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

Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

independent.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 141 posts

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#81

Post by forapurpose »

mudil wrote: post #78
zhemao wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how open is the administration to taking in Rohingya refugees who've been displaced by the violence?

United States is literally on the other side of the world. There are places like Malaysia, a very good friend of Rohingya Muslims, China, Thailand, and others that would be perfect places to accommodate. I am not sure why you think that United States should be a deposit box for all sorts of human miseries from across the globe.

Because the U.S. can afford it, being the wealthiest nation on earth, and should therefore take on its share of the burden. Also, because the U.S. can do good, and give these people liberty and safety; if they don't deserve it, why do you?

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#82

Post by askdufuga »

Veelox wrote: post #61
askdufuga wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are not evil simply for disliking aspects of other cultures or populations. For example, Americans enslaved Africans for hundreds of years. That is a claim of fact. I believe it is true. I believe slavery is bad, it should be stopped in all its forms (including as punishment for a crime), and I'm glad that the 13th Amendment was passed. Hating what white people did to Africans does not make me evil, in fact it…

>Hating what white people did to Africans does not make me evil, in fact it's a morally superior position. Interesting, specifically, the "morally superior position" part. Are you willing to explain how hating what white people did is a morally superior position? Also, morally superior position to what, not hating it?

Yeah, thinking that slavery is bad is better than enslaving people.

Omg.. are we really debating this?

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#83

Post by mudil »

mudil wrote: post #71
wavefunction wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You refuse to rent to black folks, you refuse to have black folks count your money, you claim a US citizen and judge is illegitimate because he's hispanic, you might be a racist...

What do these accusations have to do with the administration?

We have a concrete example here, of administration making statements at the UN, issuing more than $30 million to help Rohingya Muslims, and the retort I get is some hearsay about African Americans not counting the money? What does it even mean?

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#84

Post by mudil »

forapurpose wrote: post #81
mudil wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

United States is literally on the other side of the world. There are places like Malaysia, a very good friend of Rohingya Muslims, China, Thailand, and others that would be perfect places to accommodate. I am not sure why you think that United States should be a deposit box for all sorts of human miseries from across the globe.

Because the U.S. can afford it, being the wealthiest nation on earth, and should therefore take on its share of the burden. Also, because the U.S. can do good, and give these people liberty and safety; if they don't deserve it, why do you?

Thanks for your personal donation to the Rohingya Muslims fund! You are a very generous person.

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#85

Post by pault »

askdufuga wrote: post #82
Veelox wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hating what white people did to Africans does not make me evil, in fact it's a morally superior position. Interesting, specifically, the "morally superior position" part. Are you willing to explain how hating what white people did is a morally superior position? Also, morally superior position to what, not hating it?

Yeah, thinking that slavery is bad is better than enslaving people. Omg.. are we really debating this?

Hating the crime != hating the criminal. Especially when you are extending guilt to an entire race.

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#86

Post by oh_sigh »

forapurpose wrote: post #81
mudil wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

United States is literally on the other side of the world. There are places like Malaysia, a very good friend of Rohingya Muslims, China, Thailand, and others that would be perfect places to accommodate. I am not sure why you think that United States should be a deposit box for all sorts of human miseries from across the globe.

Because the U.S. can afford it, being the wealthiest nation on earth, and should therefore take on its share of the burden. Also, because the U.S. can do good, and give these people liberty and safety; if they don't deserve it, why do you?

Do you apply the same standards to your own life? I bet from your presence on this site that your income or potential income is above the median. When a drunk husband across town starts getting abusive towards his wife, do you open your house to the wife? If no, why not? Are you shouldering your share of the burden?

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#87

Post by xtreme »

Pulcinella wrote: post #55
slamdance wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

while horrible people do exist, is that a reason to strip them of their ability to express their ideas? Take for example some of the worst - Vegan Cross-fitters. Now, while i see them as 'horrible' people, I also see them as misinformed. This does not stop me from eating bacon in front of them. There are a myriad of ways to avoid them and their ilk. Here's the rub - THEY probably think the same thing as me (ikr, man-…

“and yes, it may interrupt your viewing/reading/research,...” My eyeballs are not a “free speech zone.” No one has any right to show me whatever they want. Also, while I am not vegan, I would not describe vegans as horrible people on the level of bigots and nazis.

You can close your eyes. Or cover your ears. Or close your browser tab.

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#88

Post by askdufuga »

ralmidani wrote: post #59
askdufuga wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are not evil simply for disliking aspects of other cultures or populations. For example, Americans enslaved Africans for hundreds of years. That is a claim of fact. I believe it is true. I believe slavery is bad, it should be stopped in all its forms (including as punishment for a crime), and I'm glad that the 13th Amendment was passed. Hating what white people did to Africans does not make me evil, in fact it…

> Would you be okay with large groups of people intentionally having as many kids as they can just to affect future demographics? You are defending the rhetoric of a genocide perpetrator. It's like saying "what if Hitler was right about the Jews? I don't agree with his tactics, but that doesn't mean there wasn't a problem."

I think you'll agree that I am not advocating genocide, I'm just curious about the facts. I like to learn. I want to vet everyones' claims.

What I don't understand is why are you arguing your position? What do you propose I do with respect to the acquisition and spread of knowledge?

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#89

Post by macrael »

Metafilter remains one of my favorite places on the web and it has strong and serious moderation. I'm not sure how that would translate to Facebook, since I am not sure Metafilter's voice needs to be the same voice everywhere, but moderated discussions seem pretty strictly better than the alternative.

For me this always goes back to the observation that corporations are fairly dictatorial constructions, and that especially when it comes to communication networks the decision makers are quite insulated from the huge number of people actually talking to one another. What would a company that gave representation to its customers look like?

It could be modeled after the US government, as an option. The company of today becomes the executive branch, you add a legislative branch that customers can be a part of. There's where you influence the product, there's where you define the rules of engagement on the network. And a judicial branch can determine if those rules are being followed correctly, etc. This is a rough cut, I'm interested in more refined takes on how a company could escape the dictatorship model that is taken for granted these days.

Re: Facebook is 'silencing' Rohingya Muslim reports of 'ethnic cleansing'

#90

Post by foobiekr »

macrael wrote: post #89

Metafilter remains one of my favorite places on the web and it has strong and serious moderation. I'm not sure how that would translate to Facebook, since I am not sure Metafilter's voice needs to be the same voice everywhere, but moderated discussions seem pretty strictly better than the alternative. For me this always goes back to the observation that corporations are fairly dictatorial constructions, and that espe…

the big issue with metafilter is that the moderation is both content quality and ideological; that does not really make for an open, neutral site and metafilter is not considered neutral.
Post reply on HN