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

Perhaps there are people in power who would benefit from portraying those communities in a different light.


I have no skin in the game. I was just around to witness this all go down.

The rationalist community I was talking about is well known. They split from SSC after the ban on culture war topics. They left Reddit a couple years ago because so many of their posts were getting flagged by Reddit for policy violations.

I'm not making this up. You can go see for yourself: https://old.reddit.com/r/TheMotte/comments/uaoyng/meta_like_...


What exactly do you mean?


Making a rationalist community seem right-wing would

- make right-wingers feel vindication as if they were rational all along,

- cause suspicion and division within the left/liberal rationalist community, and

- make the community, its people and their ideas less palatable to the general public.


Curious: Do you think J.D. Vance unintentionally dog-whistling a Scott Alexander article when he's on the Joe Rogan podcast was orchestrated or just what happened?[0]

---

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/1ggl0mh/jd_...


What is "unintentionally dog-whistling" supposed to mean?

Isn't intention the essence of the concept of the "dog whistle"?

I'd also like to observe that Scott Alexander does a yearly survey, which provide unusually robust evidence that if we're going to impute to him the cultural affiliations of those who read his posts, his politics can only be "all of it".


The dog whistle is a message hidden to those not in the know. An unintentional dog whistle is a hidden message shared by mistake. Either not intended and so a false message, or not intended but accidentally shared.




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

Search: