
Welcome, ACLU - katm
https://medium.com/ycombinator/welcome-aclu-e45e27aedb6e#.xblr2ga3y
======
joshfraser
I've been a long time supporter of the ACLU. While they're being politicized
right now as being anti-Trump, the thing I admire most about them is their
consistency in fighting for the rights of everyone. They stick to their
principles of free speech and human equality no matter how unpopular the issue
or unsavory their client.

A good example is back in the 1930s when the ACLU simultaneously defended the
rights of blacks on behalf of the NAACP at the same time as they were fighting
for the rights of the Klu Klux Klan to hold rallies calling for the abolition
of those rights.

The strength of your convictions are only tested at the extremes. Do you still
believe in free speech when it's coming from neo-Nazis? The ACLU do and I
deeply respect them for that.

~~~
alanh
You used the passive voice, “the ACLU are being politicized right now as being
anti-Trump.”

The ACLU, in their official communications and advertisements, have been
actively and explicitly anti-Trump. Witness their current 'pinned tweet' for
example:
[https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/825805289572151298](https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/825805289572151298)

I don’t really mind that, but let’s not ignore that the ACLU intentionally
earned their reputation as an opponent of this administration (and to some
extent, of every previous admin, as well)!

~~~
DashRattlesnake
A long time ago, during the GWB administration, I donated to the ACLU and got
placed on the postal mailing lists of innumerable unrelated Democratic-leaning
activist organizations. I was disappointed by that, since the partisan
association cheapens their work and opens them up to attack.

~~~
bjourne
Are you sure you didn't tick the "Yes, send me information about related
campaigns box"? Because this is what their privacy statement reads:

"When we give you an opportunity to voluntarily submit information about
yourself, we may give you the option of indicating that you permit us to share
that data with other parties such as coalition partners or specific
legislators. We will not share your data with such parties unless you have
indicated that you permit us to do so."

[https://www.aclu.org/american-civil-liberties-union-
privacy-...](https://www.aclu.org/american-civil-liberties-union-privacy-
statement)

Because you are making a strong accusation: "they shared my data without my
consent"

~~~
DashRattlesnake
> Are you sure you didn't tick the "Yes, send me information about related
> campaigns box"? Because this is what their privacy statement reads:

My donation happened _more than 10 years ago_ (probably closer to 15), so who
knows what their privacy stance was _then_. Quoting their current one
certainly doesn't shed any light onto that.

In any case, while the fact that they shared my info was annoying, it also
wasn't the point I was getting at. _My point was:_ they chose to lump
themselves in with unrelated left-wing causes by sharing my data, and I'm
unhappy they chose to make civil liberties seem like a left/right thing by
doing that.

~~~
bjourne
It can be checked using the wayback machine:
[https://web.archive.org/web/20020802064342/http://www.aclu.o...](https://web.archive.org/web/20020802064342/http://www.aclu.org/privacy.html)

> However, the names and postal addresses of ACLU members, ... may be
> exchanged or rented to other organizations ... > members who join through
> the ACLU Freedom Network website are provided with an __opportunity to opt
> out of this exchange __.

That's from 2002 and they have similar paragraphs in all their updated privacy
statements. But that's a moot point I guess, because your complaint wasn't
that your data was shared.

------
lpolovets
It upsets me to read negative comments about initiatives like this. My
assumption is that most people agree that it'd be good for the ACLU to have
more funding and to operate in a more efficient, higher leverage manner. If YC
can help with that, great! They could be backing other areas instead, or they
could be backing nothing. I, for one, am glad they're backing something good.

I don't understand why people often bring up other areas where private money
and resources could have gone. When someone says "I support X" (e.g. X =
ACLU), they are not saying "I don't support anything that's not X." They are
just saying they care about X. If _you_ would prefer to donate your time and
resources to another cause, that's great! I'm sure you'd be disappointed if
you dedicated yourself to curing diabetes and someone complained because they
thought cancer research should be higher priority, or if you offered to hire
10k refugees around the world and people suggested a boycott because they
preferred that you hire Americans instead.

Let's not discourage people from trying to make the world better.

~~~
rz2k
Maybe a little glib, but this came up on Reddit from Twitter:

> The left protest about Trump, but they're strangely silent about King
> Raedwald's invasion of Northumbria in AD 616[1]

It's a bizarre way to argue in favor of being politically detached.

[1]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/5r6zw0/the_left...](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/5r6zw0/the_left_protest_about_trump_but_theyre_strangely/)

~~~
tinalumfoil
I never supported Trump, but I can't find it in myself to join the opposition
specifically because I don't understand them. When someone says "Why are you
protesting Trump doing X, but not Obama doing X?" it's not a valid argument,
and it's not a convincing argument, but that's not the point.

If your answer is "well, when Obama did X he mitigated the negative effects by
also doing Y, and did X in political climate where it made more sense and
yadda yadda" then I have something tangible to understand your motives. I can
feel like I'm donating to an organization or protesting alongside people I
understand the motives of. But by treating it as an insider secret only the
smarter half of Americans will figure out, regardless of the issue or
question, I'm left in the dark alongside the unenlightened Republicans.

Worse, Republicans, who will soon control 3 branches of government, get to say
people are just predisposed to hating Trump and have no incentive to listen to
protesters. My personal take has been the left has been thrown into chaos by
Trump's unexpected victory and don't have a unified voice or reasoning. People
won't speak because their afraid their reasoning might step on the toes of
someone else's, so everyone just pretends its obvious and gathers immense
support without saying anything.

~~~
mistermann
> People won't speak because their afraid their reasoning might step on the
> toes of someone else's, so everyone just pretends its obvious and gathers
> immense support without saying anything.

This helps make sense of things a bit more for me as well, thanks. I listen to
the left, and I very often agree, but at least as often I simply don't
understand what they are on about, there is very often simply no logic to
their arguments.

~~~
grzm
_there is very often simply no logic to their arguments._

You've likely heard those on the left express similar sentiments of those on
the right. What comes to mind when you hear them say that?

~~~
mistermann
That they've read far too many threads of rabid unthinking "conservatives" and
have now concluded that all conservatives are idiots. It's difficult to blame
them to be honest.

Personally, I will always challenge idiots on my side, I don't often see the
same on the other side, they tend to be much more unified and don't tolerate
dissension.

~~~
grzm
That's commendable. I suggest that what you're seeing is also susceptible to
perception bias. Regardless, HN is a place for civil and constructive
discussion. However close-minded or obstinate we may believe others to be,
it's counterproductive to express or engage on the assumption that they're
unreasonable or irrational.

~~~
mistermann
Agreed, I was referring moreso to reddit, facebook, etc, although you do seem
the same mentality here now and then.

~~~
grzm
Then leave Reddit and Facebook for Reddit and Facebook. From my experience
here, HN members really do value the community they foster here. Each of us is
responsible for maintaining that, even when we — or others —sometimes slip.

------
CydeWeys
I don't know exactly what this means, as the implementation details are hazy,
but if this entails substantial support to the ACLU (in terms of lawyers,
money, or both), then that is awesome. I donated to the ACLU yesterday and I'm
encouraging everyone I know to do the same.

~~~
treehau5
I don't donate to the ACLU because I believe in the civil rights for _all_
people, outside the womb, and inside. Is there a similar organization I can
donate to?

~~~
ernestipark
That this is being downvoted is extremely telling of the audience here. Engage
in a discussion if you disagree. Downvoting unpopular opinions into oblivion
is how you get a SV/liberal echo chamber.

~~~
Naberhaben
This is being downvoted because of the intentionally passive-aggressive
language that was used by the poster. It's fairly clear that the poster isn't
interested in engaging in a discussion due to this. Even ignoring the
phrasing, it wasn't a post that merits much discussion -- simply responses in
the form of references to groups similar to the ACLU that are anti-abortion.

~~~
treehau5
I am afraid you have read way too far into my comment. It really isn't, it's
simply a way of rephrasing the argument, rather than just saying "I am Pro-
life" which will get surely downvoted to oblivion, I phrased in a way that
might make sense to rational thinkers -- that I believe civil rights should be
applied to all created beings, both born and unborn, but boy was I wrong. I am
legitimately interesting in supporting civil liberties, as I have had the
graces of benefiting from civil liberty groups myself in the past, I just
cannot look past the fact that the ACLU views persons inside the womb as
somehow less human than those immediately outside.

~~~
Naberhaben
I think I read into your comment exactly how you intended and have just
described. Perhaps the "intentionally" portion of my "intentionally passive-
aggressive" comment was incorrect, but the rest of what you just described is
exactly what I (and I presume other down-voters) understood your comment to
be.

Your phrasing as "I believe in the civil rights for all people, outside the
womb, and inside" carries the implicit assumption that pro-abortion people do
not, in fact, believe in the civil rights for all people. The reality is that
the down-voters likely do believe in the civil rights for all people, but do
not believe that a fetus is a person yet. Since that is generally the debate
between those who are for and against abortion, the feeling of passive-
aggression from your comment stems from entirely disregarding the other side's
point of view and instead simply implying that they don't care about civil
liberties.

FWIW, I think just saying "I am pro-life" wouldn't have gotten you down-voted
to oblivion.

------
rexreed
Does YC have a page of their particular positions on various political matters
which guides their decisions on which non-profits to support and which ones
not to? I'm genuinely interested in reading a "platform" as it were on what YC
believes and is willing to support.

~~~
ErikVandeWater
Yes this is somewhat dangerous for YC. I would like to see that this was
planned before November and their support was not determined by who the
president turned out to be. Combined with the outspoken politics of Paul
Graham1, I get the feeling people who identify as conservatives may not feel
welcome at YC.

1 [http://twitter.com/paulg](http://twitter.com/paulg)

EDIT: I changed "conservatives" to "people who identify as conservatives" to
clarify. Some replies below referred to the philosophical conservatism, which
is somewhat different.

~~~
eddieroger
The unfortunate thing is that the ACLU should be non-partisan and only
fighting for those who are having their rights threatened. It just so happens
that in the last week or so, it was Conservatives doing the threatening. There
aren't a lot of incidents in recent memory of liberals taking away rights from
folks, so you get a slant of ACLU vs Conservatives. The irony of wanting a
small government I guess.

~~~
azernik
Theoretically, yes. However, the ACLU has historically been perceived
(especially by the right-wing) as a left-wing organization, since it stood for
things like racial equality, religious equality, and most importantly the end
to (mostly anti-Communist) restrictions on political expression.

Hence the attacks on Dukakis for being a member of the ACLU during his
election campaign, and his joking self-labeling as a "card-carrying member of
the ACLU" (in reference to McCarthy's references to "card-carrying
Communists").

EDIT: And for yet more historical background - it was originally founded (as
the Civil Liberties Bureau) to defend anti-war speech and conscientious
objection during World War I, which were mostly left-wing and far-left-wing
phenomena. Post-war, in addition to serving as an ethnically-neutral
counterpart to ethnic civil-liberties organizations such as the ADL (Jewish)
and the NAACP (African-American), it spent a lot of time defending free
political speech. And the free political speech that was most under attack
through its seminal period in the 1920s was labor organizing and socialist
politics. (Because of the phenomenon of white-supremacist Southern Democrats,
minority-rights issues did not necessarily line up with party politics, but
they were indeed perceived as left-right issues in the sense that racial
equality was considered a far- _left_ position.)

~~~
cphoover
Here is an interesting paragraph from wikipedia:

``` The ACLU has been criticized by liberals, such as when it excluded
Communists from its leadership ranks, when it defended Neo-Nazis, when it
declined to defend Paul Robeson, or when it opposed the passage of the
National Labor Relations Act.[62][63] Conversely, it has been criticized by
conservatives, such as when it argued against official prayer in public
schools, or when it opposed the Patriot Act.[64] The ACLU has supported
conservative figures such as Rush Limbaugh, George Wallace, Henry Ford, and
Oliver North; and it has supported liberal figures such as Dick Gregory,
Rockwell Kent, and Dr. Benjamin Spock.[18][65][66][67][68][69][70][71] A major
source of criticism are legal cases in which the ACLU represents an individual
or organization that promotes offensive or unpopular viewpoints, such as the
Ku Klux Klan, Neo-Nazis, Nation of Islam, North American Man/Boy Love
Association, or Westboro Baptist Church. The ACLU responded to these
criticisms by stating "It is easy to defend freedom of speech when the message
is something many people find at least reasonable. But the defense of freedom
of speech is most critical when the message is one most people find
repulsive."[72] ```

Also I found this article:
[http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/](http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/)

Seems like ACLU historically has not cared about partisan politics, left vs
right, and care most about their mission of defending civil liberties, and
individual rights.

~~~
azernik
I didn't mean to imply that the ACLU sees its mission as a partisan, or that
they follow partisan lines on pursuing cases; just that they have
predominantly pursued leftist cases (because that's where civil rights were
historically most seriously infringed) and that therefore that support for it
is seen as a partisan act.

Says something about the as state of (particularly right-wing) American
politics, IMO.

------
pinewurst
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed
ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."
\- F. Scott Fitzgerald

So between Peter Thiel and the ACLU, I think we have some 1st rate minds at
YC.

~~~
labster
Heh, sick burn.

------
samuelbrin
Thank you YC. Thank you all so much. On this particular issue, I do not think
it is worth engaging with people about its merit or timing. This is a critical
moment in history and you are doing something. The velocity of decision-making
in the oval office means we literally don't have time to sit down with the
cynics right now.

------
matt_wulfeck
I used to be an ACLU supporter, but stopped after their main objectives
switched to more of what I describe as matters of _feelings_ , E.g., whether a
man who identifies as a women can use a women's bathroom in Georgia, or
whether the term man or women can ever be used at all. In my opinion most the
ACLU LGBT agenda has been a useless war on _words_ , yet it's taking on a
greater and greater importance in the organization.

Meanwhile constitutionally-guaranteed personal liberties, such as protection
against unreasonable search and seizure, seemed to be getting less and less
important.

Instead I've switched to funding the EFF, which really does seem at the
forefront of constitutional freedoms because it's operating in an area where
they are seriously under attack. In the grand scheme of things the EFF seems
to be doing much more important and historically relevant work.

~~~
tghw
That's hardly their main focus. Go to
[https://www.aclu.org/](https://www.aclu.org/) and click Issues. LGBT Rights
are just one of 18 top level issues (many broken down into many more related
issues).

I love the EFF, but they don't cover voting rights, disability rights,
immigration rights, racial justice, etc.

~~~
cabalamat
> racial justice

According to [https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/affirmative-
actio...](https://www.aclu.org/issues/racial-justice/affirmative-action) they
support discrimination against white people:

> Affirmative action is one of the most effective tools for redressing the
> injustices caused by our nation’s historic discrimination against people of
> color and women, and for leveling what has long been an uneven playing
> field.

This is bad for two reasons

1\. is is immoral in principle

2\. it is bad politics; attitudes like this make it more likely that Trump
will win a 2nd term

------
pcl
This is very timely. In particular, I was happy to see the appeal for help
from engineers. I've been brainstorming for the last couple of days about what
more I can do to defend the America I want to live in, now that it seems clear
that such defense will be necessary. But as a programmer, it's not obvious to
me what is the best way for me to do so in the immediate term.

One of the things that's appealing to me about the ACLU in particular is the
bipartisan nature of their mission. I'm sure that there are other such
organizations out there looking for engineers to help out. Does anyone have
such a list?

EDIT: here are some, from brandonb's response elsewhere in this comment
thread:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13532281](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13532281)

~~~
nickparker
It isn't bipartisan, but ProgCode was mentioned elsewhere in the thread. They
build open-source tools for progressive political organizations.

If you aren't a progressive, you might still consider getting involved and
employing those same tools to help your preferred party/organizations. The
ideal of higher political involvement through digital tools is very bipartisan
in my opinion - notwithstanding disenfranchisement efforts by the right, which
I like to view separately from conservatism itself.

[http://www.progcode.co/#about](http://www.progcode.co/#about)

------
krylon
Heads-up: This going to be a long-ish, semi-OT rant:

To be honest, I feel kind of dumb these days. How I _hate_ admitting that.

I read all the outrageous things Trump said during the Primaries and his
election campaign, and I did not really take them seriously, or him. Otto von
Bismarck, a German politician once said (or at least I've seen the quote
attributed to him, but it seems like something he would say): "People never
lie as much as before an election, during a war, or after a hunt." I was
hoping that if he got elected, Trump would turn it down a notch. I mean,
_damn_ , for once a politician does as she/he promised to, and it's gotta be
_this_ guy.

What makes me feel dumb is _that I could have seen it coming_. There's enough
people that said so. Smart people, smarter than me, certainly. I hate pulling
a Godwin, but I fear lots of people in Germany must have felt like this after
you-know-who rose to power. It's scary.

And I am a German, living in Germany. Let me point out, as an example, that
guy in Hungary, whose name I keep forgetting. Hungary is _much_ closer than
any US territory (unless you count the military bases in Germany), and quite
frankly, I don't really give a damn who is president of Hungary. Or prime
minister or whatever.

With the USA, it is different. They are the most powerful country on earth,
for better or worse. The risk of a military confrontation with Russia is going
to be a lot lower than with Hillary, I think. But that seems to be about the
only glimmer of hope[1]. Besides that, Trump turns out to be _even more_
disgusting than I would have expected.

Y Combinator got quite a bit of flak when Peter Thiel donated more money to
Trump's campaign than some people make in a lifetime, and with good reason,
IMHO. So at least it's good to read about this. I hope the ACLU makes the best
of this and makes life as uncomfortable for Trump and his circle of "advisors"
as they are able to within the boundaries laid down in the US constitution.

The world has seen much worse people than Trump come and go, and in the long
run it's all water under the bridge. But in the short run, people have
suffered and died in quantities that boggle the mind. Let's hope the world
gets lucky this time.

[1] 'bout the only other positive aspect I can make out right now is that
reading the news is not going to get boring anytime soon.

~~~
santoshalper
The idea that there was a significant risk of military confrontation with
Russia under Hillary was pure propaganda. Russia is absolutely in no position
to engage the United States militarily, and are resorting to manipulating US
politics because they know this.

------
asveikau
Pre-inauguration, discussion of Trump's immigration policies and their logical
conclusion would have been shut down under the "no politics" rule.

Seems it only takes ~10 days of this stuff being real for folks here to admit
that politics affects everybody and is a valid topic of discussion.

~~~
unethical_ban
It's allowed here now because banning foreign nationals from traveling to the
US has an impact on industries that are associated with foreign workers. Say,
IT, and engineering.

~~~
josephagoss
I think the point the OP was making (correct me if I am wrong) is that the
banning of political discussion may have been a bad idea as it was obvious
that this was going to happen.

The leading Republican candidate has been constantly talking about these types
of bans yet discussion on HN was not allowed during a time where perhaps
discussion could have prevented Trump gaining power.

Now we are in "cure" mode. It would have been better to prevent this from
taking place.

~~~
grigjd3
I suspect you dramatically overestimate the impact of the comment threads
here.

------
llccbb
People who want to use their tech and coding skills to enable and enact
progressive change should consider getting involved in the
ProgressiveCodersNetwork (Progcode)[0]. They are a dedicated organization that
is all about facilitating and organizing efforts, not dictating projects.

[0] [http://progcode.co](http://progcode.co)

------
chickenfries
Peter Thiel insists that the immigration EO is does not constitute a religious
ban [1], but Rudy Giuliani says this is exactly what the President asked for
[2] (Also, we heard him say as much many, many times).

[1] [http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2017/01/28/peter-
thiel-s...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2017/01/28/peter-thiel-says-
immigration-order-does-not-constitute-a-religious-test/#41bb68a63795)

[2]
[http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316726-giuliani-t...](http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316726-giuliani-
trump-asked-me-how-to-do-a-muslim-ban-legally)

~~~
ihsw
It's not just Peter Thiel but anyone of sound mind -- the top 5 countries by
Muslim-majority population are not included.

* Indonesia 204,847,000 (87.2%)

* Pakistan 178,097,000 (96.4%)

* India 172,245,158 (14.2%)

* Bangladesh 145,312,000 (90%)

* Nigeria 75,728,000 (47.9%)

If Indonesia suddenly became plagued by radical Islamic terrorism then it
would be on the list too.

The seven countries targeted by the immigration ban have been either failed
states or antagonistic to the US for the past 30 years, it is quite plain to
say that it makes sense for Trump's companies -- and various other companies
across a wide swath of industries -- to refrain from conducting business
there. To say that other Muslim-majority countries aren't on the list due to
conflict of interest is to deny this simple logic.

Plenty of other Muslim-majority countries have kept a lid on their populace by
maintaining adequate internal security within their borders and providing
valuable counter-terrorism intelligence to to the US, meanwhile the seven
"countries of concern" have not.

~~~
wavefunction
Why were Saudi Arabia and Egypt left off the list? That's where most of the
9/11 hijackers and planners hailed from.

I think you're hearing echoes in your "sound mind."

~~~
spaginal
Saudi Arabia and Egypt are allies in that region with functioning governments
that we don't have emigration issues with and can vet anyone coming over from.

Of the 7 nations on the list, Iran has the only functioning government, but is
a huge state sponsor of terrorism against our allies in the region and we are
not allied with them.

To claim this is a bigoted move by Trump because of Islam is a simple and
narrow minded view and shows a clear lack of factual information and first
rate thinking.

~~~
adrr
Its known and documented in intelligence reports Saudi government supports
terrorists. Here's a quote from one of intelligence reports, "it was well-
known in intelligence circles that the Islamic affairs office functioned as
the Saudis’ ‘fifth column’ in support of Muslim extremists."

9/11 commission report documented the terrorists meeting with Saudi
intelligence officers on US soil and they were partly funded by Saudi royalty.
Also lets look at Pakistan. They were harboring Osama Bin Laden.

~~~
spaginal
I don't disagree, but the chaos from Trump declaring Saudi Arabia, a current
strategic ally in the region both for material resources and military
cooperation, would be on a scale that no one here would like to pick up the
pieces from.

We deal with a lot of countries around the world that do things we don't like,
we don't have to like it, but diplomacy and politics are messy and require
compromise in situations where it's a better choice versus the alternative.

~~~
santoshalper
Round and round you go with circular logic and rationalizations. This is _at
best_ security theater and a dumb executive order designed to appeal to
emotion rather than reason. That's putting aside any ethical considerations.
You can keep trying to sell it, but nobody with a brain is buying it.

------
pkd
I am sure this is a good thing, but I can't help but feel that YC is
overcompensating for the fact that one of their partners played a pivotal role
in Trump's victory and they did nothing to oppose it.

But then again, maybe I am just cynical.

------
KVFinn
The ACLU defended a Republican city councilor in my parent's small home town
for having his signs taken down by the Democratic mayor. You wouldn't think
they'd even notice such a tiny thing, but they were there, and they won.

~~~
makomk
I have a feeling that in the current political climate, a lot of the ACLU's
traditional activities will come under hostile scrutiny from their newfound
supporters soon.

------
soheil
How do startups already part of YC feel about this? What are the ramifications
of having your name tied with and being part of an organization that backed
something that has as much to do, if not more, with politics than technology?

~~~
justinlaster
Politics is intertwined with everything. Not sure why you're trying to draw a
line here.

Start ups are extremely "people" based entities. If you think the ACLU doesn't
fit in with the YCombinator landscape -- given recent events -- then I'm not
sure what I can really say to paint a more vivid picture to make you
understand.

~~~
soheil
My point is not that startups are not "people" based entities, but simply that
this is a clear aversion from the norm on the part of YC and that ACLU is as
much a political organization, if not more, than a technological one.

------
dirkdk
I feel the pain of the underprivileged americans, in particular our African-
American brothers and sisters. However, there is a difference however between
the top leadership of our country making explicit decisions to pass
legislation to exclude groups of people that is at odds with the constitution
and established legislation, and local government and law enforcement running
cities in an unfair way.

ACLU is valuable in both situations, but in particular to fight the current
executive branch that requires massive manpower, knowledge and dedication.

------
philip1209
Politics aside, the ACLU is experiencing hyper growth. They received the
equivalent of six years of donations in 48 hours. I'm interested in seeing how
YC helps them.

------
ErikVandeWater
Does the ACLU have any new product/entrepreneurial goals for the future?
Without, it would seem this is a somewhat unusual association.

~~~
actsasbuffoon
The new product is called "civil liberties." I signed up for their mailing
list. I hope I get invited to the beta!

~~~
spacemanmatt
I have been using mine for decades and they're truly excellent. 10/10, would
recommend. I really hope they continue to kick out more good products.

~~~
gepoch
I got some when I launched, but I haven't really found a use for them. Sad to
see so many products sharing the fate of the Apple watch.

~~~
RileyKyeden
Most people's civil liberties work so smoothly they don't even notice.

------
pcl
Technical issue with the Wufoo form [0]: on iOS Chrome, the input fields
somehow end up triggering autofill with first name / last name. The second
field is for email address, not last name, however.

Looking at the source, the best I can come up with is that the email field's
'id' attribute is set to 'title2', and maybe that's used elsewhere on the
internet in a context where I've entered a last name?

Also, when I hit 'back' and corrected the name, the submit button became a
(clickable) no-op. Reloading the form and re-submitting worked fine.

[0]
[https://ycombinatorevents.wufoo.com/forms/q42uszl19i1mu6/](https://ycombinatorevents.wufoo.com/forms/q42uszl19i1mu6/)

------
gthtjtkt
So when we were dropping bombs on them it wasn't worth making an official
statement, but now that they get held up at the border for a few hours it's
suddenly worth talking about?

I can't think of a case where the term "Virtue Signaling" is more apt.

~~~
jlgaddis
Did a bunch of people just learn the term "virtue signaling" in the last few
days? I don't recall seeing it spoken on here in ages but it seems I've read
it 20 times in just the last few days. It reminds me of a child who learns a
new, big word and then porceeds to use it in conversation (to "show off") as
often as possible.

~~~
whorleater
It's a newer form of calling people "SJW's" or "White Knights", thereby
reducing their opposition to caricatures and removing any realistic and
reasonable discussion.

~~~
gthtjtkt
> thereby reducing their opposition to caricatures and removing any realistic
> and reasonable discussion.

Isn't that exactly what you're doing with this comment by comparing the term
to "SJW" and "White Knight"?

Pot, meet kettle.

~~~
whorleater
I wouldn't say so, I think there are legitimate criticism of people who talk
without action. However, the terms "SJW"/"White Knight"/"virtue signaling"
have become overburdened in their use and definition to the point where they
only serve to polarize.

------
koolba
So when did YC decide to do this? Was it in the works for a while or purely
knee jerk response to the past week?

~~~
angry-hacker
When ever it's beneficial to them and makes them more money. If you believe
otherwise, you're a fool. Too bad they didn't step up when Obama started to
wiretap the whole world what is much bigger issue. They and their companies
should have cut all the ties with the fascist government, but most likely
knowingly let their companies to participate.

I don't support Trump, but Altman and PG lack balls, are cowards and
hypocrites.

------
monochromatic
The ACLU sometimes supports a worthy cause, but it's basically just a left-
leaning political organization. I understand that's particularly trendy right
now, and anyone who supports Trump is a pariah in Silicon Valley... but come
on.

Would YC be donating directly to the Democratic party if that got the same
favorable tax treatment?

~~~
equalarrow
How are your rights 'trendy'?

I tend to stay out of politics, and don't really label people as such, but
Trump is a bad guy. I'm happy to donate engineering time to the ACLU.

~~~
sp332
"Trump is a bad guy". Well OK but the ACLU does more than just fight Trump.
It's possible that people have mixed feelings about those various things.

------
wtvanhest
I remember when HN did not have a political agenda. Right or wrong, this used
to be mainly about startups. Now its become a highly political message board

~~~
dang
No, it hasn't. The rule has been the same for years: most politics are off
topic. Check it out:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).
The difference between "most" and "all" is significant. HN can't be immune to
what's going on in the outside world and we've learned from years of
experience that it doesn't make sense to try. At the same time, we're not
going to let politics overwhelm the site, since that would kill it.

The concern about HN becoming too political or not political enough is as old
as HN. There are at least as many users complaining that we're suppressing all
the political stories and what not. I wrote more about this at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13516969](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13516969)
and
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13522433](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13522433)
if anyone's interested.

~~~
rubidium
I wish I had the time to gather the data. Someone please do this. Make sure to
normalize against total activity.

I'm a hn user since at least 9.8 years ago (my first HN handle was different
than current, which is 7 years old).

To my impression as a relatively apolitical person, the site has become MUCH
more political in the past year. I may be wrong in that though.

~~~
jacquesm
> To my impression as a relatively apolitical person, the site has become MUCH
> more political in the past year. I may be wrong in that though.

It's an election year.

Some of the policies and statements on display are extremely divisive.

Divisiveness breeds discontent at all levels, discussion, intimidation,
outright violence.

------
lorenzhs
[http://archive.is/8Liu7](http://archive.is/8Liu7) for anyone having trouble
loading the page

------
adgasf
The ACLU was founded in 1920. It seems wierd to include it in a YC batch.

------
aestetix
This would be a lot easier for me to digest if YC could ask their companies
going forward to pledge to treat all user data as PII.

~~~
tlb
I'm interested in this idea, but I'm not sure exactly what to suggest that
companies do. Can you recommend some guidelines on how to treat user data that
will reduce the harm caused by the way startups currently treat user data?

~~~
aestetix
Two immediate suggestions:

1\. Use a Ulysses pact[1] explaining how data is and will be used. Assure
users that the company won't turn into a data broker[2].

2\. Either lobby local/state/federal government to create legal data
protections, or publicly support existing efforts. Europe is not perfect, but
the ECHR and German data protection laws are a fantastic model to follow.

There are a lot of more technical suggestions involving data sanitizing and
security, but for a startup that just needs to get up to speed quickly, those
are two suggestions that would go a long way. Leading by example might bring
the entire industry forward in a positive way.

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_pact](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_pact)

[2][https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601506/23andme-sells-
data...](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601506/23andme-sells-data-for-
drug-search/)

------
tabeth
Any word on whether or not this was planned, or is this a reaction to recent
events? If the latter, then I can't help but feel that this is just
politically conveninent. The alternative is worse (not giving any funding),
but hey, I feel what I feel.

~~~
ubercore
My view would be more that it was unclear _how necessary_ this was before
January. I think a lot of people, pundits and politicians included, expected a
certain amount of moderation, which hasn't really happened. I'd put this move
as an ounce of prevention, personally. And what's the alternative, not to do
this? I don't see how that could be counterproductive.

~~~
tabeth
There must be a misunderstanding. I'm not saying that we shouldn't do this.
I'm just hoping that Ycombinator isn't simply being reactive. Even if they
are, it's better than nothing, but generally speaking, for things like this,
they're done far in advance, no?

------
brlewis
I hope they build their startup into a large independent entity and don't just
accept the first acquisition offer they get from Google or Facebook.

------
aashaykumar92
"This is awesome, good luck!" or something similarly supportive should be the
bulk of comments in here. Cynicism for something like this, especially given
the time we're in, is not helpful.

------
emperorcezar
How long till Peter Thiel breaks ties with y-combinator?

~~~
CydeWeys
Hopefully it happens the other way around, no?

~~~
deskamess
Hopefully not... YC needs to retain the inclusiveness. It should have the
ability to disagree with civility. If PT is acting in a way that hurts YC's
investments then I expect YC to have a civil discussion with him.

~~~
har777
True. But how much is too much ? If someone is say racist do you still not
kick him out for the sake of inclusiveness ?

------
Illniyar
What will they present at Demo Day?

Not that I'm against helping the ACLU (or any non-profit for that matter), but
they don't seem like a good fit, as an organization, to an accelerator of tech
startups - it's not entrepreneurial, not technology oriented, far older then
YC and doesn't seek (and can't really accept) VC funding.

~~~
ansible
Yeah, I was wondering about that too. They're not a startup... they've been
around way longer that YC.

I'm fine with YC supporting the ACLU in some way (financially or whatever),
but... are they going to release an app or service? What's the angle here?

------
ebbv
This is great news. The ACLU has always been important, and is even more
important right now as the disregard for civil liberties continues to grow in
our government (at all levels including federal, state and local.)

I set up a monthly donation to the ACLU last year, and encourage everyone who
can afford to do so to join in.

EDIT: Clarify wording.

------
hvass
Great job! I am Canadian and donated to ACLU this weekend. Fantastic decision,
guys.

------
johndevor
Why is Ycombinator involved in politics now? This didn't used to be the case.

~~~
int_19h
I think it's more of a case of politics affecting the industry significantly.

You can't really fully isolate business from politics, because politics, by
definition, affects business. Businesses can tolerate that to some degree, but
when the disruption becomes too severe, straightforward pragmatic business
decisions start being inherently political.

~~~
blablabla123
Yeah but there's kind of the idea to keep both as separate as possible. When
Hitler came to power he was very well connected with the big industrialists at
that time. The years before Germany was a really chaotic and highly polarized
nation. Reading the US news daily (CNN and Fox) I also see large polarization.
I wonder if this move is bridging the gap between left and right or widening
it.

~~~
int_19h
Keeping them separate in this sense can actually encourage cooperation, like
the infamous case of IBM. They didn't collaborate with the government of the
Third Reich because they were ideologically in lockstep - no, they kept their
business separate from their politics, and collaborated because it was
profitable.

~~~
blablabla123
...because they had no ethics.

Ethics is surely a thing that should be omnipresent.

~~~
int_19h
A lot of politics - in fact, I would argue that it's all politics, ultimately
- is about ethics. This ranges from obviously related stuff like "it's
unethical to abort babies", to more indirect like "it's unethical to let
people starve or die from diseases when they can be helped, so we need taxes
to maintain a welfare system preventing that".

------
johngalt
I applaud anyone supporting the ACLU, but perhaps it would send a less
partisan message if the YC also supported the NRA.

Of course, YC may _intend_ to send a partisan message. In that case I guess
it's better to only defend the rights that <ingroup> are interested in
defending.

------
minimaxir
Was this association in the works before the events of last weekend?

~~~
bduerst
Does it make a difference? It seems more relevant now, not last week.

------
deadcast
Happy to hear this! I just became an ACLU member yesterday and I'm grateful to
have an organization like them around in our current frightening times. The
amount of support they've been getting is pretty awesome! :)

------
giardini
Why, oh why, has this been posted here? Is there possibly a single institution
that serves as more of a lightning rod for anger in the USA, in any political
direction, than the ACLU? Would a similar article be posted about the NRA, the
Simon Wiesenthal Center, or Southern Poverty Law Center (all which, along with
ACLU, do excellent work for their contributors/supporters)?

From the ycombinator Hacker News Guidelines at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

"Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're
evidence of some interesting new phenomenon." What part of "politics" is this
not?

This topic now is yet another gathering point for all unhappy with the
election results. Perhaps this forum will allow those discontents to vent to
sufficient degree to restore themselves to adulthood and return to their work,
home and friends with a more balanced attitude required of a citizen in a
republic. But I fear it will simply be another place for them to reinforce
their anger and distrust. It's probably a good thing that liberals, in
general, avoid firearms, otherwise there might be fighting in the streets
already.

~~~
RileyKyeden
As I read this, I imagined you as one of those flailing tube people car
dealerships put out.

~~~
giardini
Thank you! This confirms that I have reached the audience I intended!8-))

What else is there to do? YC owns the football. I have no choice but to
acquiesce to their (re)interpretation of their own rules.

But they own neither the stadium, nor the electorate, nor the country. And
there's a bigger game afoot than this one.

------
joering2
> Also, please consider donating to the ACLU.

Am I the only one seeing irony that a billionaires VC firm is asking for
donations to organization they are funding?

------
w00tw00tw00t
Signed up to help. If you are serious about helping, I urge you to do so as
well.

------
wnevets
Is this the first time ycombinator.com has funded a group involved in
politics?

~~~
CydeWeys
The ACLU is involved in protecting civil liberties, not politics.

~~~
justin66
In fairness, they are an advocacy group whose activities include political
lobbying.

No idea how accurate these figures are, but:
[https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D00003147...](https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000031473)

~~~
sp332
This confuses me, but "only donations to the 501(c)(3) foundation are tax
deductible, and only the 501(c)(4) group can engage in unlimited political
lobbying. The two organizations share office space and employees."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_Liberties_Union)

~~~
chimeracoder
An organization can be simultaneously a 501(c)3 and a 501(c)4 - often this is
managed by having two separate legal entities with a mutual relationship, but
it's possible for the same organization to be classified both ways.

Separately, a 501(c)3 is allowed to engage in lobbying - they are just subject
to restrictions on how much time and money than can spend (last I checked,
it's up to 10% of time and 10% of money).

~~~
mikeyouse
This is all correct -- Notably, you can't spend 501(c)(3) dollars on (c)(4)
activities. All of those employees that work for both entities have to
accurately record their time and expenses the (c)(3) must charge the (c)(4)
for any support that they give it. It's a big pain in the ass but worth it to
keep the IRS off your case.

------
cbhl
sama, I hope you will consider temporarily withdrawing YC's involvement (as an
entity) with the ACLU.

I know that you mean well, and that you want to help. Your work on voteplz,
and your blog posts during the election (and since) all demonstrate that.

However, this announcement -- especially now, with the ACLU raising $24
million over the weekend -- feels like "whitewashing" to me. The announcement
lacks a number for the amount funded, so it must not have been big enough to
be material (probably $XX,000).

I am not comfortable with Peter Thiel's involvement with the Trump campaign.
And, by extension, I am not comfortable with sama's and YC's position to
continue working with Thiel. I don't feel safe, given the current political
environment. I feel like this announcement sounds like a way to "make up" for
not cutting ties with Thiel. Basically, it looks like a PR move in YC's
interest instead of the ACLU's interest -- something like the Ronald McDonald
charity, or Google donating Chromebooks to schools, or an oil company donating
to a charity that replants the rainforest. I worry that many others
(especially immigrants, women, and people of color) may feel the same way.

I don't expect sama or YC to cut ties with Thiel -- sama has already given
reasons why he doesn't wish to:
[https://twitter.com/sama/status/787834428064083968](https://twitter.com/sama/status/787834428064083968)

But I believe that, so long as Thiel continues to be involved with YC, that YC
being associated with the ACLU will harm the ACLU, its brand, and its ability
to fundraise. And -- even with the brightest minds in SV -- I'm not confident
in YC's ability to help the ACLU enough to offset that harm.

I really wish that I didn't feel this way about the announcement. We really
need to be working together to fight to protect our democracy.

(Edit: Rewrote they -> I in Paragraph 4.)

------
mjmsmith
This is very welcome news, even if it won't go over well with the large number
of authoritarians here.

~~~
forgetsusername
> _the large number of authoritarians here._

Everybody who has a different viewpoint than me is a <insert label>!

~~~
MagnumOpus
How would _you_ label people who are for reducing civil liberties then?

~~~
forgetsusername
I think you should provide a bit of evidence for the "large numbers" of people
in favour of "reducing civil liberties" on these boards.

~~~
freehunter
Well for one, take a look at all the comments complaining that this is too
political, or complaining about the dirty liberals on this site.

Nearly all (not all, but nearly all) the people who are against the ACLU are
the people that you're looking for.

------
zitterbewegung
The article is short of details and I am curious what ycombinator will
contribute to the ACLU other than capital (networking? , constructive
criticism ) ? It doesn't fit the previous nonprofits since it is well
established.

~~~
jrowley
YC will teach them how to spend all that money they just raised!

Jokes aside I think YC should be able to help them utilize technology to
connect people and advance their message.

------
mmckelvy
I see SV and its ilk are doubling down on the actions and ideas that lost them
the election. Perhaps something beyond a knee-jerk reaction is in order.

Great article along these lines: [http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/nine-
questions-protesti...](http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/01/nine-questions-
protesting-donald-trumps-immigration-ban-must-answer/)

Particularly salient quote:

"If you decide that border restrictions are fascist then you are declaring the
views of most people to be fascist, because most people believe in border
security."

Food for thought.

~~~
morgante
Nobody is saying that "border restrictions" are fascist.

It's jeopardizing rule of law which reeks of fascism. This weekend, the rule
of law was jeopardized though the:

\- surprise invalidation and revocation of visas; people who had followed
every law were still being detained and deported

\- detention of permanent residents

\- refusal to follow court orders

We could instigate far more stringent border restrictions (maybe _no_ new
visas to anywhere) and I wouldn't call it fascist. It's the implementation
(without warning or judicial oversight) which is fascist. We're supposed to
have 3 branches of government, not a dictator.

~~~
mmckelvy
The majority of the reactions I have seen focus almost exclusively on the
restrictions themselves rather than the way they were implemented.

Among SV, the media, Hollywood, and elites in general, any call for
immigration / entry restrictions almost immediately results in the usual "you
are a bigot", "you are a fascist" "we are a nation of immigrants" etc.
visceral reactions NOT the kind of more nuanced response you provided above.
That's the point of the article to which I referred. Maybe it's time to stop
calling people names and organizing against them for having completely
legitimate concerns and instead debate the actual issues at hand in a
reasonable manner.

~~~
morgante
> The majority of the reactions I have seen focus almost exclusively on the
> restrictions themselves rather than the way they were implemented.

That's because the problem is with the restrictions themselves. Banning
people, en masse, including existing lawful visa holders and permanent
residents is a huge problem.

The fact that you haven't seen this information or reaction before says more
about you than the facts of the case. If you follow the NYT, Atlantic, or even
the Twitter feeds of many people reacting to this (including from YC) you'll
see that much of the consternation is about how broad this ban is—not with the
specific idea of tightening immigration rules.

In a democracy, we don't ban thousands of people from our country overnight.
Changes like this, regardless of their merits, should be debated and approved
by the legislature—not made by executive fiat.

~~~
mmckelvy
> The fact that you haven't seen this information or reaction before says more
> about you than the facts of the case.

And there we have it.

------
jaypaulynice
Come on YC, glad you're funding the ACLU and it's much needed, but where is
the response to the homelessness in San Francisco for example? We care more
about refugees than people who already live here?! Too many companies are
taking advantage of a bad situation for PR and marketing!

~~~
boboyo
sad this is flagged to the bottom yet it's a valid concern

~~~
anigbrowl
I have posted stories about homelessness and the unsustainability of economic
inequality here for years and have had many productive discussions with the HN
community in general and YC members in particular on these topics. Just
because people are activated over refugees does not mean they're indifferent
to domestic political issues.

------
rhizome
I have to wonder what YC's exit strategy is here, exits not always benefiting
the funded company.

~~~
kafkaesq
It's not that kind of an "investment". It's more less obviously a charitable
donation.

~~~
rhizome
Why leave it to interpretation?

~~~
kafkaesq
Tone and message. Which are quite significant, in gestures like these.

To call it a "donation" would carry a connotation of pity, or do-gooderism
("We know this is money down the toilet; but we're doing it anyway because
it's the right thing.") Calling it an "investment" suggests that in fact they
earnestly expect a substantial return on that investment -- which they do,
though not a directly financial return, of course.

But rather in safeguarding the very fabric of society in these perilous times
we find ourselves in (which, indirectly, also safeguards their ability to keep
doing what they're doing).

------
yeukhon
> Apache/2.2.24 (Unix) mod_hive/5.5 mod_ssl/2.2.24 OpenSSL/1.0.0-fips
> mod_auth_passthrough/2.1 mod_bwlimited/1.4 FrontPage/5.0.2.2635
> mod_fastcgi/2.4.6 mod_fcgid/2.3.6 Server at blog.ycombinator.com Port 443

Should probably hide this...

------
rafikicoln
Especially now, it is very important to voice our concerns to our
representatives. I've found
[https://www.mailyourrep.io/](https://www.mailyourrep.io/) to be really good
at letting me do just that.

------
RainManDetroit
I wish the union had a refund policy, though I would be litigated and defamed
for eternity

------
irrational
I appreciate the ACLU. They make it easy for me to vote. Every election I go
through the voting booklet to see how the ACLU recommends I vote on candidates
and issues, then I vote the opposite.

~~~
codezero
Why? How can you be sure your beliefs/convictions anti-correlate with the ACLU
every election? How do you calibrate it?

------
jonstewart
Thank you, YC! Hopefully your contribution outweighs the money Peter Thiel has
made from his investments at YC so that there's a net gain for human rights
and civil liberties.

------
Hydraulix989
I'll have more to say after work, but the timeline itself of tech companies'
actions is telling.

First/day one (and same day as Muslim ban): The companies and people that
actually cared stood up (Google)

Day Two+: Transition Period (when Lyft rushed in to capitalize on Uber's bad
PR)

mid-this week (after Muslim ban): The companies that are pressured into doing
so or are solely after PR karma stand up (Bezos, YC)

------
chx
I have debated myself but did not donate the ACLU this weekend. (I did donate
to the Victoria Islamic Center Rebuilding though.) I hate to be right. Working
with an organization where Peter Thiel is a partner is a betrayal of
everything the ACLU stands for.

------
andres
Sam - I'm very proud of you and your team.

------
koolba
How much money do non-profits get?

~~~
tim333
I think $120k the same as for profits. Dunno if the ACLU will be more.

------
hvo
A standing ovation for Ycombinator.May the grace and bless of God be with you
all.Keep up the good work.

------
oneshoe
Simply, Thank You!

------
rory096
Site's intermittent. Here's a copy:

We are delighted to be funding the ACLU as a non-profit[0] in our Winter 2017
batch.

The ACLU has always been important, but has a particularly important role[1]
right now. We are honored to be able to help, and we will send some of our
team to New York for the rest of the batch to assist.

The ACLU will have full access to the Y Combinator network and community, and
they will present at Demo Day in March.

We are hopeful that the YC community will join us in supporting this important
work. In particular, if you’re an engineer and want to spend some time helping
them out, let us know.[2] We’ll keep you updated on opportunities.

Also, please consider donating to the ACLU.[3]

[0]
[http://www.ycombinator.com/nonprofits/](http://www.ycombinator.com/nonprofits/)

[1] [https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/president-trumps-
firs...](https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/president-trumps-first-week-
aclu-hands-him-first-stinging-rebuke)

[2]
[https://ycombinatorevents.wufoo.com/forms/q42uszl19i1mu6/](https://ycombinatorevents.wufoo.com/forms/q42uszl19i1mu6/)

[3] [https://action.aclu.org/secure/donate-to-
aclu](https://action.aclu.org/secure/donate-to-aclu)

~~~
Swizec
Wait, news.ycombinator.com can hug of death ycombinator.com?

That's insane.

Also I'm happy that this is happening and did not realize such a thing was
possible. Does ACLU count as an early stage startup?

PS: no need to downvote, jeez, I'm just pointing out a curious observation

~~~
rjbwork
They* introduced non-profit funding a while ago.

------
hannob
I see an error message. But it's actually interesting enough: "Apache/2.2.24
(Unix) mod_hive/5.5 mod_ssl/2.2.24 OpenSSL/1.0.0-fips mod_auth_passthrough/2.1
mod_bwlimited/1.4 FrontPage/5.0.2.2635 mod_fastcgi/2.4.6 mod_fcgid/2.3.6
Server at blog.ycombinator.com Port 443"

This is all widely outdated. OpenSSL 1.0.0 support has ended in 2014. Running
mod_fcgid and mod_fastcgi in the same server process doesn't seem to make any
sense (as they are basically competitioners for the same functionality).

~~~
edoceo
Defaults on old boxen, that is still running, wow! Frontpage!

------
andy_ppp
There are quite a few comments by presumably more right wing people marked as
dead here. Excluding these people from debate this way makes hacker news less
useful IMO. Why not make constructive criticism instead of downvoting, I
realise it's easier...

~~~
forgetsusername
HackerNews loves to pat itself on the back about what a great community it is,
but when it comes to politics (and other specific topics) the bullying and
one-sidedness is as bad as anywhere on the internet.

But this is exactly why half of America is in utter shock about what's
happening: their discussion circles involve one "side", and the other isn't
acceptable.

~~~
freehunter
90% of what Trump and his supporters are saying truly is not acceptable,
you're right. Banning people based on their religion, canceling visas that
have already been granted, firing reasonable dissenters rather than working
with them, discriminating against LGBTQ folks, destroying access to women's
health care, those are all completely unacceptable ideas.

It doesn't matter that some people believe in them, some people believe that
black people should drink from different water fountains than white people. We
shouldn't entertain those ideas even for a second, we shouldn't legitimize
them. Conservatives are completely accepted around here. What isn't accepted
is authoritarianism, bigotry, sexism/racism, and hate.

Being a conservative does not mean you have to be a bigot, and being a bigot
does not make you a conservative. There are plenty of conservatives who would
agree with that. If you believe that you should have more rights than someone
else purely because of the color of your skin or the god you worship, you've
gone well beyond the label of "conservative", you are an authoritarian and no
one should be forced to listen to you.

~~~
MrZongle2
_" Banning people based on their religion, ..."_

The ban is based upon country. Muslims in general aren't being banned,
otherwise travelers from countries such as Indonesia would be affected. They
aren't.

 _"...canceling visas that have already been granted, ..."_

If the visa has been granted to somebody from a country to which the
immigration halt is applied, or otherwise is now subject to additional
background checks that were not applied when the visa was granted, then the
United States Government certainly has the right to revoke or otherwise
suspend the visa.

This may be _rude_ and it may be _inconvenient_ , but it's hardly a violation
of human rights. It certainly isn't unconstitutional.

 _"...firing reasonable dissenters rather than working with them, ..."_

That oft-quoted "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" comes
to mind here. What constitutes "reasonable"? If your boss tells you to do
something, you do it. Or you resign. Or you get fired.

What if your boss told you to do something illegal? At the time, your options
are identical: do what you were told, resign, or get fired. In due time, if
you chose one of the latter options and your boss truly _was_ breaking the
law, you will be revealed to have taken the superior moral position.

We have yet to see if that is the case anywhere. If it turns out that way, it
will harm Trump. I suspect, however, that if the appropriate courts rule in
Trump's favor we will either not hear of it at all or it will be dismissed as
judicial activism.

 _"... discriminating against LGBTQ folks, ..."_

The White House affirmed today
([https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/obama-
trump-p...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/obama-trump-
protections-lgbt-workers.html)) that LGBTQ protections enacted under the Obama
Administration will stay in place.

 _"...destroying access to women's health care, ..."_

Citation needed.

~~~
freehunter
What they've done versus what they have said they wanted to do is not the
same. The trouble is, what they have said they wanted to do is really, really
awful. Sure Trump himself isn't repealing LGBTQ protections, but the
Republicans really want to, and aren't shy about it.

And you're calling the Attorney General a terrorist? For saying that she
didn't think the EO was legally defensible? Something that AGs do all the
time, because they're legal professionals and cannot defend something they
know is indefensible? It literally happens _all the time_. AGs very commonly
refuse to defend against laws they don't think, in their legal opinion, will
stand up to a successful legal challenge. Do a Google search for "attorney
general refuses to defend law" and you'll see just how often it happens.
Usually they don't get fired for it, because that's their job. It's not like
Trump asked her opinion on it, something he really probably should have done.

Oh and no, the government does not have the right to revoke already-granted
visas and green cards. The courts have issued a stay on that particular piece,
because it's clearly unconstitutional.

And one of the first EOs Trump signed blocked funding for any healthcare
provider who talked about abortion, anywhere across the world. Which is
following one of the promises made by Republicans, to make sure Planned
Parenthood (one of the largest women's healthcare providers in the nation)
gets defunded.

This is the last I will debate any specific things you want to call out. My
point wasn't to argue line-by-line but rather that these beliefs are _not_
conservative, they're authoritarian. And that's not okay. No one is attacking
conservatives, they're attacking fascists. Unfortunately, fascists have
started calling themselves conservatives, something conservatives really
should push back against.

So here I am, pushing back. Your comment has you sounding like a fascist. I'm
sorry you can't see that. Conservatism has nothing to do with banning muslims,
building a wall, or regulating people's sex lives. Those are authoritarian
values.

~~~
MrZongle2
You know, I was starting to address your first two paragraphs, then my eye
went to your last one:

 _" Your comment has you sounding like a fascist. I'm sorry you can't see
that."_

If you've already convinced yourself that I'm a fascist, then you've shut down
the conversation. Nothing I can possibly say can change your thinking, because
even if I'm redeemable as a person it will be because I have rejected my
irredeemable position, which is _apparently_ fascism. Which is unlikely,
because you've assessed me as incapable of observing reality.

And this, in a nutshell, is why Trump won.

~~~
freehunter
I don't know if you're a fascist, all I know is your original comment was
written to defend authoritarian policies. Like I said, the comment sounded
like what a fascist would say. Especially the part saying the AG was a
terrorist for daring to defy the glorious leader. That's pretty fucked up, you
have to understand that.

But the fact that your immediate response to that is "wah you hurt my feelings
so I'm going home" is doubling concerning. I don't care why Trump won, but you
weren't interested in having a conversation in the first place. And you're
right, neither am I. I've actually said that before, in a post that you said
you didn't read, so I'm not surprised you missed it.

But my point remains. Conservatives are always welcome. Small government, in
favor of small business, lower regulations, lower taxes, more individual
rights. Those are good things. Authoritarians are not. Denying people their
rights, regulating bedroom activities, discriminating based on color and
religion, trying to make everyone afraid of everyone and everything, demanding
100% obedience or else, those are bad policies and no one should have to put
up with it.

I can't help the way you come off in your comments, and I can't change your
mind. That's not what I'm trying to do. I just want to explain the difference
between Trump and a conservative. Because being anti-Trump is not the same as
being anti-conservative. Trump is not, in any way, a conservative, so
criticisms of his policies are in no way a criticism of conservatives.

And this, in a nutshell, is why I don't really care what you have to say.

------
muninn_
Although I think the American Civil Liberties Union is incredibly valuable and
I'm glad they have a lot more money now to fight for the American people, I'm
questioning all of this.

Where was the outpouring of funding when black people were being gunned down
by cops from West Coast organizations? Where has YCombinator been as our own
impoverished African-Americans are getting slaughtered in the streets of
Chicago? Why weren't we funding the ACLU to help these people? I haven't seen
Google talk about this, or AirBnB offer support to widows of veterans whose
spouse commits suicide and has left them with nothing.

I feel for immigrants from war-torn countries, especially having been there
myself. Maybe I'm too cynical and look at these moves (AirBnB, Uber, Google,
etc...) as marketing moves. I wish we cared more about homeless people, people
in West Virginia and Kentucky who have lost their jobs and got drenched in
opiates without any protests from anybody, or veterans who can't pay their VA
bills. Idk.

I know this comment will be unpopular, and that's ok. I tend to care more
about those who I feel (whether true or not) are being left behind because
that's who I am.

~~~
cosinetau
The best time to plant a tree was yesterday. I can personally forgive them,
but we need to hold these players accountable in the future. If marketing
moves is what incentives them, we need to make it impossible to move us
without extended action.

Edit: Ya'll are cynical Jedis.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
The best time to plant a tree was yesterday, the second best time to plant a
tree is today. Being proactive is better than being reactive, but we shouldn't
poohoo the value of being at least reactive now and maybe proactive in the
future.

------
nayuki
500 Internal Server Error

~~~
Maarius
Cached:
[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Wr9fuA...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Wr9fuAQM4bcJ:https://blog.ycombinator.com/welcome-
aclu/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de)

------
sjcsjc
503 Service Temporarily Unavailable

~~~
sjcsjc
And now a 500 error. Still haven't managed to read it.

------
jasondrowley
I keep getting an error message when I load the page.

------
savagej
I thought the "A" in ACLU stood for American.

~~~
CydeWeys
And where do you think Silicon Valley is, or where YCombinator is based?

~~~
maxerickson
I believe they may be making an oblique reference to the ACLU acting on behalf
of immigrants this past weekend.

Of course, it's perfectly consistent to believe that the government of the
United States of America does not sufficiently respect the civil liberties of
non citizens.

~~~
CydeWeys
Huh, what a weird point to make. If he were to actually look at the ACLU's
mission, though, he'd see that there's nothing in it about only working to
protect the rights of American citizens.

------
acqq
Anybody who wants to have a balanced view of ACLU should try to investigate
for himself about the connections between the Muslim Brotherhood, an
organization with a published goal to dismantle democracy once it
democratically gains enough power, and ACLU.

