Hacker News Reader

Comment by padseeker | Hacker News Reader

City Journal is part of the Manhattan Institute, and uses content generated from conservative sources like National Review. Its hard to take a publication like this seriously when their political bent is already anti union. There may some substance and truth behind the content, but the title of the article is definitely subjective rather than objective. By definition every union is their eyes is bad.

View on HN

It is still a point of view. Should we not read anti union opinions from someone who has conservative views?

That’s like saying we can’t take the teachers union claims about teachers demands because they support teachers rights?

When a union organizer yaks about the evils of corporate <insert topic>, a critical reader discounts the rhetoric because of the source. If you want to form an opinion about the Verizon CEO, don’t use the CWA as your primary source.

Similarly, these folks have an agenda that drives everything they write. Read it, but do so with a critical eye and remember that the authors employment is tied to the positions/opinion that he is expressing.

The answers to the problems we have with education are nuanced and numerous. The convservative portfolio of solutions is narrow, and never, ever changes.

Do you think that conservatives have a real and legitimate membership just like progressives have a real and legitimate membership in political discussion groups?

Imagine if conservatives dismiss all progressive points of view...and vice versa..won’t we all be talking to each other in our little echo chambers?

They do dismiss it. They are in an echo chamber.

They being both left and right.

I do. But, I think that there is a conservative message that is heavily pushed from a relatively small number of moneyed folks. That makes reading “conservative” media or message boards type discussions difficult.

In person, totally different. I’ve worked on organization boards where we deal with diverse opinion and it is very different.

Thanks for pointing their bias out. Our society, liberals and conservatives alike, seems to have forgotten that information authored by a disreputable or biased source is, by nature and on average, less truthful than from a credible source.

Right. But shouldn’t a reader be able to filter facts and opinions?

A lot of data in that piece can be spinned both ways. It depends on the audience. The audience for the unions are the teachers. The audience for publications like these are those who aren’t already pro-unions.

Everyone’s preaching to the their respective choirs. But some of us can be neither theist nor atheist..but kinda agnostic, no?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com