[HN Gopher] Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum
___________________________________________________________________
Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum
Author : FridayoLeary
Score : 299 points
Date : 2021-09-09 20:13 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.co.uk)
| smoyer wrote:
| If China is claiming that Hong Kong citizens are foreign agents,
| aren't they implicitly admitting that Hong Kong isn't part of
| China?
| johnzim wrote:
| Doublethink is a skill that takes some time to learn.
|
| While you're still waiting to get up to speed, just understand
| and accept that all Chinese people are the property of the
| Emperor. It's much easier to make sense of things.
| mhh__ wrote:
| Maybe they are, but they can say whatever they please if the
| mainlanders don't see it
| azinman2 wrote:
| No, they're saying they're working for foreign governments (aka
| the US)
| formerly_proven wrote:
| Frankly I'm amazed that this was a thing in HK to begin with.
| RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
| The power balance between the US, UK, and China in 1984 was far
| more in favor of the US and the UK than it is now and they still
| caved to Chinese demands vis a vis Hong Kong. Given the state of
| global power balance now, there is not a chance in hell that any
| of the West will do anything (except maybe words) to support the
| Hong Kong.
| asdff wrote:
| In 1984 China was part of the warsaw pact and well allied. Who
| will stand up to chinas defence in the face of an american
| coalition today? Russia would honestly probably join the
| american coaliton.
| hihihihi1234 wrote:
| China was never a member of the Warsaw Pact.
| johnzim wrote:
| The U.S. did nothing in the arrangement because their position
| wrt the CCP was one of engagement to balance against the USSR.
|
| It was the UK, which caved because, as revealed in now-
| declassified democratic cables from 1958, Zhou Enlai flatly
| stated that the PLA would invade if HK was given independence.
|
| The UK quite simply could not defend HK. It had failed to
| defend it in WWII against Japan (it couldn't even defend
| Singapore) and would have no hope against the CCP, even without
| the Harbour Tunnel to the Kowloon Peninsula, which had already
| been operating for some time.
|
| Instead it opted for an agreement in the joint declaration and
| a hope that the CCP would lean more towards international norms
| as the Shanghai cadre assumed more control. Objectively a poor
| solution but, I have to say, probably the most rational.
|
| Of course, we all know what happened. Deng's best laid plans
| came to naught and another 'great leader' emerged.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| I can't wait for the marxist comrades to explain us, using some
| no true scotman fallacy, how this is not communism, how communism
| is about freedom of speech, freedom of thoughts, freedom
| altogether and how communism is the utopia we should strive
| for...
|
| I can't wait to be living in wonderland with all these komrades
| for it looks like an amazing place.
|
| /s
| bellyfullofbac wrote:
| Reading this, I find it funny how so many people have an image
| of their "enemies" in their minds and laugh at the idiocy
| they've mentally constructed for these enemies.
| ctdonath wrote:
| Reading this, I find it funny how way back in the heyday of
| Usenet it dawned on me "people really believe this stuff!",
| for a wide array of stuff.
|
| Yes, many people do construct a mental strawman and take
| great pleasure in assigning & attacking it. It's also
| interesting how many actually _do_ believe such strawman-like
| absurdities in earnest. Yes, there are people who construct
| an image of "but _real_ communism has never been tried! "
| types and impute the term so they can attack; there are also
| people who truly believe "but _real_ communism has never been
| tried! ".
| VRay wrote:
| Every time Communism comes up on Reddit I see a thread like
| OP's satirizing
|
| I don't know if I've ever seen anyone spouting that
| philosophy on HackerNews though..
| [deleted]
| swayvil wrote:
| I wouldn't know. The post was "flagged". Which is apparently
| newspeak for "censored".
|
| This 1984 shit is getting so casual.
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| Completely understandable. Why have a museum for an event that
| never happened?
|
| /s
| redis_mlc wrote:
| There were two military groups involved in TS.
|
| The first refused to fire on the protesters.
|
| The second was brought in to shoot the protesters.
|
| The general of the second division is celebrated annually by
| the CCP. You can see that online.
| 88840-8855 wrote:
| I know it is a joke, but they do not deny the event. They just
| put it into a different context. It goes something like: 2000
| lives for 20 years of stability. Well, actually 30 years now.
| imglorp wrote:
| That would be an interesting tradeoff conversation if true.
|
| But they basically do deny the event by claiming only 300
| dead and then villainizing the victims of an atrocity.
| cabalamat wrote:
| > That would be an interesting tradeoff conversation if
| true.
|
| While no-one can predict the future, we can have a good
| guess what a democratic China would be like, because one
| exists. It's called Taiwan. Which is richer per capita and
| arguably more stable than the PRC.
| kaladin-jasnah wrote:
| Interesting. Never heard this before. Can you provide sources
| to back this up?
| Dig1t wrote:
| Maybe not what you're asking for but here is a perfect
| example of the misinformation that is spread by the CCP
|
| https://worldaffairs.blog/2019/06/02/tiananmen-square-
| massac...
| refenestrator wrote:
| The tagline "objective, nonpartisan and insightful" on
| 'World Affairs' really brings it home.
|
| The Chinese government obviously has its own propaganda,
| but being anti-China is objective and nonpartisan in the
| US. It's not taking sides, it's just the natural state of
| affairs, the entire media thinks so, both kinds of it.
| [deleted]
| slumpt_ wrote:
| [citation needed]
|
| They actively suppress awareness of the event.
| mc32 wrote:
| Good point, but they should realize Roswell and just go along
| with it and make money.
| SimeVidas wrote:
| How much longer does China plan to keep this event taboo?
| sneak wrote:
| My guess would be until everyone who cares about it dies.
|
| He who controls the present, controls the past.
| pphysch wrote:
| Interesting to see the parallel crackdowns on the glorification
| of separatism in both USA and PRC this week, with the removal of
| the Robert E. Lee statue in the former Confederate capital, and
| now this.
| jmclnx wrote:
| One was a traitor trying to keep his slaves, the other was
| fighting for Rights in China.
| pphysch wrote:
| I wasn't aware Robert E Lee ever traveled to China.
| X6S1x6Okd1st wrote:
| While that is true that fails to mention IMO a key
| difference. The civil war is not censored in the US,
| Tienanmen square is.
|
| Removing a statue is very different than shutting down all
| discussion around an event and locking up those that want to
| talk about it.
| pphysch wrote:
| Expressions of white supremacism (N word, etc) & separatism
| (Jan 6, etc) are heavily suppressed in USA.
| DixieDev wrote:
| Yeah, I don't know how America can be considered a so-
| called "free country" when the people living there will
| get angry at me for using slurs and being generally
| discriminative. I'm sure it's just a matter of time until
| they create some kind of unethical legal punishment too,
| as they did with expressions of anger (assault, murder,
| etc.).
| giantrobot wrote:
| I hope you forgot the /s.
| sneak wrote:
| Not the same kind of suppression, not by a long stretch.
|
| You're still legally entitled to stand on a street corner
| in the US and shout racial slurs, if that's your thing.
| You're also legally entitled to assemble and protest
| there.
|
| None of the undertakings that are equivalent to those
| actions are permitted in China, and will immediately
| subject you to violence.
| pphysch wrote:
| Of course USA does not have hate speech laws. But there
| is considerable extralegal hate speech regulation. Your
| face will be plastered all over social media and you will
| get "cancelled" and lose your career, and no "free
| speech" laws will protect you from that.
| jhgb wrote:
| > But there is considerable extralegal hate speech
| regulation. Your face will be plastered all over social
| media and you will get "cancelled" and lose your career
|
| That's a pretty convoluted way to say "people in the US
| don't tolerate assholes".
| giantrobot wrote:
| > and no "free speech" laws will protect you from that
|
| You have a right to speak freely without the _government_
| stopping you. You have no right to have people listen to
| you. In fact the same guarantee that _you_ have for
| speech also enshrines free assembly.
|
| So everyone who disagrees with your bullshit is free to
| ignore you and convince others to ignore you. They're
| also free to boot you off or out of their property.
| sneak wrote:
| Important distinction: the government is allowed to do
| violence to people legally (during law enforcement).
| Private people generally are not.
|
| This means that if you have free speech, you can't
| immediately suffer legal violence for saying things.
|
| You may, of course, suffer other things, but it won't be
| legal violence.
| joshuaissac wrote:
| Tiananmen Square protests were not separatist, either.
| pphysch wrote:
| Foreign-backed regime change operations are rather
| separatist in my humble opinion
| tg180 wrote:
| The growing unrest amongst students, people and the
| political elite was caused by divisions within the party.
|
| Deng Xiaoping believed in the need of absolute authority.
|
| The death of general secretary Hu Yaobang (a reformist)
| fueled anxieties about the future of the country.
|
| Foreign-backed regime change??
| pphysch wrote:
| There were many different facets to the political turmoil
| including those you mention, but the actual violence was
| encouraged by minority groups with suspicious ties to the
| US regime change apparatus. Student leader Chai Ling
| infamously quipped that "we are hoping for bloodshed" [1]
| yet abandoned the protests and was whisked out of China
| and landed in the USA with a full-ride to Princeton. She
| now runs what appears to be a business cult.
|
| [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chai_Ling#Documentary
| _controve...
| jmclnx wrote:
| I really wish the US and Europe would get *lls and punish China
| for breaking the treaty with Hong Kong and the UK
| masterof0 wrote:
| How? Another war? I'm having a hard time believing the economic
| elite in the US will be in favor of loosing business in China.
| errantmind wrote:
| Economic sanctions. Tariffs and the like. War with a nuclear
| power is not a viable option
| president wrote:
| It's a good question. Assuming war is the only option on the
| table:
|
| 1. Would Americans be in favor of (relatively) short term
| destruction in favor of long term prosperity for their
| children and future generations?
|
| 2. Would the US be able to win a conventional war against
| China?
|
| I believe the answer to #1 is no. I don't think anybody knows
| the answer to #2.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| On 1, let's not pretend that short term destruction
| necessarily leads to long term prosperity. We've "won" most
| of our recent wars, long term prosperity was not the
| result.
|
| On 2, there is no conventional war with a nuclear power.
| brnt wrote:
| Western countries irrevocably recognizing Taiwan would be a
| start.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| We are playing the long game, eventually the warmongering
| Chinese leaders will be gone.
| cabalamat wrote:
| China doesn't want war, it wants status. They see the
| last 200 years as a reversal of the natural order of
| things, and want China to be top dog again. They
| literally see themselves as the center of the world:
| Zhongguo means "central country".
| ff7c11 wrote:
| Don't do this. People live in Taiwan. It's not fair to use
| them as pawns. Keep the status quo rather than provoke war
| and chaos.
| cabalamat wrote:
| I bet loads of people said the same thing when Britain
| and France gave the Sudetenland to Germany. That didn't
| work out very well for them, and it was only because
| Germany and Russia fell out and fought each other that
| Britain won that war; if not for that it's entirely
| possible that democracy would not have survived at the
| world would be a very different place today.
| serf wrote:
| > Don't do this. People live in Taiwan. It's not fair to
| use them as pawns. Keep the status quo rather than
| provoke war and chaos.
|
| until what point?
|
| inaction is generally one of the biggest causes of death
| and suffering in historical warfare.
| refenestrator wrote:
| That's really easy to say when it's not you or your kids
| on the front line.
|
| Beyond just Taiwan, the last cold war kept the third
| world in a constant state of proxy war between the major
| powers, costing millions of lives in the short-term and
| delaying development in the long term.
|
| Worth considering if you're in favor of more of that in
| the name of human rights.
| tablespoon wrote:
| > ...the last cold war kept the third world in a constant
| state of proxy war between the major powers, costing
| millions of lives in the short-term and delaying
| development in the long term.
|
| And the alternative might have been "let the Soviets
| win." That choice would have definitely been a way to
| avoid war and achieve a kind of "peace."
| refenestrator wrote:
| What happened when we finally left Vietnam? Absolutely
| nothing, that's what.
|
| We had to support one-way helicopter rides under Pinochet
| or contras gunning down nuns? Or else the soviets win?
|
| If it's about national pride and staying on top, fine,
| but don't tell me it's human rights with that record. The
| Chinese haven't acted with force outside of what they
| consider their soil/sea in like 40 years. Xi is pretty
| worrying but until he starts doing that, let's not
| agitate for killing a bunch of people just in case.
| Kognito wrote:
| I suspect if this happened, it'd trigger an invasion by the
| CCP just to save face.
| ohazi wrote:
| This would absolutely never happen, but if we were
| serious about completely removing the possibility of a
| Chinese mainland invasion of Taiwan, we could just
| publicly give Taiwan some nukes.
|
| It would be a global political shitstorm, but even
| mainland China would not be stupid enough to invade after
| that.
|
| Nuclear proliferation may be bad for all sorts of
| reasons, but MAD really does appear to work.
|
| Also Taiwan already has nuclear power plants, so it's not
| _that_ crazy. They are capable of developing nuclear
| weapons on their own if they really wanted to.
| tablespoon wrote:
| > ...but if we were serious about completely removing the
| possibility of a Chinese mainland invasion of Taiwan, we
| could just publicly give Taiwan some nukes.
|
| IIRC, that's one of the PRC's red lines to trigger an
| invasion.
|
| Also, I'm not sure if Taiwan could get to the point of
| having a survivable nuclear arsenal that's large enough
| to guarantee MAD.
| skissane wrote:
| > we could just publicly give Taiwan some nukes
|
| US would never do that, it would violate Non-
| Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
|
| Some non-nuclear NATO countries do host US nuclear
| weapons, but they are legally and physically under US
| control. In an actual nuclear war, the US would release
| these nuclear weapons to their allies - at which point
| the US would have indeed violated the treaty, but in a
| nuclear war who cares?
|
| So in principle the US could station US-controlled
| nuclear weapons in Taiwan, and publicly announce they
| have done so. But it would be an extremely risky move -
| basically the Cuban Missile Crisis all over again, but
| this time with the US playing the role of the Soviet
| Union.
|
| Given the extreme risk of such a move, I doubt the US is
| going to make it.
| cabalamat wrote:
| > US would never do that, it would violate Non-
| Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
|
| The US unlikely to be enormously bothered about violating
| treaties if it finds doing so in its interest.
|
| > Given the extreme risk of such a move
|
| What exactly is China going to do? Try to break the US-
| led world order? They're doing that already!
| skissane wrote:
| > The US unlikely to be enormously bothered about
| violating treaties if it finds doing so in its interest.
|
| The US cares greatly about the NPT because it wants a
| world in which only a small number of countries have
| nuclear weapons, not a world in which dozens of them do.
|
| NPT limits nuclear weapons to 5 countries only - China,
| France, Russia, UK, US. Four nuclear states refuse to
| give up their weapons as the treaty demands (and hence
| refuse to join it) - India, Israel, North Korea,
| Pakistan. But a world with 9 nuclear weapons states is
| preferable to one with 90
|
| > What exactly is China going to do?
|
| Attack Taiwan? China would likely try to call the US
| nuclear bluff with a massive conventional attack. The
| ensuing loss of human life and economic damage would be
| enormous.
| warning26 wrote:
| It's an interesting idea, but it would amount to calling
| China's bluff. China has stated that they would
| _definitely_ commit to a ground invasion of Taiwan if the
| US recognized it. The question is -- how serious are they
| about that?
|
| Personally, I think they'd go for it. They've been itching
| to take over Taiwan by force anyway.
| cabalamat wrote:
| > Personally, I think they'd go for it.
|
| If there were sizable numbers of US troops on Taiwan, I
| don't think they'd attack. They don't want a major
| confrontation, at least not yet.
| tablespoon wrote:
| > If there were sizable numbers of US troops on Taiwan, I
| don't think they'd attack. They don't want a major
| confrontation, at least not yet.
|
| There's a decent chance at this point that all those
| troops would do is hold the airport for a rushed
| evacuation mission.
| bpodgursky wrote:
| > China has stated that they would definitely commit to a
| ground invasion of Taiwan if the US recognized it.
|
| I don't believe this is true. IIRC they've implied they
| would invade if Taiwan declared itself independent.
| nradov wrote:
| China has more than just implied it. They directly stated
| that a declaration of independence by Taiwan means war.
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55851052
| Gray0Ed wrote:
| Sponsor relocation to US/UK/Taiwan for any HK citizen who
| wants it? HK will have 0 value to China if every educated
| person leaves it.
| godelski wrote:
| It isn't exactly easy to leave your country, family,
| friends, and entire life behind. The UK did make it easier
| for HKers to get visas and relocation, but I think efforts
| like this only go so far in practice. Not enough people
| want to leave until it is too late. Because, and it is hard
| to blame them, they hope that their home will end up being
| saved by the many people fighting to preserve it. Leaving,
| in a way, is giving up.
|
| We should also note that with the growth of Shenzhen and
| other mega cities, HK isn't that important to China
| anymore. That's part of why they've become more aggressive
| in the situation.
| stingrae wrote:
| HK doesn't really have value to China other than making the
| case to its population that it never stands down or loses.
|
| Economically HK isn't that big of a deal compared to the
| rest of China at this point.
| jogu wrote:
| While not sponsored exactly, the UK has made some targeted
| changes to visa policies that make it easier for people in
| Honk Kong to relocate to the UK.
| kwere wrote:
| If they could leave
| Closi wrote:
| The UK has already offered relocation and citizenship to
| approx 40% of the population of HK, so this has pretty much
| already happened.
| onethought wrote:
| Punish them how? The global economy is heavy reliant on a
| cooperative China.
|
| UK have made it clear they aren't part of the EU so why would
| the EU care?
|
| Just recall the context China are operating from: Hong Kong was
| stolen from them at the height of the opium wars. There is no
| fairness in these geopolitical dealings.
|
| Overall this sucks for HK... but it's actually easy to
| understand all the parties involved actions/inaction... it's
| just crap though. :(
| busterarm wrote:
| Not as reliant as you think.
|
| Chinese exports are rapidly becoming too expensive relative
| to their neighbors and they seem to be unable to further
| cheapen the price of their labor.
|
| Economically, China is actually in a real bind.
| robbedpeter wrote:
| The China of the opium wars was a completely different entity
| than Communist China. I don't see that there is any
| obligation whatsoever to deal with the ccp as if they are the
| legitimate successors of all things formerly China.
|
| They're lying, cheating, and stealing from every entity they
| deal with on the world stage, blatantly holding themselves
| above any law, even internally. This doesn't end well unless
| there's some sort of overwhelming grassroots revolution from
| the inside. Thanks to Western panopticon tech, that can't
| happen now, so China's merry band of pirates is headed for
| Taiwan and global conflict.
|
| Thanks, boomers, ya done good.
| karaterobot wrote:
| Tariffs? We tried a trade war, and it had some economic effect,
| but no lasting political effect. We probably don't want to get
| involved in another land war in Asia, if we can avoid it. We
| could try asking them nicely, but beyond that I feel like it's
| up to the people of China to decide their own fate.
| sremani wrote:
| Hongkong dollar is pegged to USD and US has a special treaty
| with HK w.r.t Financial transactions.
|
| US can walk out of the treaty but there are downsides to it.
| It will happen sooner or later.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| A land war against China over Hong Kong would be ridiculous.
| They have the entire country as a base. The western countries
| would have to fly/sail everything in. Not to mention the
| legal situation. It's their soil already. It would be an
| invasion. Against another superpower no less. Really bad
| idea.
|
| And China can hurt the city enough by just turning the water
| off. It will only hurt the people of Hong Kong more.
|
| No, this change won't be driven by the military. It will have
| to come from within. Probably the most durable way anyway
| (see how this worked out for Afghanistan).
|
| Taiwan would be a totally different thing though. They have
| been independent for so long and they have no wish to join
| communist China (which they've never been a part of). And
| it's much more defensible. I do hope we will stand by them
| when it comes to it.
| asdff wrote:
| Western countries probably wouldn't land any ground forces
| but instead form a naval blockade all along the china sea
| and use their air superiority to deindustrialize the
| country.
| cabalamat wrote:
| > A land war against China over Hong Kong would be
| ridiculous.
|
| Indeed. It's a complete non-starter.
|
| If the West wants to beat China they must be more subtle
| and crafty than a direct military invasion: the 2nd Cold
| War will be mainly fought using diplomacy, trade,
| economics, technology and spying. Not direct military
| conflict, apart from maybe a few proxy wars.
| sneak wrote:
| I really wish that people would stop ascribing masculine
| traits, violent warmongering, and inherent virtue into the same
| bucket.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| All we can do is open our borders for Hongkongers who want to
| leave.
|
| This is maybe the most highly educated and productive
| population in the world. Any country would be lucky to get
| them.
| cabalamat wrote:
| > All we can do is open our borders for Hongkongers who want
| to leave.
|
| Yes. And no longer trade with China.
| swayvil wrote:
| According to the authorities the museum was spreading
| "misinformation".
|
| There's that word again.
|
| What do you do when all the authorities, and all the news-
| sources, and everybody you know calls it "misinformation"?
|
| Who's the bad guy here?
|
| It's enough to make you crazy.
|
| I mean have you met the average person? He believes whatever he's
| told. And with great enthusiasm.
|
| And he hates whoever he's told to hate.
|
| Crazy.
| rmason wrote:
| Leaders in the former Soviet Union learned the easiest way to
| erase an historical event was to remove all public record of it.
|
| For those who do not remember they would arrest a member of say
| the Politburo and then all pictures of him with other leaders
| would be airbrushed out, sometimes even in library books. It was
| as if he was no longer ever born.
| mushbino wrote:
| I work with a lot of Chinese nationals and they know far more
| about tiananmen than westerners. Look up operation yellowbird.
| kunagi7 wrote:
| The Chinese Government is speeding up their efforts to swallow
| Hong Kong and Macau into the Mainland.
|
| Closing the media outlets, museums, websites that speak against
| them. And a few key people get abducted here and there to scare
| more people and force them to accept the Beijing Regime. But...
| The people from Hong Kong still demonstrates and tries to fight
| for their lost rights.
| president wrote:
| Very sad and parallels what seems to be happening in the US and
| other western democracies as well. There is a trend of certain
| dominant power in all of these countries that is quashing all
| opposing voices. I predict that some major global events are
| going to happen within the next few years.
|
| EDIT: Case in point - the quashing of opposing voices occurs on
| this board on this very comment. You cannot even bring up this
| fact. Thank you for proving me right fellow HNer.
| warning26 wrote:
| Or, consider this alternative hypothesis -- people are
| downvoting you for whining about being downvoted.
| ssully wrote:
| Are people using the downvote button incorrectly here?
| temp8964 wrote:
| The parallels are:
|
| Both driven by the left.
|
| Both claim nothing will happen, it's just a myth, people are
| just being paranoid.
|
| Purge is the common theme across the history of leftism.
| another_story wrote:
| Define what you mean by left.
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| It's the _correct_ side of the road to drive on, in the
| northern hemisphere! Roundabouts should be the same
| direction as sundials.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| The Nazis were totally right-wing. Their purges shocked the
| world. It's not just a left-wing thing, it's a common theme
| across all forms of extremism. Left, right, religion-based
| (look at the Taliban now, they don't really fit in the left
| or right category at all)... It always comes down to the
| same thing. Not listening to the other person but choosing
| to silence them with violence instead. The flag they wave
| is different but the extremism remains the same.
|
| What we need is balance. Left and right together. Agreeing
| to disagree and finding a way to work together anyway.
| That's democracy. It's hard but it's the only way.
| telllersid wrote:
| The US republic was basically founded on pamphlets,
| newspapers, books..then incredibly long debates and
| respectful discussion.
|
| Look at the structure of the Lincoln-Douglas debates. One
| candidate spoke for 60 minutes, followed by a 90-minute
| response and a final 30-minute rejoinder by the first
| candidate.
|
| That doesn't work anymore. None of this works. Yes, all
| opposing voices will be silenced until there is 1 party
| basically everywhere. That is what people want and so that is
| what you will get in a democracy. There is no evidence to the
| contrary.
|
| I am just glad I am old enough to have lived most my life
| already.
| kemiller wrote:
| Nowhere in the constitution are you protected from
| consequences when you say something stupid, and right-leaning
| folks have been saying this particular stupid thing a bit too
| often. Have the offices of Fox News or Breitbart or the
| Creation Science Museum been raided by police? No? Then this
| is not even close to parallel.
| alentist wrote:
| https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1282404647160942598.html
| inopinatus wrote:
| There's a seam of individuals cutting across the political
| spectrum that is confused about their right to speak
| freely. They think it translates to a right to force
| everyone to listen to them. Then they become shirty when
| told to fuck off.
|
| It's naturally correlated to extremities of viewpoint, both
| due to the absence of critical thinking on the part of the
| complainant and the elevated likelihood their views fall
| outside a certain window of acceptability.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| You're welcome.
| analognoise wrote:
| Whose voice is getting quashed in the US? Everyone has a
| Facebook, Twitter, email, phones, a magazine, protests, their
| own news channels, subReddits.
|
| What group doesn't have all those things? Whose voice is
| being quashed - exactly? Even straight up Nazis have
| websites, newsletters, gatherings, organized protest marches
| and Facebook pages. The fucking Taliban is on Twitter.
|
| So...who is being quashed because of their beliefs, exactly?
| temp8964 wrote:
| I have a quick example: the former president.
| jjoonathan wrote:
| ...and what did he do to get banned?
|
| (Hint: it wasn't "having ideas.")
| kemiller wrote:
| Hmm... https://lmgtfy.app/?q=donald+trump
|
| So, so quashed. You can barely find any information about
| him!
| chasd00 wrote:
| For one, it's well known in tech that you're putting your
| job/livelihood at risk by speaking contrary to the
| political groupthink. Many people who didn't vote for
| Clinton or Biden are effectively in career hiding.
| Threatening someone's job over their beliefs/opinions is
| very effective censorship.
| gautamdivgi wrote:
| The right of free speech protects against government
| retribution. It does not protect private individual /
| corporation retaliation. This is why you have secret
| ballot - so no one can retaliate against you for someone
| you've voted for.
| krapp wrote:
| >Many people who didn't vote for Clinton or Biden are
| effectively in career hiding.
|
| Are they? Where? In the American South, where I live,
| Republicans, Conservatives and Trumpists are still loud
| and proud, and gainfully employed.
| sergiomattei wrote:
| When in history hasn't this been the case?
| treeman79 wrote:
| Depend on the company's Most companies I keep my mouth
| shut.
|
| And I mostly just want a balanced budget. This has become
| harder as more places are requiring active participation
| in woke mentality.
| alentist wrote:
| https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1282404647160942598.html
| cabalamat wrote:
| > Everyone has a Facebook, Twitter [...] subReddits
|
| You appear to be arguing that no-one has ever been kicked
| off Facebook or Twitter, and that no subreddits have ever
| been banned. Is that your position?
| throwawaylolx wrote:
| >Thank you for proving me right fellow HNer.
|
| Well, who do you think does the censoring in the West?
| Companies that employ people browsing this very forum.
| yuy910616 wrote:
| Really reminds me of the Taiwan election commercial that
| compares Taiwan and Hong Kong
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykcVIQMrc4A
| elihu wrote:
| Note: there's English subtitles available if you enable close
| captioning.
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| Even creepier listening to it with no subtitles and a
| primary school level understanding of Chinese.
|
| All I heard was "husband", "daughter" and "whole family".
| vmception wrote:
| wow
|
| that was really powerful
|
| makes me want to rethink some of my flippant comments about
| Taiwan impending doom after we get our semiconductor pylons
| up in other places, but now at least they have my sympathy
| yodsanklai wrote:
| The amount of effort China is putting to sabotage Taiwan
| independence is astonishing. I have Taiwanese relatives and
| I'm very worried for them.
| gogopuppygogo wrote:
| The USA has been losing all war games where it defends
| Tawain against China.
|
| https://nypost.com/2021/03/11/us-war-games-over-china-
| threat...
|
| It is not okay to assume USA supremacy against adversaries
| anymore.
|
| Why Americans still do business with China is astounding to
| me.
| vmception wrote:
| What's going on in Macau? I thought there is no contention
| there. They can if they want, they can do the perpetual lease
| if they want.
| niij wrote:
| Portugal gave up their perpetual lease of Macau in 1999.
| arcticbull wrote:
| On the same terms as Hong Kong.
| kingkawn wrote:
| The only reason Hong Kong has had this period of independence
| is a side effect of western power subjugating the Chinese
| mainland. As the Chinese mainland grows in global power and the
| west decays into internal squabbles there should be no
| expectation that the pretenses of western power will remain
| intact.
| VictorPath wrote:
| Yes, the UK (with US help) stole Hong Kong from China to help
| in its effort to turn Chinese people into drug addicts during
| the Opium wars. It's why they killed Chinese in Hong Kong in
| 1967 protesting the UK occupation (a few years later the UK
| gunned down unarmed protestors in Derry marching against
| British internment camps).
|
| Watched the liberation of Kabul from foreign imperialists
| last month and have to laugh at the pious western liberal
| imperial impotent ramblings I see here.
| asdff wrote:
| If Beijing ever martyrs the protestors like tianeman again I
| don't think the world will take kindly to that at all. I even
| think russia would join an american coalition. China has no
| strong allies that wouldn't prefer to spare themselves in the
| event of worldwide intervention and they can't fight off the
| entire developed world alone no matter how far they came in
| recent decades.
| Yeroc wrote:
| Ah, but China holds all the financial levers to keep everyone
| in their place. If there were a war there'd be no "Made in
| China" goods being exported. Take a look around you and think
| about that for a few minutes. They can get away with almost
| anything. The only thing they fear is an internal uprising.
| hker wrote:
| > They can get away with almost anything.
|
| Not if factories move to Vietnam, Thailand, Laos,
| Bangladesh, India, etc., as the current trend continues.
| mc32 wrote:
| You are too optimistic.
|
| The US got too involved in too many wars for the wrong
| reasons and we got weary of them. China sees this as a
| weakness (admittedly).
|
| If the US does not flinch, no one else will and we won't and
| no one else will.
|
| We know terrible things are happening en masse in Xinjiang,
| Iran does terrible things to dissidents, north Korea does
| terrible things.
|
| China and N Korea have nukes. Iran is close. In the and no
| one will do anything if they decide to fully bare their
| teeth.
|
| Economically it's a "commons" no one is willingly going to
| leave because it's leaving too much money on the table. In a
| globalized world, companies really heavily influence foreign
| policy. These companies want the printer to stay on.
|
| They may do themselves in, but that's on them.
| asdff wrote:
| US has sophisticated missile defense systems and enough
| nukes to send the entire continent of asia back to the
| stone age. A nuclear war started by any other nation than
| the U.S. is literally suicide, and these world leaders know
| it which is why all there has been since WWII in terms of
| nuclear warfare is saber rattling.
| yodsanklai wrote:
| >US has sophisticated missile defense systems and enough
| nukes to send the entire continent of asia back to the
| stone age
|
| So does China with the US.
| labster wrote:
| Yes, the US and it's allies will send very strongly worded
| letters to China if that happens, along with its order for
| ten million more iPhones.
| yodsanklai wrote:
| I really think nobody cares. Even if China were to military
| invade Taiwan tonight, I'm not sure there would be any form
| of retaliation from western countries.
| psim1 wrote:
| I visited this museum in 2016. It was incredible to see this on
| Chinese soil.
|
| Hong Kong had a mere 20 years of being truly Hong Kong, free of
| the UK and generally free of China. Now it is just more China.
| hunterb123 wrote:
| Communist China has only had a mere 100 years compared to it's
| 5000 year history.
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| Even less actually. The CCP has existed for 100yrs (since
| 1921), but didn't control China till 1949. Communist China
| has only existed for 72yrs.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| I try to remind people of this all the time, it's especially
| interesting since the leadership is trying to destroy
| artifacts of their history to fit a very recent narrative.
|
| They only occasionally use bits and pieces to talk about how
| they are in ancient culture, but they are rapidly becoming a
| very young culture in a historical sense.
| sneak wrote:
| This is a pretty interesting perspective to consider, too.
| khc wrote:
| and 5000 years of dictator rule, not sure what you are trying
| to say
| Bayart wrote:
| >it's 5000 year history
|
| Please don't give credence to nonsensical nationalist tropes.
| The Oracle Bone Script goes back to about 1200 BC during the
| Shang Dynasty, that makes about 3200 years of history. Before
| that it's _pre-history_.
|
| It's a bit younger than Linear B, Old Avestan and Vedic
| Sanskrit. So in terms of a traceable, continuous culture
| China is at the fourth place of so.
|
| These days I'd probably be called a "historical nihilist" in
| China for saying that.
| gibolt wrote:
| Not sure why you are being downvoted. During the communist
| revolution (in the 40s), the previous government was
| overthrown and escaped to Taiwan. That was when Mao and
| Communism took over.
|
| It is an interesting perspective
|
| Edited for accuracy, 'cultural' -> 'communist'
| skissane wrote:
| > During the cultural revolution, the previous government
| was overthrown and escaped to Taiwan
|
| Not the Cultural Revolution. Cultural Revolution was in the
| 1960s, the Communist victory over the Nationalists and the
| Nationalists' flight to Taiwan was late 1940s. The
| "Cultural Revolution" was not a "revolution" in the classic
| sense. It was not an attempt to install a new government.
| It was a totalitarian exercise in which the Communist Party
| - led by Mao - attempted to eliminate every aspect of
| Chinese culture and society that wasn't enthusiastically
| communist
| patch_cable wrote:
| That's not what the cultural revolution was.
|
| The cultural revolution took place well after the CCP took
| over.
| 0cVlTeIATBs wrote:
| I visited in 2016, too. The fellow there recommended that to
| learn more about China I should visit Taiwan. At the time I
| thought that was a pessimistic point of view.
| poorjohnmacafee wrote:
| Taiwan did seek to preserve the heritage of China after the
| communist takeover on the mainland, which sought to pretty
| much destroy said heritage in a cultural revolution.
| arcticbull wrote:
| It would've been much more free under British rule towards the
| end but the mainland government pressured the UK not to allow
| that to happen in preparation for the handover.
| [deleted]
| icelandicmoss wrote:
| > The national security unit had earlier requested that the Hong
| Kong Alliance hand over information, reportedly including
| personal details of all members since the group's founding and
| financial records.
|
| > On Tuesday, the deadline for the request, the alliance members
| handed over a letter explaining their refusal to co-operate.
|
| That takes a magnificent and heartbreaking degree of courage.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-09 23:00 UTC)