Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This would be a much more interesting post without the tired sarcasm every other paragraph.



I'm sorry you don't like it. But those comments are there for a reason: to link what he said in that article with the claims he's making now.

As for the sarcasm: when someone (1) talks at length about how natural slavery is and how some people are naturally fitted for slavery, and calls for all long-term government benefit recipients to be made into slaves, and (2) insinuates (without quite saying it explicitly) that the average black person really ought to be a slave because that's what their inborn character and intelligence make best for them, and then (1') gets indignant at being called an advocate of slavery and (2') insists, in tones of offended innocence, that if anyone thinks them racist for taking about mental differences between black and white people, the problem is all theirs for being so "IQist" ... well, I really think some amount of sarcasm is called for.


This just reads like "The other guy is a jerk, therefore I'm justified in being a jerk when describing him".


That's not my meaning at all, in at least two ways.

Firstly, this isn't about what sort of person Yarvin is (jerk or not-jerk), it's about what he's done in the specific instance we're talking about.

Secondly, neither advocating slavery and oppression nor being sarcastic about a stranger on the internet is the same thing as being a jerk.

So it's more like "The other guy is being grossly dishonest about the terrible horrible no good very bad things he has said, therefore I'm justified in being quite vigorous in pointing out the dishonesty of what he's saying now and the horribleness of the things he said before".

FWIW I doubt Yarvin is a jerk. I expect he's pleasant and interesting company and kind to strangers and animals. Being a jerk is just one of many ways to go wrong, and it is not what I am claiming Yarvin has done. If all the bad things I say about Yarvin and more are true, and if those are not just one-off occurrences but a matter of settled character, then the consequence isn't that he's a jerk, it's more that he's a fascist or something. I happen to think I'm not a jerk either, but at least you're in the right ball-park there: if all the bad things you say about me and more are true, and if that is a matter of settled character rather than a one-off, then indeed I'm a jerk :-).

[EDITED for clarity here and there; no changes to meaning.]




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: