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

BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 132 posts

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#61

Post by TeeMassive »

mrjin wrote: post #26
causality0 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look up almost any genocide or mass killing of the 20th century, even the late 20th century, and see how nobody outside the area gave a damn. Pre-WW2, you've got millions exterminated in the Congo Free State. The Ottoman Empire killed a million Armenians, 500,000 Greeks, 400,000 Assyrians. The British starved five million Indians to death in 1900 and two million Bengalis in 1943 and nobody gave a single solitary shit…

I'm just wondering what kind of genocide can make Uyghur population in Xinjiang grow from 5M to 25M?

The measures that are making the news now didn't really reach their peak until Xi was in power. Also, the Chinese are known to flood with ethnic Han people recalcitrant territories they conquered.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#62

Post by chillee »

brundolf wrote: post #42
tammerk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Five cent army, assemble! Quick link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party They also flag posts to take down from the first page. Just look how many votes do this post have but barely on the first page, about to fall down.

@dang, might some intervention be in order?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26643703

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#63

Post by arcanon »

EEmory wrote: post #51

Doing business with China in 2021 will look like doing business with Germany in 1938. Profits were more important than Tibet, Hong Kong and the Uyghurs - profits will be more important than Taiwan. Maybe we’ll stop doing business with genocidal communists if they attack Japan? One can hope.

No. Taiwan is the backstop

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#64

Post by tammerk »

wait_a_minute wrote: post #55
tammerk wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is way beyond being "controversial". First thing probably, HN team can investigate all China related posts and gather users who flagged these posts and take action accordingly.

What if some of those people are on the HN team?

We'll see if they are going to prevent this.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#67

Post by KlinkEastwood »

wait_a_minute wrote: post #57
KlinkEastwood wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is war. It's really that simple. Do we want to bear that cost? Personally my answer is please God no, but that doesn't mean war isn't the only real option.

You must be joking as this kind of war would be WW3 and the end of life. We need to sanction the shit out of the people closest to the problem and get the UN out there to investigate.

I have no doubt it would be carnage unlike the world has ever seen. But honestly the real joke is expecting the UN to be able to do anything meaningful. This is an organization that is so politically impotent they can't even stop genocides in places like Sub saharan africa, like they will be able to do anything against a premier world power that sits on the permanent security council. No one likes it but war is a serious answer, calling for UN investigations, well you might as well throw a bottle in the ocean and hope someone in a landlocked country gets your message.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#68

Post by KlinkEastwood »

klyrs wrote: post #54
KlinkEastwood wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is war. It's really that simple. Do we want to bear that cost? Personally my answer is please God no, but that doesn't mean war isn't the only real option.

We got South Africa to end apartheid without war. Let's try a boycott before getting all hot with a major nuclear power, right?

Comparing the prc to south africa makes as much sense as me saying war between the usa and china is no biggie because the usa quickly won in Granada.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#69

Post by wojciii »

TeeMassive wrote: post #61
mrjin wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just wondering what kind of genocide can make Uyghur population in Xinjiang grow from 5M to 25M?

The measures that are making the news now didn't really reach their peak until Xi was in power. Also, the Chinese are known to flood with ethnic Han people recalcitrant territories they conquered.

All this has been used by the Soviet Union before and I'm sure we can find a guide book on suppressing satellite states in some KGB archive or perhaps in Germany (copy lent to their friends in stasi). It sounds to me that the Chinese are using this here.

Re: BBC: The cost of speaking up against China (Uyghurs)

#70

Post by unityByFreedom »

meibo wrote: post #25
tammerk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Five cent army, assemble! Quick link : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party They also flag posts to take down from the first page. Just look how many votes do this post have but barely on the first page, about to fall down.

It's a shame, I feel like it's our duty to boost these things - it's the least we can do. Maybe the HN team could manually do "flag locks" for certain articles that are being brigaded? Reddit has a "controversial" indicator on posts and comments that can help users identify that this is happening(heavily downvoted, but also heavily upvoted and interacted with).

If there were a way to transparently share coordinated activity I'd be supportive. But, I've never seen the evidence shared and I trust the reason is because sharing such evidence would lead the actors to change their methods. The best we can do as users is discuss the possibility it may be occurring.
Post reply on HN