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

Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 562 posts

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#21

Post by MagnumOpus »

ordinaryradical wrote: post #6
WilTimSon wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, this presumes that it's a government acting in good faith. Sure, something like the UK or a EU country should have dissent and criticism to keep democracy healthy. However, countries like China, Russia, and NK, have no interest in fostering a healthy dialogue and it wouldn't be very conducive to their government's interests.

> it wouldn't be very conducive to their government's interests. It depends on your timeline. If you eliminate dissent you may be able to push through short-term aims or develop a facsimile of national unity, but you will naturally eliminate nuance from your geopolitics. Even one or two generations into this experiment, you can wind up with a leader who truly "drinks the koolaid," who assumes the state propaganda to…

> wind up with a leader who truly "drinks the koolaid," who assumes the state propaganda to be reality

There possibbly is no leader in history who drank the state propaganda koolaid as deeply as Chairman Mao. He accidentally murdered tens of millions when the propaganda turned out to be incongruent with reality. Meanwhile he stayed in power by butchering millions of potential opposition members, and by having nukes and ten million soldiers which impressed Nixon enough to bow and scrape before him.

The lesson has been learned by Chairman Xi. As long as he brutally cleans house domestically and is a MAD-level military threat, absolutely no one can doom his regime.

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#22

Post by jedberg »

john_moscow wrote: post #10

It is ironic how the western public generally frowns upon the silencing of dissident throught in China, and at the same time welcomes precisely the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home.

There is a vast difference between letting the government suppress speech, which is what China does, and letting private companies suppress speech, which is what happens in America.

When the government does it, you can't express that idea anywhere. When private companies do it, you can still express those ideas somewhere else.

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#24

Post by john_moscow »

ciarannolan wrote: post #17
john_moscow wrote: post #10

It is ironic how the western public generally frowns upon the silencing of dissident throught in China, and at the same time welcomes precisely the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home.

[flagged]

Just to get it straight, I don't like what China is doing to public speech, and I don't like what the West is doing either. I grew up in a country (Soviet Union) that took it to the extreme, and I don't like where this road is going.

I strongly believe that the key to building a long-term stable society is a culture where people of opposing beliefs are still able to peacefully debate with each other, and respect the other's opinion even if they don't agree with it. Just like the professional boxers that would let out their worst at the ring, but would find it inconceivable to try and hurt their opponent's private life or family.

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#25

Post by Twixes »

gonehome wrote: post #7

This kind of thing is the exact reason why I was disturbed by the Keybase.io sale to Zoom and abandoned my account. ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23105253 ) I've been currently using Zoom during the pandemic because as a product it's still the best (and I signed up for a discounted year of pro), but I won't give them any money again.

As much as I don't like consolidation of tech, I've had really good experiences with Google Meet. No scummy practices like forcing users to pretend that the app installer doesn't download just to connect from the browser either. What are Zoom's advantages?

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#26

Post by nothal »

MagnumOpus wrote: post #21
ordinaryradical wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it wouldn't be very conducive to their government's interests. It depends on your timeline. If you eliminate dissent you may be able to push through short-term aims or develop a facsimile of national unity, but you will naturally eliminate nuance from your geopolitics. Even one or two generations into this experiment, you can wind up with a leader who truly "drinks the koolaid," who assumes the state propaganda to…

> wind up with a leader who truly "drinks the koolaid," who assumes the state propaganda to be reality There possibbly is no leader in history who drank the state propaganda koolaid as deeply as Chairman Mao. He accidentally murdered tens of millions when the propaganda turned out to be incongruent with reality. Meanwhile he stayed in power by butchering millions of potential opposition members, and by having nukes a…

What's going to happen when he's gone? Does the next leader understand well enough? How about the next?

It's the same reason we're seeing so much strife in the US. In the US, societal opinion and legislative action hardly follow the same path. In fact, IIRC, public opinion has almost no impact on legislation. Wonder why everyone here feels like we're going down the wrong track?

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#27

Post by duxup »

john_moscow wrote: post #10

It is ironic how the western public generally frowns upon the silencing of dissident throught in China, and at the same time welcomes precisely the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home.

> the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home

I'm not aware of any government action regarding speech and sensitive topics like we see in China, or other dramatically less free countries.

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#28

Post by enriquto »

jedberg wrote: post #22
john_moscow wrote: post #10

It is ironic how the western public generally frowns upon the silencing of dissident throught in China, and at the same time welcomes precisely the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home.

There is a vast difference between letting the government suppress speech, which is what China does, and letting private companies suppress speech, which is what happens in America. When the government does it, you can't express that idea anywhere. When private companies do it, you can still express those ideas somewhere else.

Lol, no; it is exactly the same thing.

Anyhow, this is about a private company suppressing speech, so I guess you are OK with that?

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#29

Post by axguscbklp »

john_moscow wrote: post #10

It is ironic how the western public generally frowns upon the silencing of dissident throught in China, and at the same time welcomes precisely the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home.

>It is ironic how the western public

Only part of the US public, to be fair.

That said, the US public does certainly seem to be mostly apathetic about the giant US government surveillance system, even though that system, if the right sort of political will appeared, could be rapidly turned into a system of social control rivaling what China has.

Re: Zoom closes account of U.S.-based Chinese activist after Tiananmen event

#30

Post by dang »

ciarannolan wrote: post #17
john_moscow wrote: post #10

It is ironic how the western public generally frowns upon the silencing of dissident throught in China, and at the same time welcomes precisely the same behavior for "sensitive topics" back home.

[flagged]

Please keep this and other canned arguments off HN. They're typically used as reflexes to try to stop discussion, which isn't in the spirit of intellectual curiosity. If a comment is bad, explain specifically what's bad about it, or downvote/flag as appropriate.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

"Whataboutism" is a strange case because the name is catchy and sounds convincing, but it's a fallacy. Comparables are relevant. Humans evaluate things by comparing them.

Pointing out inconsistencies is also relevant because it adds context to an argument. The same thing can appear completely different depending on the context it's surrounded by. Negotiating context (what's included vs. excluded) is a critical aspect of debate, not something that can be shut down with just a word.

Adding information can be perfectly legitimate, or it can be distracting or misleading. In the latter case the proper response is to explain specifically why, not play a wild card like "whataboutism" which basically says "I determine the context and you're not allowed to change it." That amounts to power to control an entire discussion.

Previous explanations at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20338307 and links back from there. I particularly like the analogy to programming languages, because it illustrates the issue in a non-political context (though static vs. dynamic is about as intense a flamewar topic is it gets in programming discussions).

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Post reply on HN