3 ms·

Like any elected leader who want to serve their country. Not defending Erdogan here. Just being wary when people advocate for the removal of an authoritarian l

by jokoon 10y ago

Like any elected leader who want to serve their country. Not defending Erdogan here. Just being wary when people advocate for the removal of an authoritarian leader (Saddam, Assad...). It's easy to talk about free speech technologies when we enjoy the comfort we have. It's harder to look at history and try to have a conversation.

ThomPete 10y ago
I don't understand what you mean. The original comment was that it's ironic that Ergodan who is against social media (and thus block as much as he can) was using the very social media to stop the attempt. How does that turn into "it's easy to talk about free speech technologies..." ?
- jokoon 10y ago
  I'm kinda tired of constantly reading about free speech and its virtues, and how people who don't have that culture are somehow backward. I know free speech is a good thing, but when you venture in the middle east, free speech doesn't matter because there is much less public order. Politicians know that people don't have this culture of free speech and must act accordingly. Outside of the US, people don't consider using something as a political statement or general endorsement. For example there are many politicians who are against europe in general. They still hold a seat at the parliament, because they can. When poor people in africa use cellphones, should they change their opinion about the country it came from ? What bothers me is the whole "you used a technology you were against and it helped you". Sure, it is contradictory, but when the stakes are high like in a coup, politicians have to forget their stance a little. It's another domain of scenario. History in politics is full of contradictions, so what bothered me is that easy sniping remark about social media while there's a freaking coup attempt. I don't think people care so much about a neat social media application while a parliament is being bombed. Those techs devices and infrastructure were paid for, everyone use them. The tech is not from there, so of course a politician won't really approve of it. The general tone that bothers me is that when tech people read the news and they only read the tech part, not the rest.
  - ThomPete 10y ago
    Then don't read it. Thats the freedom you have contrary to those living in Turkey who don't even get to read about it.
    - jokoon 10y ago
      That good sweet freedom. Are you telling me to just unread it ? Sure I could ignore it, but I'm free to not ignore it and to answer. > contrary to those living in Turkey who don't even get to read about it. There are worse examples than turkey. Pointing out that every problem there are in the world are caused by a lack of freedom is easy. Freedom is more a progress of culture than anything else. I don't think it would solve Turkey's problems in a day to just have access to hacker news and the whole internet. Don't forget about propaganda machines and misinformation. Granted that in ideal, I'm not right, but foreign politics are not your average rubik's cube. It's not the first time the US will be criticized for pretending that freedom is the solution for all of the ills in the world.

by jokoon 10y ago

ThomPete 10y ago

I don't understand what you mean. The original comment was that it's ironic that Ergodan who is against social media (and thus block as much as he can) was using the very social media to stop the attempt. How does that turn into "it's easy to talk about free speech technologies..." ?

jokoon 10y ago
I'm kinda tired of constantly reading about free speech and its virtues, and how people who don't have that culture are somehow backward. I know free speech is a good thing, but when you venture in the middle east, free speech doesn't matter because there is much less public order. Politicians know that people don't have this culture of free speech and must act accordingly. Outside of the US, people don't consider using something as a political statement or general endorsement. For example there are many politicians who are against europe in general. They still hold a seat at the parliament, because they can. When poor people in africa use cellphones, should they change their opinion about the country it came from ? What bothers me is the whole "you used a technology you were against and it helped you". Sure, it is contradictory, but when the stakes are high like in a coup, politicians have to forget their stance a little. It's another domain of scenario. History in politics is full of contradictions, so what bothered me is that easy sniping remark about social media while there's a freaking coup attempt. I don't think people care so much about a neat social media application while a parliament is being bombed. Those techs devices and infrastructure were paid for, everyone use them. The tech is not from there, so of course a politician won't really approve of it. The general tone that bothers me is that when tech people read the news and they only read the tech part, not the rest.
- ThomPete 10y ago
  Then don't read it. Thats the freedom you have contrary to those living in Turkey who don't even get to read about it.
  - jokoon 10y ago
    That good sweet freedom. Are you telling me to just unread it ? Sure I could ignore it, but I'm free to not ignore it and to answer. > contrary to those living in Turkey who don't even get to read about it. There are worse examples than turkey. Pointing out that every problem there are in the world are caused by a lack of freedom is easy. Freedom is more a progress of culture than anything else. I don't think it would solve Turkey's problems in a day to just have access to hacker news and the whole internet. Don't forget about propaganda machines and misinformation. Granted that in ideal, I'm not right, but foreign politics are not your average rubik's cube. It's not the first time the US will be criticized for pretending that freedom is the solution for all of the ills in the world.