Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 192 posts

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#131

Post by mistermann »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #100
mistermann wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't a legal right, it is a de facto right. Generally speaking, only left leaning speakers are allowed on campuses. Generally speaking, only pro-immigration speech is allowed in polite company. This story, at least to me, also illustrates Chinese immigrants aren't interested in immigrating to other countries because they like the culture, way of life, etc and are choosing them as a new home to raise their familie…

> It isn't a legal right, it is a de facto right. Our legal system allows you to challenge that. If a campus prevented your conservative group's speaker from speaking, you can sue and win. If you don't do that, you are failing to uphold free speech as we have upheld it for centuries in America. Your civil rights do not enforce themselves. > This story, at least to me, also illustrates Chinese immigrants aren't intere…

> Our legal system allows you to challenge that. If a campus prevented your conservative group's speaker from speaking, you can sue and win.

Sure, might as well sue mother nature for the temperature rise. What we're seeing is a force of nature, the legal profession cannot stop it, overall society has to choose to stop it, which means they have to choose to allow conservative voices.

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#132

Post by hyperdunc »

rtpg wrote: post #125
hyperdunc wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying you're concerned that anti-immigration speech is now more acceptable? If so, why?

Because most of it is wrong? Most of the speech is around ideas that have been proven wrong over and over again. It's the same as when people come in and talk about a database that "solves" CAP. Perhaps a better example is climate denial. Why do I have to listen to decades old debunked discussions over and over again? EDIT: I also disagree with the premise. Loads of polite company will happily discuss immigration res…

Practically speaking, it's a two-way street. Speakers also redefine the speech that society accepts.

But I disagree that it's not society's job to have all speech be acceptable. All speech should be allowed, and all counter-speech should be allowed. Only violence is not tolerated (and speech is not violence).

We also shouldn't treat all other cultures as equally valid sources of immigration because some cultures hold values that directly oppose our own.

Ideally, any individual that accepts certain fundamental western liberal values like freedom of speech should have the chance to immigrate. Practically, it's extremely difficult to screen individuals for this.

We have to be able to talk about the effects of mass immigration from places like the Middle East and North Africa. In Europe, many people who arrive from those areas create no-go zones, and their children don't assimilate but instead foster a resentment for the dominant culture. That is not ok and if we can't even talk about the one solution being to stop immigration from those areas then we are done as a culture.

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#133

Post by candiodari »

mintplant wrote: post #102
maverick_iceman wrote: post #50

I see this as an outgrowth of left-liberal student bodies clamping down on conservative speech on college campuses. If leftist students can block Ann Coulter from speaking then why can't Chinese students block the Dalai Lama? Every speech is guaranteed to offend someone and that's verboten in today's campuses. As a libertarian, I was always worried about this and it was a main reason why I opposed social justice warr…

First off, who would you include in "left-liberal", "leftist", and "social justice warriors"? These terms all mean different things to different people. "Liberal" in the American sense or the traditional sense? Do you group anarchists, communists, and sociaists into "left-liberal"? Do you consider Democrats to be "leftists"? I won't bother addressing the amorphous idea of a "social justice warrior". Your interchangea…

When the law department attempted to get a representative of the white house to speak about public service (something they do every year, for obvious reasons), the aula got locked down with chains and students prevented anyone from coming there.

Why ? Well "not my president" was one of the signs.

Needless to say, the students blocking the aula were not law students and since they made it clear they would disrupt any attempt to change the venue, the talk was canceled.

VERY disappointing I must say. You don't like who's gotten elected ? Let's obstruct the futures of your co-students because it might help them.

This seems to be the norm now. And yes, it was rescheduled, the venue was changed to a downtown hotel, and there was a "covert" announcement of the new arrangement. I hear the hotel owner even gave the venue and the drinks for free in support of free expression.

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#134

Post by porpoisemonkey »

mistermann wrote: post #131
unityByFreedom wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It isn't a legal right, it is a de facto right. Our legal system allows you to challenge that. If a campus prevented your conservative group's speaker from speaking, you can sue and win. If you don't do that, you are failing to uphold free speech as we have upheld it for centuries in America. Your civil rights do not enforce themselves. > This story, at least to me, also illustrates Chinese immigrants aren't intere…

> Our legal system allows you to challenge that. If a campus prevented your conservative group's speaker from speaking, you can sue and win. Sure, might as well sue mother nature for the temperature rise. What we're seeing is a force of nature, the legal profession cannot stop it, overall society has to choose to stop it, which means they have to choose to allow conservative voices.

> What we're seeing is a force of nature, the legal profession cannot stop it, overall society has to choose to stop it, which means they have to choose to allow conservative voices.

I find this observation very strange considering the current political climate in the United States. Isn't the conservative voice the dominant voice being expressed in the executive and legislative branches right now?

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#136

Post by jza00425 »

it_learnses wrote: post #38
msie wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish we could somehow make people less ignorant and more tolerant here in Canada. People are always blaming immigrants for their problems.

I'm ok with immigrants from certain other countries. Also I'm referring to limiting chinese govt influence here.

I am not ok with racists like you. So I probably should wish Canada kick you out

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#137

Post by kccqzy »

bhouston wrote: post #74
maverick_iceman wrote: post #50

I see this as an outgrowth of left-liberal student bodies clamping down on conservative speech on college campuses. If leftist students can block Ann Coulter from speaking then why can't Chinese students block the Dalai Lama? Every speech is guaranteed to offend someone and that's verboten in today's campuses. As a libertarian, I was always worried about this and it was a main reason why I opposed social justice warr…

It has nothing really do to with that. Chinese government doesn't care about left wing American students and what they think. It is just doing what it can to promote its message, like it has been doing for decades.

I think the GP meant that the Chinese government can in fact promote its message because it is free speech.

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#138

Post by blackguardx »

nol13 wrote: post #119
blackguardx wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pro-Israel in what sense? Believing that Israel shouldn't exist is an extreme opinion that isn't widely shared in the western world. The debate is about a homeland for Palestinians.

Believing that Palestinians shouldn't have a homeland with safety and rights is an extreme opinion not widely shared in Pro-Israel world, they just aren't delusional about the security implications.

I'm serious. What does Pro-Israel mean in this context? Most of the western world is Pro-Israel as in pro Israel's existence. An Anti-Israel speaker would be extremely controversial.

Look at what happened when Ahmadinejad came to Columbia University.

Re: On Campuses Far From China, Still Under Beijing’s Watchful Eye

#140

Post by plandis »

lambdasquirrel wrote: post #129

I'm going to take the contrarian position, just so people understand why this is so. For the uninitiated, read up the history of Tibet. They haven't always been peaceful monks. Most notably, the Tibetans sacked the capital of the Tang dynasty — one of China's most brilliant in terms of cultural accomplishments — in that dynasty's twilight years. For the Chinese, unity is a matter of culture and national security. Sur…

I'm sorry but I have to ask: are you Chinese? This isn't a counter argument. You're argument is literally people in the geographical region of Tibet did something to another group over a thousand years ago and that justifies the hatred of the Dalai Lama.

I feel bad that you're so indoctrinated, I really do.

Post reply on HN