3 ms·

I actually subjected myself the the entire 30 minute video of his speech and there’s little else I can say other than that it was embarrassing, bordering on dis

by ixtli 7y ago

I actually subjected myself the the entire 30 minute video of his speech and there’s little else I can say other than that it was embarrassing, bordering on disgusting in its western chauvinism. And I don’t just mean castigation of Chinese government policy: he quite literally said it’s in the worlds best interest for Americans to continue controlling the censorship policies for the entire internet.

PunchTornado 7y ago
1) the GDPR is European and has a huge effect in changing policies for internet giants 2) are you defending the government currently imprisoning millions of people in indoctrination camps just because they believe in something?
- ixtli 7y ago
  1) and that’s a great thing. watch the video and you’ll see it begins with the claim that “no one wants to live in a world where tech companies control what you can say” and ends with “but we should keep doing exactly what we’re doing”. GDPR would never pass here partially because interests like Zuck’s don’t want it to. 2) quite explicitly I am NOT saying that. What I’m saying is that neither the government that disappears protestors NOR the government running concentration camps in the open NOR the government outright banning climate protests should be deciding what qualifies as dangerous to say. EDIT on 2) just because I’m critical of the claim that the west and America specifically has any moral high ground here doesn’t mean in any way that I condone human rights violations by China. I think that’s an unreasonable implication.
- bambax 7y ago
  The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, so they're not in a position to lecture any other country about freedom.
  - dimator 7y ago
    This is what-about-ism and it's dishonest. The US's incarceration rate has little to do with concentration camps where people are put because they're a ethnicity the government doesn't like. They can both be problems worth pointing out.
    - ixtli 7y ago
      I actually can't tell if you're talking about China or the US. This is currently happening on the US' southern border.
      - DuskStar 7y ago
        Pretty sure people aren't put there for their racial or religious characteristics, but their nationality and/or legal status. Yes, there's a difference.
        ixtli 7y ago
        We are, at best, making the same leap of faith but in opposite directions. The people who are there observably share a nationality but they also happen to be a pretty small group of ethnicities. You’re choosing to believe that’s not ultimately why they’ve been out there and that the state is trustworthy. I’m choosing to disbelieve the state. In any case, if were gonna both accept the premise that there are concentration camps on the southern border for immigrants I’m really not that interested in splitting hairs about why.

by ixtli 7y ago

PunchTornado 7y ago

1) the GDPR is European and has a huge effect in changing policies for internet giants 2) are you defending the government currently imprisoning millions of people in indoctrination camps just because they believe in something?

ixtli 7y ago
1) and that’s a great thing. watch the video and you’ll see it begins with the claim that “no one wants to live in a world where tech companies control what you can say” and ends with “but we should keep doing exactly what we’re doing”. GDPR would never pass here partially because interests like Zuck’s don’t want it to. 2) quite explicitly I am NOT saying that. What I’m saying is that neither the government that disappears protestors NOR the government running concentration camps in the open NOR the government outright banning climate protests should be deciding what qualifies as dangerous to say. EDIT on 2) just because I’m critical of the claim that the west and America specifically has any moral high ground here doesn’t mean in any way that I condone human rights violations by China. I think that’s an unreasonable implication.
bambax 7y ago
The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, so they're not in a position to lecture any other country about freedom.
- dimator 7y ago
  This is what-about-ism and it's dishonest. The US's incarceration rate has little to do with concentration camps where people are put because they're a ethnicity the government doesn't like. They can both be problems worth pointing out.
  - ixtli 7y ago
    I actually can't tell if you're talking about China or the US. This is currently happening on the US' southern border.
    - DuskStar 7y ago
      Pretty sure people aren't put there for their racial or religious characteristics, but their nationality and/or legal status. Yes, there's a difference.
      - ixtli 7y ago
        We are, at best, making the same leap of faith but in opposite directions. The people who are there observably share a nationality but they also happen to be a pretty small group of ethnicities. You’re choosing to believe that’s not ultimately why they’ve been out there and that the state is trustworthy. I’m choosing to disbelieve the state. In any case, if were gonna both accept the premise that there are concentration camps on the southern border for immigrants I’m really not that interested in splitting hairs about why.