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

14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

tribuneindia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 504 posts

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#311

Post by rmah »

niteshpant wrote: post #251
andrepd wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the memories are no antidote. In the Philippines the memory of Marcos didn't stop autocrats from rising to power. Even in Europe, countries with relatively recent memories of autocracy and fascism, such as Portugal and Spain, have far-right parties with >20% seats in Parliament, just like in France or Germany. What is to be done?

It is not a question of what, but a question of why. Why do autocrats rise to power? Why are far-right parties rising in power in Germany, France, Spain and Portugal? I've come to see this as a fundamental human nature one can't go against. Some people are, just evil. Humans will always love self more than others. This love of self can turn into a hatred of others, or easily be turned into a hatred of others. Accepta…

Calling people who hold beliefs you find wrong "evil" is, IMO, counter-productive and will lead not only to conflict but to worse outcomes for yourself (even if your side "wins"). The root of cultural differences (both within and between societies and sub-cultures) are differing beliefs of what is right and wrong; what is morally good and morally bad.

What you view as hateful, others will view as loving. And what you view as loving, others can view as hateful. Painting the opposition in simplistic terms like "evil" and refusing to even try to see why they feel they way they feel solves nothing and empowers extremists. And when groups led by such people "win", the majority still lose.

IMO, any side of any belief, be it individualism vs collectivism, atheism vs religion, sexual openness vs sexual restraint, free speech vs censorship, capitalism vs socialism, etc, etc. can easily morph into something harmful. You may have discovered "evil", but after many decades, I've come to see that most people's hearts are in the right place. But there are always a significant fraction on any side of any issue that, for whatever reason, cannot regulate their emotions and seem to need to strive for the extremes.

Compromise can happen if you reject extremists. Solutions can be found if you understand that the extremists on your own side are as much the opposition as the other side of an issue. Purity of belief always seems attractive on the surface. But moderation is not a cop out, it's pragmatism. Moderation is the practical philosophy through which solutions can be found. Fundamentalism, extremism, dogmatism, are approaches that lead to worse outcomes. Moderation leads to better outcomes. History has shown this again and again.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#312

Post by AnimalMuppet »

panic wrote: post #282
Quarrelsome wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its quite something that we all waste our time over divisions like left/right, capitalism/socialism, woke/not-woke when in practice; this is the only division that matters. Those who are trying to follow the rules and make the nation better, and those that are only active for their self-interest.

This sounds nice until you think more closely about the framing implicit in “follow the rules and make the nation better”. Who makes the rules and defines what is good for a nation?

True, and yet...

I think there is broad consensus that too much poverty is a problem, and (perhaps somewhat less broad) that therefore too much wealth inequality is a problem. I think there's fairly broad consensus that college costs are a problem, that healthcare costs and access are a problem. I think there's a fair consensus that fixing these things would make the nation better.

Then you get to "how do we fix them?" and all consensus disappears.

As for the rules, it seems pretty clear to me that "the rules" are the Constitution and the existing law, plus the rules on how to pass or repeal laws.

But this framing also misses one category: Those who think that they should break the rules to make the nation better. I think that they are misguided at best and lying (either to others or to themselves) at worst.

Why misguided? Because preserving the rule of law is a really big deal. Even if they have the best of intentions, once they knock the law down flat and pave a road over it, they won't be the only one to drive on it. Tyrants try to build that road; if it's already there, the tyrant's job becomes much easier and much harder to stop.

So I oppose such tactics. It doesn't matter whether they are well-meaning or not. Even if the person doing them will never be a tyrant, the next person who wants to be a tyrant will find the door wide open.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#313

Post by bbminner »

In the meantime, Russia erected a copy of the great Chinese firewall with DPI and everything - blocking YouTube, foreign news, most voice chat apps, most vpn traffic, and even actively dropping ssh connections when too much bidirectional sustained traffic is being detected.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#314

Post by storus »

miohtama wrote: post #174
FollowingTheDao wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Capitalism has done more to overcome hunger and poverty than any other system in world history. The most devastating man-made famines over the past 100 years all occurred under socialism – in the 1930s alone, according to a range of estimates, between five and nine million people died in the Soviet Union from famines caused by the socialist collectivisation of agriculture. > The end of communism in China and the So…

> The end of communism in China and the Soviet Union was a major factor in the 42 percent reduction of hunger between 1990 and 2017.

This sounds like a complete BS. There were no starving people in the Soviet Union and its satellites after a brief post-war period. They had no luxuries all year round like exotic fruits, but the basics were covered. They had also vastly more educated population than the US. Just their governance and understanding of economics didn't consider the innate selfishness of humans and the need to dominate and outdo others so supply-demand laws didn't work well. China fixed that part later by allowing private corporate ownership and throwing its population into a Darwinian environment while keeping minimal social standards for the unlucky ones. North Korea, Cambodia and Laos would be the only "communist" countries where famines were still present.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#315

Post by thisislife2 »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #165
Fricken wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Interesting. Are you arguing in that case censorship would have been a good thing? Is there a principled stance to be made here, or is it just "people should have freedom of speech when I agree with their goals, and be censored if I don't"?

Not OP, but I don't consider regulating social media as "censorship" at all because the nature of foreign owned social media platforms means that you do not know if it is your own citizens talking or some foreign agent with their own vested interest. Media and communication platforms in every country is regulated. All countries also have stricter regulations for foreign media and telecom companies. Online platforms - who are now media and communication platform - have somehow managed to wriggle by most governments so far, and even become dominant, without any oversights. That does not bode well for any country, including democratic ones. This kind of digital colonisation is the most egregious mistake made by the Global South, and they are just now waking up to it, hoping to reign it before it is too late.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#316

Post by angelgonzales »

cedws wrote: post #22
perihelions wrote: post #7

Hard-earned freedoms are wasted on societies who don't have memories of what it took to earn them. Freedom is a ratchet: slides easily and frictionlessly one way, and offers immense resistance in the other. This is all so disheartening.

I’m not aware of a single nation where the ratchet is loosening. It appears freedom is being eroded everywhere. The most disheartening thing is that nothing works to stop it. There are countries where millions of people have protested, but in time the protests always fizzle or are stamped out, and things continue on the same trajectory.

It might not be on the national level, but we’re fighting over here in California to maintain/take back our gun rights. A court recently ruled that the state cannot require a background check for ammunition, we also got rid of the one gun a month rule recently as well. This progress gives me hope we still have so much more work to do re. privacy, property rights and freedom of speech!

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#317

Post by 0xcafecafe »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #299
dmbche wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then again, Canada had a whole convoy that tried to protest but that got stamped out.

> Canada had a whole convoy that tried to protest but that got stamped out It was an anti-vax protest [1]. Canada isn't anti vax [2]. The protests were unpopular [3][4]. The convoy didn't go anywhere because it had nowhere to go. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_convoy_protest#cite_not... [2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/measles-vaccination-poll-1.75... [3] https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/15/politics/fact-c…

Sure it might have been unpopular and a silly cause. However that didn't stop the government from invoking the emergencies act and cracking down with impunity. There were even cases of finances being frozen.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-pro...

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#318

Post by aianus »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #299
dmbche wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then again, Canada had a whole convoy that tried to protest but that got stamped out.

> Canada had a whole convoy that tried to protest but that got stamped out It was an anti-vax protest [1]. Canada isn't anti vax [2]. The protests were unpopular [3][4]. The convoy didn't go anywhere because it had nowhere to go. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_convoy_protest#cite_not... [2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/measles-vaccination-poll-1.75... [3] https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/15/politics/fact-c…

It was an anti-lockdown protest. Canada continued to have extreme lockdowns well after the vaccine was available.

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#319

Post by johncolanduoni »

nomdep wrote: post #268
mandeepj wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite similar corruption is happening here in America! Donald trump made over $3.8B since getting into office this year, while tanking farming, jobs market, and foreign relations.

He made that with the business he already had and some legal cryptocurrency investment based on capitalizing his fame. How on earth you call that "corruption"? Are you even aware of what the word means?

And members of congress have their spouses just make totally legal stock market trades because they happen to be genius investors, don’t you dare suggest otherwise!

Re: 14 Killed in anti-government protests in Nepal

#320

Post by thisislife2 »

lionturtle wrote: post #10

It was absolutely not just social media ban, it was mostly youth protesting against the corrupt government and unfairness, social media ban was one element that was against the freedom of speech, but it was right around the time where everyone was documenting the rich politicians, their business connections and their families that have been living lavishly and just inheriting the election seats from generation to gen…

> "kids don't get facebook and throw tantrum".

But you cannot ignore that aspect - addicts do get aggressive, even violent, when they don't get their fix. So they are indeed vulnerable and politically susceptible.

Post reply on HN