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

Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 199 posts

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#111

Post by bufferoverflow »

defrost wrote: post #110
bufferoverflow wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense? Show me 3 stories from NPR in the last month (among hundreds they've reported in that time frame) with a right-wing flavor. You know, things like articles against abortion, critical of Kamala, supporting mass-deportation of illegal immigrants, etc.

They're left of the US centre (not global, US). Not "far left", not "very far left", and not "very, very far left".

Ok, you failed to show a single article with the right-wing perspective. How are they not far-left again?

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#113

Post by hollerith »

LAC-Tech wrote: post #92
Barrin92 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>In our history, the credible threat of social violence has been absolutely necessary for justice & progress Even in very similar Anglosphere cultures like Britain, a liberal constitutional monarchy, all of that had been achieved, even earlier in many cases, without the overt glorification of violence as a normal part of the political process. In fact liberal monarchies, even before they were democratic had done a pr…

The English civil war wasn't violent to you? even the glorious revolution was very violent by modern standards. not to mention the following jacobite "rebellions".

You mean the glorious revolution that is also called the Bloodless Revolution?

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#114

Post by mapt »

hollerith wrote: post #104
defrost wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem unfamiliar with the vast bulk of history of the "Four Lions" region (now called the United Kingdom). Just one snippet: The Peterloo Massacre took place at St Peter's Field, Manchester, Lancashire, England, on Monday 16 August 1819. Eighteen people died and 400–700 were injured when cavalry charged into a crowd of around 60,000 people who had gathered to demand the reform of parliamentary representation. As a…

The fact that you're using an incident that resulted in only 18 deaths to prove your point is evidence that, yes, England since the English Civil War has been an unusually peaceful and law-abiding part of the world.

Twelve years later:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Days_of_May

> The BPU had made its reputation amid the spontaneous rioting that had accompanied the fall of the First Reform Bill in 1831, assembling 150,000 protesters at Newhall Hill in the largest political assembly the country had ever seen.[15] Its threat to reorganise itself along semi-military lines in November 1831 had led to suggestions that it was trying to usurp the civil authority, and made a deliberate, if implicit, threat of the possibility of armed revolt in the event of the formation of an anti-reform government.

Ultimately led to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1832 which dramatically expanded the voting franchise.

The French Revolution, and the almost total destruction of an aristocratic/noble/royal system, was the subtext of every bottom-up political movement in Europe in this era.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#115

Post by christiangenco »

chasil wrote: post #45
christiangenco wrote: post #26

I've been thinking a lot recently about where I would personally draw the line on what sorts of speech should be criminal. If someone publicly called for specific violence (ex: "let's all meet at Joe's house to burn it down—I'll bring the lighter") that feels to me like the sort of thing that would be useful to do something about instead of waiting for the actual crime to be committed. But publicly stating that you s…

You might investigate the current standard in the U.S., developed by the supreme court, known as Imminent Lawless Action . https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action This replaced the previous standard, Clear and Present Danger . https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_and_present_danger

Oh that was fascinating! Thank you for bringing those standards up—it seems like the US legal system landed in a similar place as my intuition. “Imminent Lawless Action” is where I’d also draw the line.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#116

Post by defrost »

hollerith wrote: post #104
defrost wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem unfamiliar with the vast bulk of history of the "Four Lions" region (now called the United Kingdom). Just one snippet: The Peterloo Massacre took place at St Peter's Field, Manchester, Lancashire, England, on Monday 16 August 1819. Eighteen people died and 400–700 were injured when cavalry charged into a crowd of around 60,000 people who had gathered to demand the reform of parliamentary representation. As a…

The fact that you're using an incident that resulted in only 18 deaths to prove your point is evidence that, yes, England since the English Civil War has been an unusually peaceful and law-abiding part of the world.

This one incident in English political history appears more violent than, say, the US Kent State massacre:

    The Kent State shootings were the killing of four and wounding of nine unarmed college students by the Ohio National Guard
Is it your position that the US state has been more violent toward citizens than the "liberal constitutional monarchy" in the UK, less violent, or about the same.

Modern English monarchy history easily traces back to 1066 and the political history to the issue of the Magna Carta in 1215.

It's selective to limit political violence to last Civil War (of many wars | rebellions of the last 800 years) and blinkered to claim that the modern UK doesn't put the boot in (eg: Thatcher during the miners strikes .. instigated by the Thatcher government in a deliberate ploy to break trade unions across all industries).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ridley_Plan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Orgreave

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#117

Post by hollerith »

defrost wrote: post #116
hollerith wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you're using an incident that resulted in only 18 deaths to prove your point is evidence that, yes, England since the English Civil War has been an unusually peaceful and law-abiding part of the world.

This one incident in English political history appears more violent than, say, the US Kent State massacre: The Kent State shootings were the killing of four and wounding of nine unarmed college students by the Ohio National Guard Is it your position that the US state has been more violent toward citizens than the "liberal constitutional monarchy" in the UK, less violent, or about the same. Modern English monarchy his…

My position is that both the UK since the end of the English Civil War (1646) and the US since the end of the American Civil War (1865) have been unusually free of internal political violence.

In contrast, the Chinese Civil War (ending in 1949) was bloodier than any conflict in the 20th Century except the 2 world wars, and Rwanda had a little internal conflict in 1994 that resulted in the death of 491,000–800,000 citizens (of the Tutsi ethnic group). Also since the 1980s, 350,000–1,000,000+ have been killed and 2,000,000–3,800,000 displaced by internal conflicts in Somalia. Also, Libya and Syria more recently.

>Modern English monarchy history easily traces back to 1066 . . . It's selective to limit political violence to last Civil War.

It is the recent centuries of the history of a country that is the most informative for predicting what will happen in the future.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#118

Post by defrost »

hollerith wrote: post #113
LAC-Tech wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The English civil war wasn't violent to you? even the glorious revolution was very violent by modern standards. not to mention the following jacobite "rebellions".

You mean the glorious revolution that is also called the Bloodless Revolution?

The deposition of James II and VII (same person, different kingdoms) in November 1688 was a singular event that followed the wider 1639 to 1653 Wars of the Three Kingdoms, which included The English Civil War (a series of civil wars and political machinations from 1642 to 1651)

A singular action with no bloodshed that followed a period in which bodies were stacked high, including over a hundred thousand non combat civilians.

A singular action with no bloodshed that sparked a long series of bloody revolts that began in March 1689, with major outbreaks in 1715 and 1719, and culminated in the Jacobite rising of 1745.

Yes - he did mention the day James was deposed, you ignored the rest of century that surrounded that day.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#119

Post by LAC-Tech »

hollerith wrote: post #113
LAC-Tech wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The English civil war wasn't violent to you? even the glorious revolution was very violent by modern standards. not to mention the following jacobite "rebellions".

You mean the glorious revolution that is also called the Bloodless Revolution?

It was bloodless for the time but was still a foreign expeditionary force marching on London in the middle of the 9 years war. Considering us moderns clutch our Pearl's at an obese person getting a heart attack during an "insurrection" it's fair to say it was violent by today's standards.

Re: Iranian writer is sentenced to 12 years after tweeting a dot at supreme leader

#120

Post by [deleted] »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #111
defrost wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're left of the US centre (not global, US). Not "far left", not "very far left", and not "very, very far left".

Ok, you failed to show a single article with the right-wing perspective. How are they not far-left again?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN