Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Last time I checked, bigotry was bad in general, not just when applied to those without power.

You're invoking "it's bigotry!" as a reason why we shouldn't do this. Why do you think bigotry is bad? Is it bad intrinsically (aka "bigotry is bad" is an axiom), or is it bad because of its effects? If it's the latter, does the reasoning apply when applied to organizations with voluntary membership?

Furthermore, I don't see why it's bad to hate on an organization and/or its members based on the conduct of its other members. Let's say Acme, Inc is known for sales reps with high pressure sales tactics. Is it bad then, if I ignore a cold call from an Acme sales rep on that basis?



> Why do you think bigotry is bad?

Depending no the definition you use, either because it's part of the definition in that it's talking about negative effects, or because it's based on intolerance and unwillingness to consider other people's beliefs at all. Are you actually asking why intolerance of all other points of view is bad? Or are you asking why something defined as bad is bad, which is an odd semantic discussion to have? If this is trolling to get me to define a basic portion of my argument, it's a particularly absurd attempt, since it's literally covered by the dictionary.

> If it's the latter, does the reasoning apply when applied to organizations with voluntary membership?

> Furthermore, I don't see why it's bad to hate on an organization and/or its members based on the conduct of its other members. Let's say Acme, Inc is known for sales reps with high pressure sales tactics. Is it bad then, if I ignore a cold call from an Acme sales rep on that basis?

Because you are taking the actions of some members and applying it to the whole. Should we hate all Democrats and/or all Republicans because some of them act in horrible ways that undermine our government? There are definitely people on each side that would like it if you did.

Basically, I see this as coming down to the purpose of the organization, why people are members of the organization, and how many of them exhibit the behavior in question. If we're talking about white supremacists, people join because of that belief, that belief itself is problematic, and we can safely assume all members (except for special circumstances or those there because they have little choice) have those beliefs and exhibit and support that behavior.

Contrast that with police agencies. Whatever the behavior of the portion of officers that behave in a way you we all find abhorrent, the purpose of the organization is not to suppress or kill minorities, it's to keep public order, enforce the law, and keep people safe. I think most people join because they think it's a noble profession and want to serve their community (whether or not that goes to their head later). I don't think you can make an assumption about any specific police officer's behavior with regard to the negative behavior we've seen, because many police officers do not agree with it either.

That is a clear difference in many attributes that defines why I would be willing to make assumptions about an avowed member of a white supremacist group with regard to behavior about race, but I would not be willing to make assumptions about any single police officer with regard to behavior regarding treatment of minorities.




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

Search: