation itself is woke
> Most regulations (ADA, affirmative action, etc.) fall into the "not woke enough" category of model regulation

For sake of argument, let’s assume this is true. Those rules are still structured as laws, with boundaries and legal recourse. The precedent being set, that the President gets “voluntary” deference from private companies, is un-American and will be abused by the left.

I don't think I'm smart/intellectual enough to respond to this

or i just don't understand what you're saying

The ADA isn't about wokeness. It's about being able to live in society with a disability.
Limiting a business's ability to exist because they can't afford to accommodate a small percentage of the population is 100% about wokeness
Well, we've just now defined safety rules, health codes, paying taxes, and the like as "woke".

You'd be calling the First Amendment woke if we proposed it now.

"Woke" is just a dog whistle. It's used by anti-intellectuals on the right to signal their allegiance to whatever their dear leader says, and is used to say "I am triggered by this idea" regardless of what the idea is. Anything can be woke to these people, up to and including the 2nd Amendment.
it is actually perfect, you hear or read “woke” you can immediately turn around and know the level of intelligence in front of you requires immediate extraction from any further proceedings :)
Taxes? How?

I agree with the rest, sure.

Health codes and safety rules are woke, yes. I would have thought that as given. Debates over where you draw the line are absolutely a matter of wokeness.

The way freedom of expression is regulated today is generally woke. The WPFI is insanely woke.

> Taxes? How?

They, at times, "[limit] a business's ability to exist because they can't afford to accommodate a small percentage of the population".

> Health codes and safety rules are woke, yes.

I take it you never read the parable of the boy who cried wolf.

> Debates over where you draw the line are absolutely a matter of wokeness.

This is offensive in how trite it is

ADA preceeded wokeness by at least 2 decades