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

121–130 of 198 posts

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#121

Post by trash_goblin »

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…

No post body was provided.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#122

Post by davorak »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #120
jgwil2 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> also seem to be against the consequences of that speech, such as being "cancelled" > Getting shot for saying the wrong thing is also just another consequence. Is that also acceptable to you? I'm sure it's not, but that would also mean your whole point is BS. OP never said any consequences were acceptable; we have laws against shooting people so clearly such a consequence is proscribed in civil society. > But the t…

> By that logic My logic is that, in order to guarantee the right to freedom of expression, there needs to be a line. The moment the "consequences" of expressing an opinion are predominantly punitive is where it needs to stop. So no, by my logic, you're totally allowed to not be friends with someone who says something racist. As for losing a job, in an ideal world where this person could just get another job, yes, th…

> But when it turns into losing the right to have any job whatsoever, then no, that's definitely not okay either.

wesleywt seems to be against this too since removing a legal right like that would require government action and they are againts that as seen in:

> I am for both free speech and getting cancelled for it. In this way, standards acceptable to our society can be policed without interferance from the government.

It seems like you put cancelling on the acceptable side of the line when you say:

> So no, by my logic, you're totally allowed to not be friends with someone who says something racist. As for losing a job, in an ideal world where this person could just get another job, yes, that'd be acceptable.

I normally think of cancelling as individuals deciding who they want to associate with and any consequences that flow from that. Which seems to land on the acceptable side of the line you are drawing.

While government action would not be acceptable, which I agree with, but I would not call cancelling.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#123

Post by chaostheory »

yorwba wrote: post #95
chaostheory wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yes we did.

“we were crucified in a courtroom for crimes that we did not commit.”

These students are confusing criticism of a government and leadership with criticism of an entire race of people. Either that or they’re being disingenuous.

Saying that Xi Jinping and the CCP have terrible policies is not racist.

For the record I am also Chinese.

Since we’re on the subject, Jiang Zemin is more fit to rule. That’s something a lot of different factions both inside and outside of China can agree on. Xi Jinping is a disaster not just for China, but the entire world.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#124

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

davorak wrote: post #122
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By that logic My logic is that, in order to guarantee the right to freedom of expression, there needs to be a line. The moment the "consequences" of expressing an opinion are predominantly punitive is where it needs to stop. So no, by my logic, you're totally allowed to not be friends with someone who says something racist. As for losing a job, in an ideal world where this person could just get another job, yes, th…

> But when it turns into losing the right to have any job whatsoever, then no, that's definitely not okay either. wesleywt seems to be against this too since removing a legal right like that would require government action and they are againts that as seen in: > I am for both free speech and getting cancelled for it. In this way, standards acceptable to our society can be policed without interferance from the governm…

> I normally think of cancelling as individuals deciding who they want to associate with and any consequences that flow from that. Which seems to land on the acceptable side of the line you are drawing.

Yea but lets not forget the context entirely here; we're talking about a walkout at a university, and people are insinuating that there should be some form of punishment as a consequence.

You can construct a case where social consequences for an expression of opinion do happen and no human rights are infringed, but I'm not arguing that such cases can't exist, so you aren't really proving anything meaningful there.

My point is, to put it clearly: The idea that the right to either free speech or freedom of expression does not guarantee any form of protection from social consequences is completely incorrect.

> In this way, standards acceptable to our society can be policed without interferance from the government.

That's a cute way of spelling "mob rule". It sounds nice because it talks about avoiding "interference", but really, it's a way of avoiding democracy and due justice. If you can't convince the majority of society, then you take matters into your own hands. That's not a system I want to live in.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#125

Post by logicchains »

deltaonefour wrote: post #52
logicchains wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What motivated them? Likely he will give simpleton answers like "power corrupts" or dictatorships are evil without ever understanding the complexity of the situation. The motivation is very simple: the Uighurs started a separatist movement, and there's little the Chinese government hates more than separatist movements. Now, many governments in the world don't like separatist movements, but you don't see the Spanish…

Quoted post unavailable.

>Fail. What motivated them was actual slaughter. The uhygers conducted a terrorist attack that killed many people. Think 9/11 but it happened in china so your biased mind is unable to comprehend how bad it is because it didn't happen in your backyard.

So it's okay to jail and sterilise innocent people for the actions of a small number of people of the same ethnicity? Anyone who believes that is a truly horrible person, a monster who deserves to suffer the greatest pains in life, and I'd wish every misery upon them. I'd say the same thing about anyone who believes the American slaughter of innocent children in the middle east was justified, but fortunately most Americans now recognise that was a mistake and the US has mostly wound down its aggression in the middle east.

You're advocating for the exact same thing the terrorists did: harming innocent people for actions that they weren't directly responsible for, purely because of their ethnicity.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#126

Post by logicchains »

deltaonefour wrote: post #81
agapon wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fail. Look at the North Ireland situation. There was no "reeducation" of Irish or Catholics that I heard of.

But the US sent soldiers to another country to slaughter more people after 9/11. Which is better? Re-education or more slaughter? Also what does the UK have to do with this? I'm comparing china to the us. Cornell is in the US.

> But the US sent soldiers to another country to slaughter more people after 9/11. Which is better? Re-education or more slaughter?

Is the US doing this now? No it stopped, because so many Americans vigorously opposed it. How many Chinese people are speaking out against the genocide in Xinjiang?

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#127

Post by logicchains »

deltaonefour wrote: post #79
midasuni wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The attacks were similar in scale to the Irish attacks in the 70s through 90s. Did the U.K. sterilise Irish people?

No they didn't. What's your point? I never said what the Chinese did is justified. My point is that emotions that launched the sterilization campaign is equivalent to the state of the US during 9/11. This doesn't justify genocide or actual war or does it? The US, on the other hand, thought sending soldiers to another country to kill more people was justified. China isnt doing that. But that's besides the point. The p…

>My point is that emotions that launched the sterilization campaign is equivalent to the state of the US during 9/11. This doesn't justify genocide or actual war or does it? The US, on the other hand, thought sending soldiers to another country to kill more people was justified. China isnt doing that.

Were American university students overseas protesting at any criticism of the Iraq war? No; if anything US university students were the most anti-war Americans, leading protests against it, as would be expected of people with a higher level of education/moral development.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#128

Post by logicchains »

dirtyid wrote: post #69
fxtentacle wrote: post #49

I know this way of thinking is horrible, but let me play devil's advocate for a while: What if the CCP puts Uyghurs into prison simply because the majority of Chinese citizens want Uyghurs in prison? 1. That would explain the behavior in the article. 2. That would explain why studies report that people in China feel like a democracy. Their government works in the way that benefits the majority of its people, so for s…

It's a lot simpler than that. PRC's XJ security architecture is publically about counter terrorism and deradicalization through forced reeducation (with mass interment) and poverty alleviation. While forced sterilzation for women with 3+ kids is XJ catching up to family planning policies with rest of PRC. Years of consistent Uyghur terrorist attacks stopped in exchange for repressing minority consisting 0.02% of popu…

>They don't mean for crimes they personally did not commit, but alleged "genocide" that the global political UN community majority states PRC did not commit.

The "majority" of UN are poor countries on China's payroll; facts are not a matter of majority opinion.

>And in fact the opposite position is true, to them PRC has found a relatively "humane" method of eliminating radical terrorism versus US bombing the shit out of the ME.

So completely annihilating an ethnicity through sterilization and banning their cultural practices is more humane than indiscriminate bombing? In fifty years' time there'll still be an Iraq and Iraqi people, but if the current practices continue then in fifty years there'll barely be any Uighurs in China.

Fortunately the Chinese people are beginning to see that what Xi did to poor Uighurs in Xinjiang, he can just as easily do for rich Hanzu in Shanghai. A taste of their own medicine, so to speak.

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#129

Post by whimsicalism »

kramerger wrote: post #41
whimsicalism wrote: post #16

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?

This links to an article about Chinese students at GW. Do you mean to say this group of students transferred en masse from GW to Cornell or are you just saying they are the same group because they are both Chinese?

Re: Chinese students at Cornell “taunt” Uyghur classmate

#130

Post by whimsicalism »

effingwewt wrote: post #107
wesleywt wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech absolutionist, like you, also seem to be against the consequences of that speech, such as being "cancelled". I am for both free speech and getting cancelled for it. In this way, standards acceptable to our society can be policed without interferance from the government.

This is where I find myself as well. You are free to say things, you are not free of the consequences. I expect someone to deck me for saying certain things. Growing up in Texas we had a saying- 'Them's fightin' words.' ie if someone said something out of bounds, they were headed for a scrap, or at least that wad a very real possibility. Having said that I would still defend their right to talk shit. edit- screw canc…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN