Hacker News

points by oliculipolicula 1 day ago | 0 comments

You might want to find PaulHoule in Ithaca.. local social media (& activism) is totally his wheelhouse, I reckon?

Or join his "reading group" first.

(You just have to remember he absoltely knows that he ought to be terrified of coming off as a pompous prick)

FT ain't too right.

It's more socialist than The Guardian sometimes

https://www.ft.com/content/6b969bcb-9c5c-4a6a-9143-2c5c593ab...

>Are you not going too far in the direction of letting the more well-to-do among us off the hook?

https://www.ft.com/content/6f3ada65-c56c-499c-8eb6-008fac589...

https://www.ft.com/john-burn-murdoch

[–] emsign 22 hours ago

> FT = "socialist"

and you're not even ironic, your overton window is way off to the right/libertarian side

No, the Financial Times is NOT socialist.

[–] verdverm 20 hours ago

Ironically, some policies coming from the far right look a lot like socialist policies.

They have changed their definitions for conservative and socialist to fit their new world view.

[–] oliculipolicula 15 hours ago

Elections are the continuation of attempts at thoughtful conversation by other means

[–] verdverm 14 hours ago

your comments make less sense the deeper this thread goes

[–] oliculipolicula 12 hours ago

I don't think you guys clicked on the first ft link? It's not paywalled. A transcript where the ft interviewer wonders if the author of Antifa Econs isn't holding the wealthy to account enough..

By comparison, I just checked Guardian, and it's all lifestyle and identity politics.

What I was insinuating above was that votes can be a way for people on either (and sometimes on the same) side of an ideological divide to avoid having conversations.

Now that the midterms are over, Republicans are already pandering to the "support base" of those across the aisle. While the elects themselves are celebrating (too early, and for the wrong reasons, imho-- roughly that people hated Trump)

>“What passes for political discourse these days consists of either narrow, managerial, technocratic talk, which inspires no one, or, when passion does enter, we have shouting matches — highly partisan, often bitter shouting matches where politicians and elected officials and citizens are shouting past one another rather than engaging seriously with the big, ethical questions, questions about justice and the common good that should be at stake in democratic public discourse,” said Sandel.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2015/01/making-a-case...