The Alt-Right Playbook: I Hate Mondays on HackerTube: recommended by 1 Hacker News commenter across 1 month, 2021–2025.
commentary · evergreen
An Innuendo Studios Alt-Right Playbook episode about a rhetorical tactic of dismissing partial fixes to problems. It frames this as a style of argument that treats flaws as unfixable facts of life.
Referenced to describe an argument style that rejects incremental improvements, and in discussions of differing liberal and conservative views of society.
“There's an interesting video essay on this exact style of argument, if you're interested.”
4 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
Sure, but reducing bad things is helpful even if it isn't 100%. There's an interesting video essay on this exact style of argument, if you're interested. ▶ this video
in “Man dies of a heart attack after minors swatted him over his rare Twitter handle” · View on HN
I think the issue ultimately comes down to what Ian Danskin described, paraphrased: that liberals see the faults in society as things that can be fixed, whereas conservatives see those faults as facts of life (reference: ▶ this video ). Wouldn't you also be less happy if you viewed society's faults as fixable, where you rally, vote, and protest for them to be fixed, and yet they almost never are?
in “What explains the liberal-conservative happiness gap?” · View on HN
> reread their comment, apply context, it should be apparent. I did. It was not apparent; hence why I asked. > Why do you think Trump has anything to do with it? If we're still talking about "it" being a significant fraction of the US public being distrustful of the election process/results, then Trump's main relevance is the combination of: - His holding of the most powerful office in the world for four years - His direct attacks on the election process/results, e.g. [link] [link] [link] [link] [link] [link] [link] - The attacks on the election process/results by other Repulican politicians, either using Trump's example to seize or cling-to power, or to curry Trump's favour, or to avoid Trump's wrath (either direct, or indirect like [link] ), e.g. [link] [link] - The attacks on the election process/results by members of the public, following Trump's example, e.g. [link] [link] > Really people couldn't care less about Trump. You mean, other than the 74,216,154 who voted for him? Many of whom are in no way casual about their support: [link] [link] > we have a divide in this country, mostly caused by dems refusal to accept and admit the right are people with opinions, ideas and feelings as well. Do you anything at all to back up such absurd partisan hyperbole? > The system is flawed regardless. Lol, what fatalistic nonsense. Reminds me of ▶ this video
in “GitHub, fuck your name change” · View on HN
Nah, this is just the ultimate conclusion of the Friedman doctrine: there is no morality, only legality. Unless you can conclusively prove that IBM US C-level executives knew about the Holocaust while it was happening, it was just business as usual which makes it okay by definition. Actually if I put it that way, it's just hating Mondays. ▶ this video
in “Googlespeak – How Google limits thought about antitrust” · View on HN