Recent submissions

Comment · 3 years ago
Poe’s law strikes again. I legit cannot determine whether your comment is satire or genuine.
Comment · 3 years ago
Your first false equivalence arises out of trivializing the qualitative differences in freedom between China and the USA/EU, implicitly framing the limitations in China as comparable to those in democratic societies.

This is misleading given the severe restrictions on human rights, freedom of speech, and rule of law in an authoritarian regime like China.

Your second false equivalence is in your equating of limited, private content moderation by a social network with systemic human rights abuses by government.

Comment · 3 years ago
Do you get paid by the word, by the post, or are you actually this nuts and do this for free?
Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
You have conspicuously avoided addressing the specific, systemic human rights abuses unique to China.

Instead, your post employs a series of rhetorical tactics aimed at stifling constructive dialogue:

First, you assert a false equivalency between China and the USA/EU by trivializing the qualitative difference in freedom levels, thereby attempting to normalize authoritarianism.

Second, you use a slippery slope argument about social media moderation to suggest that all limitations on freedom are essentially the same — equating limited, private content moderation with systemic human rights abuses by government.

Third, you engage in an ad hominem attack by accusing me of being influenced by propaganda without providing substantive counter-arguments.

Were I to adopt your approach, I could easily make similar sweeping ad hominem accusations based on your behavior here.

Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
I don’t believe you’re engaging in good faith; you are employing tactics meant to stifle discourse:

1. False Equivalence: Suggesting that economic progress and freedom of speech are interchangeable or mutually exclusive is intentionally misleading.

2. Relativism: By stating there's "no objective way" to compare, you are deflecting any form of critical evaluation.

3. Unfalsifiability: Your assertion that any evaluation is "inherently biased" is an unfalsifiable claim meant to immunize your argument from critique.

Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
By all human rights measures, it is worse. Freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of religion … you name it.

Feel free to read the yearly reports from the HRW:

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2023/country-chapters/china

Random selection from the report:

> In May, a court in Hainan province sentenced former journalist Luo Changping to seven months in prison for a Weibo post that questioned China’s justification for its involvement in the Korean War.

Details on his case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luo_Changping#Arrest

> Sanya Ji'an Police Bureau summoned Luo for investigation into his "illegal remarks" suspected of "insulting heroes and martyrs".

Comment · 3 years ago
Xinjiang internment camps: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_internment_camps

Censorship in China: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_China

Four Cardinal Principles (enshrined in the constitution): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Cardinal_Principles

Open Constitution Initiative (shut down by the government): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Constitution_Initiative

The issues are plain, endemic, and well-documented. It is not propaganda.

Comment · 3 years ago
For all the faults of western democracies, the Chinese Communist Party is far worse. That’s not anti-China propaganda.

You comment on this issue a surprising amount, and clearly feel strongly about the US’ views on China. I’d be curious as to exactly how you feel China is being judged unfairly.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton