Live data from Hacker News

China's scheme to transfer Uighurs into work

bbc.com

61–64 of 64 posts

Re: China's scheme to transfer Uighurs into work

#61
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not my beliefs, but trying to accurately represent the ideas: Having a state is only necessary during the socialist phase. When society is perfected and true communism is achieved, the state is unnecessary. What Mao refers to as socialism seems to be equivalent to Marx's "dictatorship of the proletariat" phase, which involves the gradual abolishment of the capitalist elements of society (including people). When capit…

> When society is perfected and true communism is achieved, the state is unnecessary. I mean, "the public" still has to make decisions on the allocation of resources, goods, etc. Is the idea that every little decision is put before the whole community to vote on? Everyone spends all day voting on everything? Even assuming the Magic Wand of Communism absolves us of our selfish tendencies, is it also going to make us a…

> In social relations between people certain voluntary social norms will have to be accepted, namely, the obligation to fulfill a freely accepted agreement. Anarchism is not no government. Anarchism is self-government (or its equivalent, self-administration). Self-government means self-discipline. The alternative to self-discipline is enforced obedience imposed by rulers over their subjects. To avoid this, the members of every association freely make the rules of their association and agree to abide by the rules they themselves make. Those who refuse to live up to their responsibility to honor a voluntary agreement shall be deprived of its benefits.

> Punishment for violation of agreements is balanced by the inalienable right to secede. The right of groups and individuals to choose their own forms of association is, according to Bakunin, the most important of all political rights. The abrogation of this right leads to the reintroduction of tyranny. You cannot secede from a jail. Secession will not paralyze the association. People with strong, overriding common interests will cooperate. Those who stand more to lose by seceding will compromise their differences. Those who have little or nothing in common with the collectivity will not hurt the association by seceding, but will, on the contrary, eliminate a source of friction, thereby promoting general harmony.

This the most reasonable-sounding explanation of the concept of "free association" in anarchism and communism. It definitely glosses over the lessons of much of human history. https://web.archive.org/web/19980206141952/http://flag.black...

Re: China's scheme to transfer Uighurs into work

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s be balanced; China is not as bad as Nazi Germany. Not even close. But it is true that this soft cultural erasure that they are attempting is very evil. Lol me: let’s be balanced You: DIE APOSTATE Usually I’m the one going all nonlinear! That’s my job guys!

[flagged]

Nationalistic and ideological flamebait and flamewar are not welcome on HN. This was well over the line. No more of this please, regardless of which nations or ideologies you have a problem with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: China's scheme to transfer Uighurs into work

#63
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nationalistic and ideological flamebait and flamewar are not welcome on HN. This was well over the line. No more of this please, regardless of which nations or ideologies you have a problem with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Dang, if you think my comment is out of place here, that's fine, but don't mischaracterize what I wrote. Nothing I said was nationalistic or ideological; it's objectively true and reported upon by mainstream media around the world. In the context of my comment, I don't have a "problem" with China. I'm pointing out that China's human rights violations, which are recognized by the international community, are very similar to a certain historical regime cited by the person I was replying to. If this is off limits, then fine, but this sort of overreaction on your part only makes this community less interesting.

By the way, what do you define as "flamebait"? Nothing I said was "flaming" the other person. There wasn't even a flamewar. The closet to that was my comment getting downvoted, which I don't even care about. I'm not going to argue with you, but anyone reading this should at least know how you interpret it.

Maybe it'd be helpful if you were more specific: Should we not comment on a country's human rights violations? No argument from me either way.

Re: China's scheme to transfer Uighurs into work

#64
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nationalistic and ideological flamebait and flamewar are not welcome on HN. This was well over the line. No more of this please, regardless of which nations or ideologies you have a problem with. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Dang, if you think my comment is out of place here, that's fine, but don't mischaracterize what I wrote. Nothing I said was nationalistic or ideological; it's objectively true and reported upon by mainstream media around the world. In the context of my comment, I don't have a "problem" with China. I'm pointing out that China's human rights violations, which are recognized by the international community, are very simi…

It's much shallower than that. You posted over-the-top language about a country, complete with Nazi references. Please don't. It makes internet threads really shitty.

If you don't think "So they're not putting people into ovens yet, but besides that" is flamebait I'm not sure what else to tell you.

Post reply on HN