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

Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 198 posts

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#91

Post by drran »

dvt wrote: post #54
zaptrem wrote: post #22

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…

> 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…

You should watch this couse: http://justiceharvard.org/justicecourse/ .

Free humans are not free to kill or enslave. Free speech is not free to hate.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#92

Post by koonsolo »

glogla wrote: post #68
koonsolo wrote: post #66

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.

Even if they are residents, you can absolutely be expelled from university for bullying, hate speech and other abuses.

This could indeed be seen as bullying or discrimination.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#93

Post by dvt »

sofixa wrote: post #83
godelski wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

From 1: > 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.

> Nobody wants neo-Nazis shrines.

Ironic, considering the Pyramids at Giza are literal monuments to slavery.

Free speech -- i.e. the free exchange of ideas, ergo the natural extension of freedom of thought -- is a fundamental and transcendental ideal, and it's a hill I've died on and gotten downvoted for plenty of times. Germany, Nazis, and the USA probably won't be around 200 millennia from now, but the ideal of free speech certainly will. We think too much of ourselves and of our times.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#94

Post by systemvoltage »

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #87
zaptrem wrote: post #22

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…

Right wing activists have been doing this kinda stuff wrt Israel on campuses for decades. I agree, this kind of intolerance should be stamped out. The question is: whose morals become law?

If you're in the US:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/

> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Emphasis mine.

There is a beautiful expansion by Blackstone. It makes me proud of this place:

> The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications, and not in freedom from censure for criminal matter when published. Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press: but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, he must take the consequences of his own temerity. To subject the press to the restrictive power of a licenser, as was formerly done, both before and since the Revolution, is to subject all freedom of sentiment to the prejudices of one man, and make him the arbitrary and infallible judge of all controverted points in learning, religion and government. But to punish as the law does at present any dangerous or offensive writings, which, when published, shall on a fair and impartial trial be adjudged of a pernicious tendency, is necessary for the preservation of peace and good order, of government and religion, the only solid foundations of civil liberty. Thus, the will of individuals is still left free: the abuse only of that free will is the object of legal punishment. Neither is any restraint hereby laid upon freedom of thought or inquiry; liberty of private sentiment is still left; the disseminating, or making public, of bad sentiments, destructive to the ends of society, is the crime which society corrects.

Citation: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt1-2-1/ALD...

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#95

Post by yorwba »

chaostheory wrote: post #28
gumby wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what? So Jim Crow or Apartheid were not racist because they were promulgated by governments?

For context, in the article the mainland Chinese student association leader mentioned that by the mere mention of Xinjiang and the CCP’s culpability was seen as being racist toward them as Chinese people.

Did we read the same article?

William Wang, president of the program's student government body, drafted a letter that was signed by more than 80 Chinese students in the program and sent to the administration on Thursday evening, then sent to all program students on Friday.

"We left today’s colloquium because we felt that the atmosphere in that room was extremely hostile towards us," the letter stated. "At that moment, we were not sitting in a classroom; we were crucified in a courtroom for crimes that we did not commit."

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#96

Post by dvt »

drran wrote: post #91
dvt wrote: post #54

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…

You should watch this couse: http://justiceharvard.org/justicecourse/ . Free humans are not free to kill or enslave. Free speech is not free to hate.

Seems like an Ethics 101 course, I have an undergraduate degree in philosophy. I am intimately familiar with arguments on both sides, and I think you should read some John Stuart Mill, specifically his seminal On Liberty[1] (maybe not as engaging as a YouTube video course, though).

Free speech absolutism is a pretty hardline position, but I think it's probably correct.

[1] https://www.econlib.org/library/Mill/mlLbty.html

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#97

Post by proudasian »

I am a Chinese-American, born and lived in California my entire life. The past few years has seen an explosion in racism and Sinophobia against Asians, against Chinese people in particular. The hate has motivated far more people to sympathize with the CCP than they could dream of. So I can understand the Chinese students actions here.

Also, despite what they spoonfeed you on American media, the Chinese government is not committing genocide in Xinjiang - they are not killing people in mass. The amount of misinformation that's being spread is amazing, and scary, as it this is literally the same tactic used when they fabricated justification for war against Iraq with WMDs. The evidence we have is the Uyghurs (who are deemed a national security threat in China) are indeed put into internment camps - but this is more similar to Japanese internment camps US did in WW2 rather than genocide.

I believe the West is threatened by China's progress, and the fact that China is an Asian nation. Westerners cannot fathom that Asian faces can lead the world. As a corrollary of this, China has done more to dethrone white supremacy than Black Lives Matter could ever have done.

Also relevant: https://www.reddit.com/r/asianamerican/comments/v8k0p1/it_an...

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#98

Post by kwertzzz »

agapon wrote: post #57
dgellow wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When did that ever work?

Exactly. Reminded me of this tweet: https://twitter.com/anneapplebaum/status/1534969496724807680

Thank you so much for sharing this.

"And at the same time it is stated on behalf of Chancellor Hilter that these acts of violence [against Jews] by Nazis have been condemned and that official order haves been issued to prevent their recurrence"

Telling X and doing !X is not a recent invention.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#99

Post by [deleted] »

colordrops wrote: post #75
zaptrem wrote: post #22

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…

Sorry but I'm disgusted with this thought process that has taken hold over the last several years. You decide the truth value of something and based on that you further decide that a topic is off limits. It's shockingly self-centered and leaves no room for the possiblity that you might be wrong about the matter, and that you are moving the goalposts for what is considered acceptable speech. The road to hell is paved…

[deleted]

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#100

Post by femiagbabiaka »

systemvoltage wrote: post #94
femiagbabiaka wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right wing activists have been doing this kinda stuff wrt Israel on campuses for decades. I agree, this kind of intolerance should be stamped out. The question is: whose morals become law?

If you're in the US: https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/ > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Emphasis mine. There is a beautiful expansion by Blackstone. It…

The Constitution is a great document. We no longer live in a world where the spirit of the document matters. It’s a shibboleth, a proxy for the actual political discourse. It’s referred to when there’s a need to call on a talisman, in service of whatever opinion one has. Ultimately meaningless. So the question stands. If one is to legislate morals, whose will win? This is the real question of the last 4 decades of American politics (at least).
Post reply on HN