Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

[flagged]


One was a traitor trying to keep his slaves, the other was fighting for Rights in China.


While that is true that fails to mention IMO a key difference. The civil war is not censored in the US, Tienanmen square is.

Removing a statue is very different than shutting down all discussion around an event and locking up those that want to talk about it.


[flagged]


Not the same kind of suppression, not by a long stretch.

You're still legally entitled to stand on a street corner in the US and shout racial slurs, if that's your thing. You're also legally entitled to assemble and protest there.

None of the undertakings that are equivalent to those actions are permitted in China, and will immediately subject you to violence.


[flagged]


> But there is considerable extralegal hate speech regulation. Your face will be plastered all over social media and you will get "cancelled" and lose your career

That's a pretty convoluted way to say "people in the US don't tolerate assholes".


> and no "free speech" laws will protect you from that

You have a right to speak freely without the government stopping you. You have no right to have people listen to you. In fact the same guarantee that you have for speech also enshrines free assembly.

So everyone who disagrees with your bullshit is free to ignore you and convince others to ignore you. They're also free to boot you off or out of their property.


Important distinction: the government is allowed to do violence to people legally (during law enforcement). Private people generally are not.

This means that if you have free speech, you can't immediately suffer legal violence for saying things.

You may, of course, suffer other things, but it won't be legal violence.


Yeah, I don't know how America can be considered a so-called "free country" when the people living there will get angry at me for using slurs and being generally discriminative. I'm sure it's just a matter of time until they create some kind of unethical legal punishment too, as they did with expressions of anger (assault, murder, etc.).


I hope you forgot the /s.


Tiananmen Square protests were not separatist, either.


[flagged]


The growing unrest amongst students, people and the political elite was caused by divisions within the party.

Deng Xiaoping believed in the need of absolute authority.

The death of general secretary Hu Yaobang (a reformist) fueled anxieties about the future of the country.

Foreign-backed regime change??


Deng was actually in the middle between the hardliners and reformists, from accounts I've read. He wasn't officially head of the party anymore, and there was stalemate for a few days about how to handle the protests before Deng finally weighed in with 'enough is enough'.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: