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

I don't know. I personally know people that lost their minds because of an election. Completely well off people, whose lives are not affected at all by national politics, apart from slight changes in tax rates. They live in a state and city that shares their politics. They're isolated from everything on the national level.

Yet some of these people have rearranged their entire lives around a singular politician. Ended relationships, moved, started therapy or medication.

It happens on both sides and its pretty sad.

What else would you call that?




>Completely well off people, whose lives are not affected at all by national politics, apart from slight changes in tax rates. They live in a state and city that shares their politics. They're isolated from everything on the national level...

>What else would you call that?

This is one of those comments that accidentally reveals more than intended because I would call that "empathy". You are revealing that the only reason you think people should be concerned about politics is when it directly effects them. Some people actually genuinely care about other people and seeing someone elected who has promised to hurt people is a disturbing and troubling turn of events even if they themselves are likely to be safe.


So you’re saying people are making a rational estimation of the various harms caused to their fellowmen, determining that political actions in Washington are the primary component, and feeling bad about the harm?

I don’t buy it. Citing empathy is moral language to justify bad actions.


>So you’re saying people are making a rational estimation of the various harms caused to their fellowmen, determining that political actions in Washington are the primary component, and feeling bad about the harm?

Trump released an executive order yesterday that said some of my friends are no longer considered citizens of this country. Yes, sometimes it is incredibly obvious when Washington is to blame for people's suffering.


This thread is about people whose well being and ability to enjoy life is ruined by politics (Enemy centered mindset).

It’s normal to feel bad for someone you know impacted by bad a policy. Ruining your life on their behalf is not empathetic.


>This thread is about people whose well being and ability to enjoy life is ruined by politics

Another facet of empathy is being able to understand other perspectives besides your own. Maybe this was your interpretation of the bounds of the conversation. It doesn't mean that is the only interpretation.

Here are the exact words from the comment I replied to: "Ended relationships, moved, started therapy or medication." I don't think those are signs someone whose "ability to enjoy life is ruined". In fact, I see those as signs of someone enjoying life more by removing or addressing things that sap the joy out of life.


Yes. Needing medication because your friend has visa problems is crazy. They themselves are probably less anxious.

> another facet of empathy

Do you really think political obsession is just a sign of superior morals and humanity?

Empathy should make you less pessimistic about politics because you understand other groups values and incentives. (I don’t claim this description is me)


>Yes. Needing medication because your friend has visa problems is crazy.

There was an "or" in that list of possible reactions. I was not giving an example of a situation in which someone would or should have every one of those reactions. I was directly replying to you by giving you an example of a situation in which it was clear that "political actions in Washington are the primary component" of inflicting harm on people.

>Do you really think political obsession is just a sign of superior morals and humanity?

I never said anything about superiority. That is something you brought to the conversation. Is there a reason you view someone exhibiting more empathy than you as an insult?

>Empathy should make you less pessimistic about politics because you understand other groups values and incentives.

Understanding a person's perspective isn't necessarily paired with the ability to change that perspective. Does knowing a racist might be motivated by fear make their racism less dangerous?


I think you should manage your health and safety first and those closest to you.

You're not helping by inflicting harm on yourself and those around you. If you want to canvas for the other side, donate, volunteer, great. But these people are obsessed and inflict a lot of damage on themselves for no good purpose.

Most people empathize to those that are infected with a virus. It's often out of their control. You can only offer them help and suggest they touch grass once in a while. But you shouldn't feed into their self delusions that self harm and obsession with things out of their control is healthy and a good way to live their life


The empathy you are showing in this comment would feel a lot more genuine if you didn't reveal with your prior comment how little empathy plays into your overall worldview. I'm personally fine, you don't have to waste your time telling me how to live a better life. I was just trying to explain to you what you were seemingly misunderstanding about your fellow humans.


> Some people actually genuinely care about other people and seeing someone elected who has promised to hurt people is a disturbing and troubling turn of events even if they themselves are likely to be safe.

Ya but, it's all a bit silly isn't it? Realistically those people wouldn't be doing any of that unless they were addicted to media and perhaps by consequence emotionally volatile. If I chose not to be chronically keeping up with stuff on a moment to moment basis that only has vague intangible impacts on my life or those around me, specifically online, does that make me less empathetic or less tolerant of having all my time, energy, and attention stolen from me? That's not always the case, but it often is, and if it's actually relevant, you're opting into poor mental health despite having zero control over anything even if you care, so you might as well not be so tuned in; which part is the good part again?

It's a bit fatalistic perhaps, but I feel like the greatest trick social media (and Trump) ever pulled was convincing us we'd be pariahs if we opted out. If not for chronically keeping up with nearly literally every word the new batch of chronies has to say, they might not be saying it.


>If I chose not to be chronically keeping up with stuff on a moment to moment basis that only has vague intangible impacts on my life or those around me, specifically online, does that make me less empathetic or less tolerant of having all my time, energy, and attention stolen from me?

Some people view empathy as an active ability to "put yourself in someone else's shoes". Other people view it as a passive feeling along the lines of "it hurts to see other people hurt". If you can just stop being empathic by not thinking about it, you are in the first group. Some of us are in the second group and can't just decide to ignore it.


Belief.

Belief short circuits reason.


Weird part is that these two groups generally belive are not that different in the general. Most of the fight on the ideological side is on marginal differences.

This all is mostly idiotic tribal fight when you hate each other because you just must to hate someone.

I profoundly hope for star trek like civilisation in the future


They’re not that different through a rich straight cis white Christian male perspective.

As soon as your skin color or sexual preference or religion or gender identity or income level is not in-group, they’re pretty different.


Integrity?


It’s religious conflict. Nobody cares really about differences in tax rates. But differences in foundational beliefs about the world and humanity will do that.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: