= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MoLAoS comments on LINK: In favor of niceness, community, and civilisation - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (137)
Done. I think the most significant point Chu made which didn't come across in the other summaries was that "some ideas are inherently dangerous and must not be allowed to spread", and that neoreaction is among those.
So I guess that a lot of the disagreement come down to how dangerous you believe the ideas are. A big reason I feel comfortable reading Moldbug looking for interesting points of view is that his ideas have lost so thoroughly---regardless of his feelings that black people would be better off as slaves, the probability that slavery will be reinstated in America is basically zero (except perhaps in a complete collapse of civilization). If I believed that discussing Moldbug carried an appreciable risk of destroying modern liberal society, then I wouldn't.
(Indeed, since the pseudo-nazi revival in Greece in recent years, I have felt a bit less comfortable about Moldbug too. Suddenly, liberal democracy seems slightly less secure).
Upvoted for followthrough.
How do you feel about less intense negatives, such as social regression? Things like how American conservatives essentially export their bullshit all over the world, such as the rise of American anti abortion tactics in Britain, and the role American conservatives player in the anti-gay movement in Russia? Or just certain anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-POC stances in America? For instance Arizona passed, or tried to pass, a law allowing for discrimination against LGBT and racial minorities under the grounds of religious freedom by businesses.
At what point does it be come problematic enough that we should stop debating and crack down on these behaviors? Although, crackdown may be of varying levels. No need to send in the army to round up Arizona legislators.
What happens in America, influences significantly the rest of the world. Yes. But it's almost orthogonal to the question of how to win the battle within America.
If the hypothesis "if you play nice, you are more likely to win (because people will enjoy joining your side), and if you play dirty, you are more likely to lose (because neutral people will hate you, and you will also have a lot of internal fighting)" is true -- which is the thing being debated -- then the fact that the outcome in America will strongly influence the rest of the world, just makes it more important to play nice in America.
More meta: If you believe some strategy is the winning strategy, increasing stakes should make you follow the strategy more carefully, not abandon it.
Care to define what you mean by "social regression", also explain why it's a bad thing.
Why should discrimination be illegal? Also while we're on the subject, should churches be forbidden to discriminate on religion?
This is not even an accurate summary of the law in question.