Hacker News Reader

Comment by hkai | Hacker News Reader

In the last 10-15 years ACLU has moved away from being politically neutral (and has publicly stated so), so one might easily see this action as an attempt to undermine the government's capabilities rather than to legitimately protect the freedoms of Americans.

View on HN

Believing that americans should have freedom is not a politically neutral position.

Y'all literally fought a war over that very question back in the 1700s.

Hell, is there any question less political than to what extent individual freedoms should be trumped by the state and the collective "good"? That, in its various forms, is the fundamental political question from which all other political questions follow.

Being pro civil liberties can't be politically neutral when there are those attempting to take them away via political means.

The ACLU was always a staunch defender of free-speech rights, but that is no longer the case. They now only defend the free speech rights of people on the left side of the political spectrum. For example, they will not defend religious speech, the accused in title IX cases, pro-life groups, etc.

Thats not true

The ACLU has lost a great deal of moral clarity once they began taking on political positions. They no longer have the clout they once had, in the eyes of many.

The timing seems odd for that, given that their preferred side seems rather likely to be largely in control for the next couple years.

Limiting the governments capabilities is the very essence of what it means to protect freedom of private citizens. Throughout history there is no case of continual government expansion which leads to more freedom of its citizens.

Consumer privacy has been politicized as it entered the public consciousness. Parties have taken sides.

I don't see another choice for them. The populist authoritarian streak taking hold in many country's right wing parties goes against much of what the ACLU stands for.

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Part of the reason their name has weight, is their history of defending anyone including in at least one case actual neo-nazis.

When you have one party relentlessly gerrymandering districts to take away voting rights (mostly from minorities) and putting immigrants in cages separated from their parents, it's hard to support both sides. One side is violating basic rights as a matter of mainstream policy.

IMO populism is anti human rights. I think that's the reason ACLU is no longer neutral. They were totally fine with traditional conservative principles for many decades.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com