81–90 of 198 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Fail. Look at the North Ireland situation. There was no "reeducation" of Irish or Catholics that I heard of.
Also what does the UK have to do with this? I'm comparing china to the us. Cornell is in the US.
It feels like the history is repeating itself. The people of Nazi Germany probably thought they were doing the "right thing". These Chinese students have been brainwashed enough to believe everything their government says. Or may be even paid well enough to act like that!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> absolutely should have rebuked those using their free speech in favor of human rights abuses I have no love for communists (having been born in the Eastern Bloc), but that's not how free speech works. Either you're for it (and all the icky stuff that comes with it) or you're against it. There's no "splitting the difference" here. We've debated and litigated this since the Enlightenment (from J.S. Mill to Skokie, IL…
I also want to bring Blackstone's Ratio[0] into the conversation. I think it resonates with engineers really well because it is essentially the legal version of failure design. You design failure into your programs, bridges, and whatever (does your safe fail with an open lock or closed?). Why? Because when the thing fails, we want it to fail in a specific way to do the least amount of harm. We all know how terrible b…
> Neo-Nazis are attracted to the town because Hitler’s deputy Rudolf Hess was once buried there. Though his remains were exhumed in 2011 and his grave was destroyed, far-right extremists still flock to the town year after year
And that's why all those dead after Nuremberg were cremated and their ashes were spread in rivers and seas. Nobody wants neo-Nazis shrines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
That is a lot of words to say "our genocide is justified". It is not. It can never be. If you think it can be, you don't belong in a society.
That is so few words to completely mis-characterize and manipulate the intended meaning of what I wrote.
Big tobacco used to use catch phrases and one liners similar in vein to what your doing here in order to manipulate and obfuscate the complex statistical results that effectively showed tobacco kills people.
I offer a lot of words. Read it. And offer a response that matches the nuance and complexity. Stop manipulating sentiment because you know people are too lazy to read.
I think leaving en masse from a lecture/speech that you ideologically disagree with is likely one of the few permissible forms of protest in a university context.
Agreed, but the same group also do this > Some Chinese international students at universities in the U.S. and Canada have reported anti-Beijing speech to university authorities as a form of anti-Chinese racism, or they reported Uyghurs and Chinese dissidents on campus to Chinese diplomatic officials. Can you have freedom of speach while trying to take it away from others?
Ah, the paradox of tolerance at work.
I just graduated from Cornell, and I'm not surprised. Some student posters around campus which read "Hong Kong stands with Ukraine" had the "Hong Kong" scribbled out by someone else. [1] I saw students point and laugh at a similar poster. On multiple occasions, I saw scraps left behind where posters criticizing Xi Jinping or the CCP had hung. [1] https://i.postimg.cc/25LM9hZJ/7297-B1-DB-5-CB3-4019-BCF3-8-F...
I'm a current senior at Cornell and I'm conflicted. > On Friday, the administration told students in an emailed statement "we have an expectation and responsibility to engage with viewpoints that we disagree with," but that "we must also respect that walkouts are a legitimate form of protest and an appropriate expression of disapproval." I like free speech as much as the next Hacker News user, but many of the actions…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they are residents, I agree there is nothing you can do about it. But since they seem to be exchange students, you could say "We don't welcome people with such views here in our country", and just send them back to the country that is ruled by their beloved government. Just because you have free speech doesn't mean you can't select foreigners based on their beliefs and values.
When we're talking about fundamental rights, I don't think we should treat foreigners any different than citizens. That's cruel. Is that really the country we want to be? Humane only to our citizens? We say that the mark of a man is how he treats those he sees as lower than himself. I think the same applies to countries. Now I'm not saying being a foreign national you should have "the right" to open a US bank account…
But if you act as an idiot abroad, you shouldn't be surprised when they send you back.
While I do sympathize with this student, you have to be careful when criticizing a hostile government you are a citizen of. Only in the United States do we have such protections in place to prevent the government from retaliating against the individual for voicing a critical opinion.
I'm sorry, but were you educated in the US? That's just blatantly false, and on the level of a Russian praising their army's success in Ukraine.
In the EU, Canada, Australia, UK, New Zealand and some other countries individuals are protected from retaliation if they're critical of their government. In fact it's the norm for democratic countries. Of course some pretty government officials might try to abuse their position in personal retaliation (happened in Germany recently) but that's why all those countries also have an independent judiciary to control such potential abuses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a current senior at Cornell and I'm conflicted. > On Friday, the administration told students in an emailed statement "we have an expectation and responsibility to engage with viewpoints that we disagree with," but that "we must also respect that walkouts are a legitimate form of protest and an appropriate expression of disapproval." I like free speech as much as the next Hacker News user, but many of the actions…
And there we are again: Demonstrating that an absolutist take on free speech tends to destroy free speech itself in the long run. „The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the…