Well yes, thinking people should be treated equally regardless of their sexuality or color of their skin is good, and the opposite is bad. Is that the kind of "very left leaning position" you had in mind? Or something else?

The left-leaning ones usually don't call for the eradication of certain peoples.

> hen did we decide platforming very left-leaning positions is good, and platforming very right-leaning ones is bad?

The same way DHH can have opinions, one-man-companies forking the sponsorship momey can have some too. "We" didn't decide anything, a sponsor company decided to stop sponsoring (with no public commentary), that's all that happened.

More to the point, "platforming" is an active operation, I think anyone can decide who they want to promote and why. It's fundamentally different from censoring.

I disagree with this framing as well. There's nothing wrong with "right-leaning" statements or opinions. DHH can talk all he wants about a desire for smaller governments, opinions on gun control, or conservative fiscal policy.

However, people that espouse intolerance of others based on the colour of their skin is just objectively bad. Sometimes there is a right and a wrong side to things. The problem is that some on the political-right seem to have aligned themselves with policy or viewpoints that stand for hatred.

I think the real issue is framing blatant racism as a 'very right-leaning' opinion. It does a disservice to people who have normal conservative opinions on economic or social issues. We've moved past race as a social issue long ago. It's not a debate that should be had anymore. Racists aren't conservative or right wing - they're just bigots.

And to be clear, you can discuss immigration policy without being racist. In the blog post in question DHH gives his support to a convicted criminal, who is also a former member of an explicitly fascist political party and founder of an islamophobic hate group. That's not 'right-leaning'. It's support for a racist criminal. I'm unsure whether DHH is actually a bigot or just completely engulfed in the rhetoric common on Twitter these days. Either way he's a fucking moron pontificating on something which he has no actual experience of. Maybe when the US invades Greenland and starts deporting the Danes from the US he'll discover empathy.

you think we should platform racism?

I read the DHH post in question: https://world.hey.com/dhh/as-i-remember-london-e7d38e64. It is pretty standard anti-immigrant. It feels like it is acknowledging the fact that the populations of Western countries are in a demographic crisis, they are sub-replacement in terms of fertility but instead of fixing that he just wants to ban immigrants. It feels like fixing the fertility issue would solve the root issue.

He's made comments supporting the Trucker protest in Canada and he knew fuck all about it too.

There is, however, a whole lot that says a lot about the character of DHH in it, such as by repeating rhetoric of the UK's racist far-right.

The question was "Why was "platforming" DHH bad?". Some people disagree with the views represented in that linked blog post, and do not wish to sponsor events that showcase him.

Personally, I think DHH is a troll and would never be interested in sponsoring, or attending, an event that involved him.

David Heinemeier Hansson, also known by his initials DHH, is a Danish programmer, writer, entrepreneur, and racing driver. He is the creator of Ruby on Rails, a web framework written in Ruby.[1]

That is the gist of it.

Please try to argue in good faith.

> He liked the nationalistic display of a march in England?

Replace "nationalistic" with "fascist". That's the issue.

It's the third link on that page, in the first sentence.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

This is kind of the problem. People parrot this stuff with no further investigation.