←back to thread

560 points whatsupdog | 7 comments | | HN request time: 0.301s | source | bottom
Show context
perihelions ◴[] No.45167153[source]
Hard-earned freedoms are wasted on societies who don't have memories of what it took to earn them. Freedom is a ratchet: slides easily and frictionlessly one way, and offers immense resistance in the other.

This is all so disheartening.

replies(8): >>45167266 #>>45167299 #>>45167311 #>>45167395 #>>45167428 #>>45167827 #>>45168737 #>>45169148 #
1. whimsicalism ◴[] No.45167827[source]
I am perfectly fine living in a society where you are not free to assault/storm government buildings and personally believe that the Jan 6th riots should have been met with more violent force than what occurred to protect the congressional proceedings.
replies(1): >>45168235 #
2. whimsicalism ◴[] No.45168285[source]
all that from one comment, huh?
replies(1): >>45168436 #
3. fruitworks ◴[] No.45168436{3}[source]
Who do you want to step in to save the capitol from armed right wing protesters? The police and the military are largely sympathetic to the right wing.

The only solution is for the left-wing of US politics to stop disarming itself. The reason that voting power exists is because it represents the fighting power of the voters. When you decouple the two, you create a power imbalance that gangsters and tyrants can exploit.

Capitol riots are just a symptom of that power imbalance.

replies(1): >>45168602 #
4. whimsicalism ◴[] No.45168602{4}[source]
jeez and you accuse me of LARPing online. call me when your revolution starts
replies(1): >>45168779 #
5. fruitworks ◴[] No.45168779{5}[source]
How to win any argument on HN:

0. Start by moving the overton window to the edge of civility. Do not provide any justifications for your opinion. For example, "Protestors inside a government building should be met with violence"

1. Don't address any points they make

2. Make a snarky passive agressive response, thus winning.

3. Flag them for hurting your feelings. By discussing your ideas concretely ("who should perform the violence" "why?"), they have explored the "uncivil" aspects. This grounds for deleting their comment.

replies(2): >>45168870 #>>45178684 #
6. whimsicalism ◴[] No.45168870{6}[source]
sorry for not engaging faithfully with a user that called me a coward within 3 sentences. your comment was flagged by third parties
replies(1): >>45169031 #
7. yibg ◴[] No.45178684{6}[source]
Or just start with ad hominem attacks first and then get indignant when the other person doesn't want to engage in an "argument".