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

'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 365 posts

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#251

Post by munk-a »

jdm2212 wrote: post #236
threwawasy1228 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a ridiculous framing, so in your opinion by this logic, if Xi was democratically elected by a free and fair election, and then proceeded to ban memes via a legislative branch that would be perfectly fine? I think what the UK is doing is equally shameful. This kind of "its ok when the west does it" type of narrative is why when I talk to Chinese students about censorship issues they can consistently point…

There are two separate issues with China banning memes: 1. it's symptomatic of Xi's government being able to do anything it wants to (including killing people to harvest their organs) without any checks and balances 2. it violates our ideal of freedom of speech One of those is a far more serious problem than the other. A democratic society can fix laws that don't live up to its ideals. A lawless, autocratic society c…

The US is hardly perfect...

1. The US has long operated offshore prisons where human rights are routinely abused (though harvesting organs is never a thing I've heard of happening in them)

2. The US routinely silences comedians when they're reported to say something impolite or against the grain - remember Kathy Griffin?

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#252

Post by munk-a »

Volundr wrote: post #224
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I google privilege definition google tells me 'a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group. "education is a right, not a privilege"' Obviously whoever wrote that should be penalized because they mucked it up with their example, if privilege is a special right then how is education a right not a privilege? But anyway, a privilege is something that is understood…

Education is a right to all, not a particular person or group, hence not a privilege.

But specialized education and the extent of that education is a privilege. Not everyone has access to the same levels of education.

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#253

Post by pinkfoot »

Meai wrote: post #13

In my opinion this fight is important but futile at the level of individual companies. The USA as the only nation in the world with true free speech protections should make free speech a requirement in their trade negotiations. Even with Europe, we should not get certain tariff improvements until free speech goes into law that deserves the name and is equivalent to the US level of free speech.

Bollocks.

78% of American citizens live in the 25+ states of the union that have passed actual laws that will punish you or your company if you even so much as voice boycotting a particular foreign country.

You really need to get out more often.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/9/18172826/bd...

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#254

Post by PKop »

jdm2212 wrote: post #236
threwawasy1228 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a ridiculous framing, so in your opinion by this logic, if Xi was democratically elected by a free and fair election, and then proceeded to ban memes via a legislative branch that would be perfectly fine? I think what the UK is doing is equally shameful. This kind of "its ok when the west does it" type of narrative is why when I talk to Chinese students about censorship issues they can consistently point…

There are two separate issues with China banning memes: 1. it's symptomatic of Xi's government being able to do anything it wants to (including killing people to harvest their organs) without any checks and balances 2. it violates our ideal of freedom of speech One of those is a far more serious problem than the other. A democratic society can fix laws that don't live up to its ideals. A lawless, autocratic society c…

Both points are perfectly encapsulated in UK hate speech laws.

They subvert free speech with the heckler's veto, and there's nothing anyone can do about them, "democratic" or not.

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#255

Post by [deleted] »

grievances wrote: post #78
StaticRedux wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not privilege. It's a right the country has fought and died for for over 200 years. It's a principle the country was founded on. "Privilege" has lost all meaning in today's world. It's just a word to throw around to slow how "woke" you are. Calling our rights "privilege" is throwing out the struggle and sacrifice of everyone that fought for those rights. You may have been Lucky to have been born in the US, but n…

Many brave people have fought and died for their countries and rights. Its easy to forget that minorities and “unlucky” people fight too; knowing that you’re safe expressing your points of view is something that many have earned, not all have received. That very much sounds like privilege to me.

[deleted]

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#256

Post by munk-a »

Konnstann wrote: post #93
dekhn wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, if you (10 years ago) smoked a joint on the street, and you were black, you carried a far far higher risk of being imprisoned.

Where's the parallel between doing something illegal (10 years ago) and being able to comment on the political climate without fearing for your life/livelihood?

The fact that African Americans are the most likely people by race to be stripped of their right to representation and political expression by a wide margin.

To clarify - this is via them losing access to representation by being deemed a felon, and a lot more African Americans are sentenced with drug possession or intent to distribute than any other racial group proportionally.

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#257

Post by greedo »

goatlover wrote: post #237
SomeOldThrow wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true of all countries. Try posting threats about federal employees and you will also get arrested.

Threatening someone's life is a bit different from a cartoon, and it should get anyone arrested in any country, with some consideration of context, of course.

I was under the understanding that words generally don't rise to the legal definition of assault (at least in the US).

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#258

Post by rusk »

andrepd wrote: post #233
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I google privilege definition google tells me 'a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group. "education is a right, not a privilege"' Obviously whoever wrote that should be penalized because they mucked it up with their example, if privilege is a special right then how is education a right not a privilege? But anyway, a privilege is something that is understood…

>Thus by the American conception of things every human has the right to free speech, that China takes that away from it's citizens thus not make American's privileged - it makes China bad and its citizens oppressed for having their rights removed. A priori, in a natural state, there is no "right of free speech". It was fought for, built, implemented, and maintained. We are privileged if we are born in a country with…

> I don't see why such a fuss

Snowflake got triggered

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#259

Post by corodra »

journalctl wrote: post #248
joelx wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to avoid getting lost in minor internal debates. I agree some classes of people in America have had more difficulty exercising their rights, but they always had those rights and the courts enforced them usually. What we are talking about with China and Russia is totalitarian dictatorships that come and take you from your home and beat you and murder you for making a comment on the internet they didn't like or…

You, uh, you could own people a few generations ago. There are women alive today who remember not being able to vote. To call that “some difficulty expressing their rights” is remarkably tone-deaf. And no, the courts usually sided with the majority (c.f. Plessy v. Ferguson, etc.)

Name a country that's never done it. Because I think taking criticism from them would be appropriate. Or at least someone who hasn't had an asshole ancestor in the last, oh... I don't know... 3 generations?

Let's just discuss what your ancestors did to my ancestors! Because holy crap! That'll definitely fix our current day problems! No better cure for the present than to yell at each other about things that happened a few hundred years ago! Maybe if we turn it into a card game, we can have tournaments and see who's the most oppressed every year. As a Polish-Jew, I wonder where I'm going to be in the rankings in historical oppression. Oh wait, it doesn't matter. I'm going to focus on today instead.

Re: 'We good now China?' South Park creators issue mock apology

#260

Post by Konnstann »

andrepd wrote: post #245
Konnstann wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a majority non-white area, and am now subsequently living in another majority non-white area. I can count on one hand the number of beat cops I've seen in those cities. Seems to me if there's a higher crime rate, the amount of cops increases, and the likelihood you get stopped increases as well. On another note, when did Caucasian become a term for white people? As an actual Caucasian, having immigrated…

Parent: "substantive objective measurements show that nonwhite people are subject to systemic racism" You: "yeah but I grew up in so and so and I never saw anything like that, plus I have a friend who is black and bla bla bla" Come on...

The "substantive objective measurements" don't even need to be debunked, the article does that itself. My example wasn't to illustrate "no discrimination doesn't happen" it was to illustrate the fact that maybe, the relative wealth of different geographic areas, combined with racial demographics and crime rates, could have more to do with policing practices that JUST skin color. I specifically didn't bring up any of my multicultural friends or whatever, because my argument is not "I didn't see anything therefore it isn't there" but "fewer cops mean fewer people get stopped". Urban density which means that 1 cop can cover more people, and higher crime rate which means more cops are likely out on the street instead of on traffic duty, equate to more people getting stopped by police.

Go ahead and reduce my argument to a strawman and put words into my mouth, but don't act like you're contributing to the conversation.

Post reply on HN