Bob and Van didn't make you aware of their political views within a few minutes of meeting them. They didn't put a sign in their front yard or a bumper sticker on their vehicle. They weren't wearing any particular apparel. You didn't notice them in the town's Facebook group making their opinions crystal clear. It's much different in a world where people make their political views their whole identity.
It's also a bit ironic, since Marco has a pride flag with the trans additions flying from his house. So is this blog post him coming to realize he's a part of the problem or...?
This sounds nice, but what if your neighbor's political views are an existential threat to you personally? What if they don't want you to live in their neighborhood because of the color of your skin, or if they don't think you're a fit parent because you let your kid wear certain clothes? There are some things about which we can have friendly disagreements, like Laffer curves, school vouchers, the death penalty, environmental regulations, or whatever. But there are other disagreements which mean we cannot be friends.
Then you live next to them and let them borrow a cup of sugar or ask to borrow one from them and collect their mail while they’re away and thank them when they let you know you left a light on when you left for work the other day. And realize that your hangups, quirks, and beliefs are just as offensive to them as theirs are to yours but that doesn’t mean either one of you is. Or a good neighbor that can’t crack a beer and just live next door to one another.
> Then you live next to them and let them borrow a cup of sugar or ask to borrow one from them and collect their mail while they’re away and thank them when they let you know you left a light on when you left for work the other day.
You would have liked my grandmother, who shared your opinion that kindness between neighbors can heal political rifts.
Unfortunately it didn't work out so well for her, as despite her kindness, the neighbors sent her to Dachau anyway.
What if you were friendly with your neighbor, but on the way to return a shovel you get hit by a bus?
Point being: you're dreaming up edge cases, presumably as a justification for... what? Refusing to engage with people who don't wear their political views like a badge on their chest?
If your stance honestly is "we cannot be friends unless I know your political views", then those who keep to themselves in the face of that are wise.
Xenophobia and racial (or religious ) animus are hardly edge cases. On the contrary, they are the default setting for our species, as evidenced by (flips through history book) the last few millennia.
> what if your neighbor's political views are an existential threat to you personally?
Then you are uniquely placed to show them you're not the baddie they thought you were. Say hello, introduce yourself, smile and wave, bring cookies or stuff from your backyard garden once in a while, be personable.
Firearms lobby, institutionalized prejudice in law enforcement, Justice system, etc all have made this additional labor of the marginalized minority extraordinarily dangerous.
> Then you are uniquely placed to show them you're not the baddie they thought you were.
Great idea! If only we had thought of this sooner. We could have avoided Jim Crow and segregation if only black people had thought to be friendly to racist whites!
The essay makes a token gesture toward this ("privilege and power dynamics play a complex and unavoidable role"), but ultimately Marco, who is a rich straight white male unaffected by any meaningful or existential prejudice, is willing to overlook those views (which do not impact him) as things that do not matter.
I think the key differentiator today is the silent mental health crisis that’s gripped this country. Until you know them well, it’s hard to know if your neighbor is secretly part of a weird Discord server where obsessive people lord over random strangers for internet clout. You really don’t want to inadvertently become the day’s “main character” somehow by giving the wrong “vibes” or being unaware of the latest taboo.
It used to be easier to tell when someone was a nutjob based on their appearance, but these days not so much.
It’s still good to get to know your neighbors, but some caution is warranted.
This is still the case today, if you let it be. I am friends with many neighbors with differing views from my own and literally do have them over for dinner, invite them to my toddlers' birthday parties, etc.
I don't recognize the things the author describes here - awareness of hot takes, opinions about coffee shop owners... they strike me as features of the online world, but not the offline one I inhabit.
Maybe the healthier past wasn’t one where nobody talked about politics. Maybe it was one where disagreeing about politics didn’t automatically make someone your enemy.
As someone from the Netherlands, I find this especially strange. You can call the leader of the party your neighbour voted for every name under the sun, preferably involving some kind of disease, because that’s our style, and still have a beer together afterwards.
In all likelihood, that leader of the party your neighbor voted for does not hold views that you consider an existential threat to yourself, or those you love. I say this because you live in (or are from) NL, and while there is certainly a range of political views there, compared to the US you may as well all be in the same party.
Try having a beer with someone who things your daughter in law should have her drivers license revoked because she "lied about being a woman", in a society where a drivers license is a critical part of life.
I struggle with this. Where I live, it's harder nowadays to compartmentalize how someone votes from their core values. What we used to call "politics" now encompasses some fundamental aspects of how we observe and process our daily lives.
It might help to realize that this is a uniquely American affliction. People almost anywhere else simply don't consider politics (or race or gender for that matter) to be nearly as important.
This would then let you see your neighbors as people. What you claim are core values are nothing of the sort. They are misconceptions invented by your in-group to dehumanize the out-group. In reality people's core values are: their kids, their health, love, belonging, a sense of purpose. The rest is just a puppet master hijacking these core values for organizing a crowd.
Counterpoint: what you want to claim are core values are actually window dressing to hide how people see the out-group. Who doesn't "love their kids" or fall in love, or want a sense of belonging (ok, a few), or a sense of purpose (ok, a few more). These are not statements about anyone's core values, they're statements about what it is to be human.
Core values are about how you treat people who are NOT close to you, how you believe limited resources should be allocated, how and by whom you think decisions should be made, what the relationship between individuals and society ought to be, and specifically between individuals and government.
It always did, we just had the norm that in a liberal democracy, we put that to the side for our dealings with people. Same thing as religion -- a huge deal that shapes people's values and attitudes about the most core aspects of life -- and there was a norm of "no politics or religion" in polite conversation.
> What we used to call "politics" now encompasses some fundamental aspects
That's less true IRL if you just talk to people and be personable. There's something about seeing someone face to face and chatting that helps you intuitively understand you have a lot in common with them (or not) - and regardless of their political opinions either way.
I find that the sorts of life choices people make and the character they have as a result is a far better discriminator of what they actually have in common (or don't) with others.
I'm a pretty left wing person. Most of my friends are a lot more conservative. We can talk anything including politics and disagree without breaking apart our relationship. Last night out it was abortion and Lindsay Clancy, before that colonialism, race/IQ and labor rights. I guess it helps that we all think the people in power right now are corrupt.
If your friendships can't handle a debate that's a skill issue.
In my experience it’s not the conservatives who end relationships over disagreements. In fact, I’ve never heard of a conservative kid disowning their parents, family, or friends because of their liberal views.
Nope. I haven’t seen any of those things personally. Have you?
I have personally seen family members disown their parents. Siblings not speak for decades. A friend call another racist and cut off communication not for any racist behavior, but because the friend (who has a multiracial family) didn’t support the same cause.
And likewise, maybe you should experience the real world instead of believing sensationalized things you read.
I mostly roll my eyes but it seems like there's so much fretting over echo chambers... when we are online. Only online. But this post is anecdotal example of IRL being a wicked echo chamber, a place where we stay within our bubbles and avoid finding out and avoid sharing our world or regional views.
I think it's good to exchange views on the world. That's a stronger better species, society. People receive different information, and talking about the world and what events we see and what they mean to us helps broaden that base and provide context. A lot of it is bad wrong and annoying. I want to hope though that socialization and seeing that oh we are humans together is a great relief for many of the narrownesses that afflict our hearts and souls and which cause strife, which is terrible for our welfare economically, socially, spiritually, politically.
The crux of this post is that even publicly stated political views like DHH's shouldn't matter.
"If I learn today that my neighbors have political views that my “side” considers unacceptable and unforgivable, [...] Should I be condemned for not publicly condemning them myself? [...] I don’t want to associate with any community that would insist on either of those. [...]
"The town coffee shop was just a coffee shop. We weren’t publicly shamed for going there because one of the owners was an ass."
> And I can’t help but feel that maybe we were better off before we knew everyone’s hot takes on everything
He says this, while implying his conservative neighbors, who did nothing but be wonderful neighbors to him and his family except have different political opinions, should, in fact be publicly shamed by people he agrees with. But now they’re not shoveling his snow anymore, so maybe it’s time for a mea culpa.
Did he feel this way when he shamed Y Combinator? When saying alternative political stances are reprehensible, regressive, and aggressive.
The world he helped create is uglier. Now he’s not happy that he crapped in the sandbox and no one wants to play with him.
I think you misread the post. He's saying that his ignorance was great, and maybe we should go back towards that.
I don't think Tumblr was particularly influential on the neighbors aspect. It never reached that kind of broad base. Twitter did though. Unless you just mean social media broadly?
Bob and Van didn't make you aware of their political views within a few minutes of meeting them. They didn't put a sign in their front yard or a bumper sticker on their vehicle. They weren't wearing any particular apparel. You didn't notice them in the town's Facebook group making their opinions crystal clear. It's much different in a world where people make their political views their whole identity.
It's also a bit ironic, since Marco has a pride flag with the trans additions flying from his house. So is this blog post him coming to realize he's a part of the problem or...?
He lives on Fire Island, that's about as political as flying the American flag in Orange County.
The problem is not showing what you stand for. The problem is that your political system only offers two options.
This sounds nice, but what if your neighbor's political views are an existential threat to you personally? What if they don't want you to live in their neighborhood because of the color of your skin, or if they don't think you're a fit parent because you let your kid wear certain clothes? There are some things about which we can have friendly disagreements, like Laffer curves, school vouchers, the death penalty, environmental regulations, or whatever. But there are other disagreements which mean we cannot be friends.
Then you live next to them and let them borrow a cup of sugar or ask to borrow one from them and collect their mail while they’re away and thank them when they let you know you left a light on when you left for work the other day. And realize that your hangups, quirks, and beliefs are just as offensive to them as theirs are to yours but that doesn’t mean either one of you is. Or a good neighbor that can’t crack a beer and just live next door to one another.
> Then you live next to them and let them borrow a cup of sugar or ask to borrow one from them and collect their mail while they’re away and thank them when they let you know you left a light on when you left for work the other day.
You would have liked my grandmother, who shared your opinion that kindness between neighbors can heal political rifts.
Unfortunately it didn't work out so well for her, as despite her kindness, the neighbors sent her to Dachau anyway.
This is just sentimental nonsense. You are not obligated to patronize or be friendly to evil people.
What if you were friendly with your neighbor, but on the way to return a shovel you get hit by a bus?
Point being: you're dreaming up edge cases, presumably as a justification for... what? Refusing to engage with people who don't wear their political views like a badge on their chest?
If your stance honestly is "we cannot be friends unless I know your political views", then those who keep to themselves in the face of that are wise.
> you're dreaming up edge cases
Xenophobia and racial (or religious ) animus are hardly edge cases. On the contrary, they are the default setting for our species, as evidenced by (flips through history book) the last few millennia.
> what if your neighbor's political views are an existential threat to you personally?
Then you are uniquely placed to show them you're not the baddie they thought you were. Say hello, introduce yourself, smile and wave, bring cookies or stuff from your backyard garden once in a while, be personable.
Firearms lobby, institutionalized prejudice in law enforcement, Justice system, etc all have made this additional labor of the marginalized minority extraordinarily dangerous.
> Then you are uniquely placed to show them you're not the baddie they thought you were.
Great idea! If only we had thought of this sooner. We could have avoided Jim Crow and segregation if only black people had thought to be friendly to racist whites!
/s
Remember: the onus is always on you to prove that you're one of the "good ones" by coddling them.
it means someone tricked you into thinking that
The essay makes a token gesture toward this ("privilege and power dynamics play a complex and unavoidable role"), but ultimately Marco, who is a rich straight white male unaffected by any meaningful or existential prejudice, is willing to overlook those views (which do not impact him) as things that do not matter.
I think the key differentiator today is the silent mental health crisis that’s gripped this country. Until you know them well, it’s hard to know if your neighbor is secretly part of a weird Discord server where obsessive people lord over random strangers for internet clout. You really don’t want to inadvertently become the day’s “main character” somehow by giving the wrong “vibes” or being unaware of the latest taboo.
It used to be easier to tell when someone was a nutjob based on their appearance, but these days not so much.
It’s still good to get to know your neighbors, but some caution is warranted.
It is still like this in most neighborhoods in the US, but it does require being outside and actually talking to them... which does seem rarer today.
This is still the case today, if you let it be. I am friends with many neighbors with differing views from my own and literally do have them over for dinner, invite them to my toddlers' birthday parties, etc.
I don't recognize the things the author describes here - awareness of hot takes, opinions about coffee shop owners... they strike me as features of the online world, but not the offline one I inhabit.
This is such a uniquely US thing.
Maybe the healthier past wasn’t one where nobody talked about politics. Maybe it was one where disagreeing about politics didn’t automatically make someone your enemy.
As someone from the Netherlands, I find this especially strange. You can call the leader of the party your neighbour voted for every name under the sun, preferably involving some kind of disease, because that’s our style, and still have a beer together afterwards.
In all likelihood, that leader of the party your neighbor voted for does not hold views that you consider an existential threat to yourself, or those you love. I say this because you live in (or are from) NL, and while there is certainly a range of political views there, compared to the US you may as well all be in the same party.
Try having a beer with someone who things your daughter in law should have her drivers license revoked because she "lied about being a woman", in a society where a drivers license is a critical part of life.
Have you ever heard of Geert Wilders?
I struggle with this. Where I live, it's harder nowadays to compartmentalize how someone votes from their core values. What we used to call "politics" now encompasses some fundamental aspects of how we observe and process our daily lives.
It might help to realize that this is a uniquely American affliction. People almost anywhere else simply don't consider politics (or race or gender for that matter) to be nearly as important.
This would then let you see your neighbors as people. What you claim are core values are nothing of the sort. They are misconceptions invented by your in-group to dehumanize the out-group. In reality people's core values are: their kids, their health, love, belonging, a sense of purpose. The rest is just a puppet master hijacking these core values for organizing a crowd.
Counterpoint: what you want to claim are core values are actually window dressing to hide how people see the out-group. Who doesn't "love their kids" or fall in love, or want a sense of belonging (ok, a few), or a sense of purpose (ok, a few more). These are not statements about anyone's core values, they're statements about what it is to be human.
Core values are about how you treat people who are NOT close to you, how you believe limited resources should be allocated, how and by whom you think decisions should be made, what the relationship between individuals and society ought to be, and specifically between individuals and government.
It always did, we just had the norm that in a liberal democracy, we put that to the side for our dealings with people. Same thing as religion -- a huge deal that shapes people's values and attitudes about the most core aspects of life -- and there was a norm of "no politics or religion" in polite conversation.
> What we used to call "politics" now encompasses some fundamental aspects
That's less true IRL if you just talk to people and be personable. There's something about seeing someone face to face and chatting that helps you intuitively understand you have a lot in common with them (or not) - and regardless of their political opinions either way.
I find that the sorts of life choices people make and the character they have as a result is a far better discriminator of what they actually have in common (or don't) with others.
I'm a pretty left wing person. Most of my friends are a lot more conservative. We can talk anything including politics and disagree without breaking apart our relationship. Last night out it was abortion and Lindsay Clancy, before that colonialism, race/IQ and labor rights. I guess it helps that we all think the people in power right now are corrupt.
If your friendships can't handle a debate that's a skill issue.
In my experience it’s not the conservatives who end relationships over disagreements. In fact, I’ve never heard of a conservative kid disowning their parents, family, or friends because of their liberal views.
Never heard of a "Christian" parent kicking out their gay son?
Never heard a "conservative" call a protester a "libtard" right before rolling coal at them?
Never heard of a friendly Southern town doing anything they can to keep out people of the wrong skin color, or to encourage them to leave?
Oh.
Maybe you should read some history and not rely on your personal anecdata.
Nope. I haven’t seen any of those things personally. Have you?
I have personally seen family members disown their parents. Siblings not speak for decades. A friend call another racist and cut off communication not for any racist behavior, but because the friend (who has a multiracial family) didn’t support the same cause.
And likewise, maybe you should experience the real world instead of believing sensationalized things you read.
> Nope. I haven’t seen any of those things personally
I didn't ask if you saw those things personally.
> And likewise, maybe you should experience the real world instead of believing sensationalized things you read.
Do you think the Jim Crow era was "sensationalized"?
Do you think that your own personal experience is more representative than documented historical fact?
Of course he does. He is comically ignorant.
Too bad Marco quit Twitter, I enjoyed following him.
I mostly roll my eyes but it seems like there's so much fretting over echo chambers... when we are online. Only online. But this post is anecdotal example of IRL being a wicked echo chamber, a place where we stay within our bubbles and avoid finding out and avoid sharing our world or regional views.
I think it's good to exchange views on the world. That's a stronger better species, society. People receive different information, and talking about the world and what events we see and what they mean to us helps broaden that base and provide context. A lot of it is bad wrong and annoying. I want to hope though that socialization and seeing that oh we are humans together is a great relief for many of the narrownesses that afflict our hearts and souls and which cause strife, which is terrible for our welfare economically, socially, spiritually, politically.
Thought this would be a cool story about Dylan and Morrison :(
From the timing, this seems to be a vaguepost in support of Omarchy and DHH.
I would shocked if it was, Accidental Tech Podcast is not a political show but they don't hide the fact that all three hosts are very liberal.
Which would be a strange defense. DHH is not someone who keeps his political views to himself.
The crux of this post is that even publicly stated political views like DHH's shouldn't matter.
"If I learn today that my neighbors have political views that my “side” considers unacceptable and unforgivable, [...] Should I be condemned for not publicly condemning them myself? [...] I don’t want to associate with any community that would insist on either of those. [...]
"The town coffee shop was just a coffee shop. We weren’t publicly shamed for going there because one of the owners was an ass."
> And I can’t help but feel that maybe we were better off before we knew everyone’s hot takes on everything
He says this, while implying his conservative neighbors, who did nothing but be wonderful neighbors to him and his family except have different political opinions, should, in fact be publicly shamed by people he agrees with. But now they’re not shoveling his snow anymore, so maybe it’s time for a mea culpa.
Did he feel this way when he shamed Y Combinator? When saying alternative political stances are reprehensible, regressive, and aggressive.
The world he helped create is uglier. Now he’s not happy that he crapped in the sandbox and no one wants to play with him.
I think you misread the post. He's saying that his ignorance was great, and maybe we should go back towards that.
I don't think Tumblr was particularly influential on the neighbors aspect. It never reached that kind of broad base. Twitter did though. Unless you just mean social media broadly?
It wasn’t ignorance, but tolerance.
I wasn’t referring to social media or his role in it at all except as a participant.
Won't somebody think of the Y Combinator!