Hacker News Reader

Comment by ogogmad | Hacker News Reader

Reminds me of how some people now think that the term "blacklist" is discriminatory.

To be honest, I could somewhat understand the people who found "master/slave" terminology insensitive. But with the term "blacklist" being interpreted racially, I think now is the time to start saying "no" to idiots who are looking for trouble. The suggestion that these terms took their original meaning from people's skin colour is absolutely bonkers; haven't light and dark been associated with safety and danger since forever?

I don't think this is creeping fascism. I think it's worse: It's creeping idiocy. And it looks like companies and institutions are giving into these idiots out of sheer spinelessness and a desire to avoid trouble. I don't want to be dictated to by idiots, ever -- they should just be called what they are.

View on HN

There is some overlap with fascism, its followers weren't the brightest stars in the sky either. But the source of authoritarianism is most often fear. Fear of being left behind or taken advantage of or something similar. Doesn't really matter, but it results in the want to prescribe rule for others, finding flaws in others and having a clear image of an enemy.

The question if companies are able to stand for any value at all is thoroughly answered however. I think a business environment that has accepted this fact is more attractive to work in, but that probably comes down to preference. I evade larger companies which ascribe values to themselves with care.

I remember a discussion on Twitter about abolishing possesive pronouns, because they allegedly express a relation of power and, well, possession. Like, you shouldn't say "my wife" because she doesn't belong to you.

The thing is this: for a lot of things we have experts, and we listen to them. We know we should listen to medical doctors instead of improvising uneducated opinions.

In the case of language, there are also experts: linguists. They can educate us about the various uses of possesive pronouns, which express more than just a naive idea of possession.

But somehow in this kind of heated discussions nobody consults linguists for guidance.

> Like, you shouldn't say "my wife" because she doesn't belong to you.

Random fun fact: in Korean you'd frequently say "our wife" even though you're her only husband. Also our son, our mom, or our house (even when you're the only one living in it).

Maybe bring it up next time, and see their brains trying to process the info. :D

I watched Joe Rogan's interview with defector Yeonmi Park and, if I understood correctly, she said that this is the case in North Korea only, because the government banned the word "I"!

You can't say "I like this", only "we like this".

In South Korea people do use the first person singular. I hope a Korean person could correct me if I'm wrong.

Wasn't Park Yeonmi the person who said American universities are worse than North Korea? I wouldn't take anything she said too seriously ... :)

The Korean language does have "I/my" vs. "we/our" distinction, but for some inexplicable reason, it uses "our" when it comes to family, people, or houses. So, people say "my book" but "our dad". Even if you're the only child.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com