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

301–310 of 365 posts

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

#301

Post by blaser-waffle »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #230
dlivingston wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember reading somewhere (The Atlantic, maybe?) that, while Western people highly value individualism, Chinese people value the collective. That may explain the ostensibly huge support for the PRC.

The West used to value the collective, or community and society as we were more inclined to call it. The neoliberal experiment that started with Reagan and Thatcher put paid to that, and it's become all about the individual. Even when it is clearly to the detriment of individuals.

The neoliberal experiment that started with Reagan and Thatcher become all about specific individuals, those who already had big $$$

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

#302

Post by bryanrasmussen »

AcerbicZero wrote: post #292
andrepd wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

Close, but not quite. In a state of nature (natural state) you absolutely have the right to free speech, among many other natural rights which are innate to you. You simply lack the guarantee of the ability to exercise that right when in a state of nature.

In the absolute state of nature there is probably nothing to stop you exercising that right, unless you are eaten by a carnivore just as you open your mouth to declaim.

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

#304

Post by AnthonyMouse »

aeternum wrote: post #269
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But isn't it the very definition of privilege, when through no effort of your own you get to enjoy the benefits for which others have "fought", "struggled", and "sacrificed"? How is it different from the privilege of being born into a rich (or just functional) family? The reason this framing is despicable is that rights and privileges are not the same. Being able to afford a Lexus is a privilege. Not everyone has i…

You can't just say free speech is a right. Every country including the US has restrictions on speech to varying degrees. The US draws the line at true threats, and inciting imminent lawless action, among others. New Zealand now draws the line at simply sharing a manifesto along with anything else decreed by the Chief Censor. China is much more strict, but who's to say where the line should be drawn? Not even western…

If you ask ten different cartographers to create a map of the world, you'll get ten different maps. That hardly proves that the world doesn't exist.

We decide where the line should be drawn through argument and public debate, and by refusing to comply with weaker definitions from anyone who can't convince us using reason that where they want to draw the line is actually in the interest of the people.

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

#305

Post by seanmcdirmid »

munk-a wrote: post #291
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is just another part of the check. The executive nominates judges, legislative approves judges, judges then interpret. Ya, it isn’t perfect, but you still have a few judges (Kennedy before and Roberts now) who are independent enough to sometimes do the right thing against their ideology (judges are mostly independent after being approved, so influence is limited).

So I generally agree with what you're saying, but I don't know if that makes enough of a difference, the US has more checks and balances than China but China does have checks and balances[1] and the US's isn't perfect - is the Rule of Law something that switches from off to on somewhere between those two points? I really don't disagree that China's government is crap, but things aren't black and white, all peoples ev…

None of China’s checks and balances proceed past theory. In reality, they just have a hierarchy and and as long as the top leader says something is ok, it is. Under Hu it was a bit better, since Hu was so weak, but in that case the result of the hierarchy breaking down was an increase in corruption.

Yes, China has laws and those laws are often enforced, you won’t get away with murder probably. But if an official feels like they want to intervene, all bets are off; the only recourse for justice are the whims of an even greater official.

And I’m not saying that China is a dangerous place to live: as long as you don’t go against the party’s (or a family member of such) interest, you aren’t going to be effected by a lack of rule of law (though you still have to be careful of rule by law). The pollution will kill you before anything bad happens to you in china’s legal system.

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

#306

Post by nx20592 »

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…

"rights" as defined by libertarians and anarchists who follow the non aggression principles, are assumed as axiomatic, or considered "self-evident" to them at least. It is a belief based on a form of trancendencent morality above the whims of flawed humans, but universally exist (somewhere) in the hearts of all humans. There is no proof of this of course, but many believe it.

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

#307

Post by pinkfoot »

jldugger wrote: post #287
pinkfoot wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Skimmed the article, didn't see any mention of the supreme court -- have these laws passed judicial review?

No idea. But free speech also accounts for the chilling effect of legislation on the populace.

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

#308

Post by bena »

sgt101 wrote: post #297
munk-a wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And so taking a stand like this is a privilege for those with status - a dude working in a newspaper stand wouldn't get away with this - but Trey Stone & Matt Parker have survived the worst the Scientologists could throw at them... they'll weather this one or, if China decides to throw pressure at ComedyCentral or whoever their corporate overloads are, then they can be ready to greet the Streisand effect. I applaud t…

I expect that they need their self respect a lot more than they need the Chinese market. What will they do with another $10m each? or $100m... they don't strike me as G5 and coke fellas... Maybe more divorces?

They have been known to drop acid from time to time.

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

#309

Post by AcerbicZero »

trhway wrote: post #188
jeffdavis wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is more to be done to protect, secure, and expand the rights of everyone. But they are still rights. Privileges are things granted to you, often conditionally, by someone else. Using the word often sounds quasi-religious to me: "Thank Privilege for this meal we are about to eat, and our safe home, ...".

>Privileges are things granted to you, often conditionally, by someone else. Using the word often sounds quasi-religious to me: "Thank Privilege for this meal we are about to eat, and our safe home, ...". most people didn't do anything do get whatever rights they are enjoying - they were just born into these rights while many other people don't have those rights. Pretty much definition of privilege. > Calling our rig…

I think you're conflating the exercise of rights with the existence of those rights.

"Being born "into" these rights" is close to accurate, but misses the point. You (and everyone else) are born with a basic set of natural rights which exist regardless of how much or how little you can/do exercise them. People have been struggling for hundreds of years to avoid having those rights infringed upon, not to "create" them.

Privileges on the other hand, derive their authority from a secondary source. Driving, public education, etc are good examples of "Privileges" where society builds/pays for something, and members of that society are granted the privilege of its use. Compared with your right to free speech, which doesn't disappear because someone/something infringes upon it.

Post reply on HN