politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is quite the Hanlon's Razor situation.
There have been a number of US citizens who have received these emails, all of them do some kind of work related to immigration. It's pretty clear that whoever sent out these emails just collected every email related to immigration work, and sent out a mass email. That satisfies Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
But! The fact that they're doing this without even a passing effort at accuracy, with no concern about getting it wrong, shows how it's motivated by malice too. It's the ICE version of a reckless homicide, they're doing something they have to know would normally get them fired if not charged. But, they don't care because the current racist administration is going to revel in the pain.
So, it's a weird situation where Hanlon's Razor is both right and wrong.
The problem with "they're just incompetent", is that it let's malicious people feign stupidity. And if it is a combination, it doesn't matter which aspects are one or the other. They are dangerous all the same and shouldn't be allowed to continue hurting people. But a combination of apathy, indoctrination, and infiltration means they'll likely never see any real consequences. Or if they do, they were likely expendable and their excision doesn't accomplish anything. People need to, at a minimum, vote. And preferably get more involved. Organize. Start local.
It may let malicious people feign stupidity, but that doesn't mean you have to just forgive them.
Basically you're saying, attribute the email to stupidity; attribute the stupidity to malice.
I think anybody who wasn't malicious would be very careful about this process. They would know that a mistake was possible and that they should triple-check everything they were doing. So, it's more that the stupidity is the evidence for the malice. That, and the fact that there wasn't a massive apology and attempt to correct the mistake when these news stories started coming out.
well. I mean, no. They could just be stupid.
People often forget with Hanlon's Razor that stupidity is evil, and that evil is not always malicious.
Please explain why stupidity is evil.
I guess I shouldn't have been so black and white. It depends on your definition of stupidity, and I suppose your understanding of evil - to an extent.
Ignorance is not stupidity, for one thing. A lack of knowledge is, in no way, indicative of an inability to gain it. Nor is it indicative of an individual's desire to gain knowledge.
If I were to define a stupid decision, it would be a decision made without any thought for the consequences. Littering, for example, is stupid. Depending on what you're littering, it is also evil. Littering paper? Yeah ok, as long as it isn't heavily laminated it's just going to decompose. Littering plastic? Metal cans (lined with plastic, but the metal itself is also bad)? It's a decision made where the benefit is so small compared to the negatives that you might as well shoot yourself in the foot.
The stupid person doesn't consider this, though. They don't care that their roads are littered with trash, plastic strewn amongst fields - poisoning the earth and waterways with chemicals possessing adjectives like forever. They don't care that they live in an ever deepening landfill. They just throw it out the window and forget about it. They look at the next species to go extinct and push the thought out of their mind.
This, to me, is evil. This is probably the least evil example of stupidity that I can think of. There are more but, truth be told, I don't really like thinking about stupid people. They tend to make me angry.
Edit: I did not downvote you, by the way.
Is there reason to believe that Hanlon's Razor is correct?
Yeah, Occam's razor.
Occam's Razor comes from a 14th century priest who studied logic. It's been gone over by philosophers in the centuries since and is generally considered valid.
Hanlon's Razor comes from a joke book published in 1980.
Hanlon's Razor is basically a special case of Occam's Razor.
Making a mistake or doing something stupid is easy. Conspiring to do something malicious is not as easy. The simpler explanation is generally that something is a mistake rather than an elaborate conspiracy. So, Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation (a mistake) is probably the right one.
Fwiw Occam's razor is actually a little more precise than "choose the simplest explanation". Specifically, it defines what "simplest" actually means, in such a way that makes it easier to see how you could describe Hanlon's razor as a special case of Occam's.
Occam's razor is that you should choose the solution which requires the fewest assumptions. Assuming someone made a mistake is precisely one assumption. That they were acting maliciously requires several, including having the motive to do it and, in a case involving large organisations, having the capability to cover it up.
From a logical perspective, if you're trying to discover the truth of something you're inevitably going to start weighing and eliminating variables. It makes sense to start from the absolute bottom, prove or disprove that, then move on.
It's just razors all the way down...
Is it? Hitchens' razor says that you've provided no evidence for your turtle-like stack of razors, so your claim can be dismissed without evidence.
While true, the intent behind Hanlon's has been expressed for millennia. The Principal of Charity (which was only named in the 1950s)
Basically, never assume the worst about someone.
The problem here is when there is actual malice. But that's when Occam's razor comes in.
No. And it's a boon to "people" like the Trump regime.