3 ms·

Stated with a western perspective here, but I wouldn't be surprised if anybody who lived under an oppressive regime would openly admit they fear it, for fear of

Stated with a western perspective here, but I wouldn't be surprised if anybody who lived under an oppressive regime would openly admit they fear it, for fear of the repercussion. Can you meaningfully distinguish those who genuinely don't feel any fear (because they're bold, or ignorant, or possibly both), and those who superficially state they don't fear their government?

ineedasername 7y ago
A U.S. citizen that migrated from China has very little reason to self-censor or dissemble on this topic. After encountering this beguiling attitude in conversations with others, I sought out such a person, an acquaintance who was a Professor of linguistics, who became a U.S. citizen decades earlier and still had close contact. He confirmed it all. This topic has also been a minor obsession for me, and the reading I've done further confirms it. Even when the people might be aware of something their government has done, they feel protected, that the government is acting in their best interests. And that awareness of incidents is rare. I showed a video of Tianmen Square to a Chinese student I knew. Not only hadn't they known about the incident, but their response was, "oh, those people (protestors) shouldn't have been doing that."
- ineedasername 7y ago
  I think HN would be a more productive environment if downvoting required a responding comment to address the disagreement. In this case, I provide detailed personal experience with individuals that confirm the points I'm making, and it's downvoted. Certainly improper, unproductive, snarky, flame-ish comments are often downvoted, but all too often I see comments downvoted that are simply making reasonable points that someone finds convenient to ignore and downvoted rather than engage in meaningful discussion. I would implorer readers to always downvote and respond when they disagree, and only blindly downvote when the content is in some way counter to the community guidelines. And heck, even then a brief explanation would sometimes be useful to help the commenter understand where they went wrong.

ineedasername 7y ago

A U.S. citizen that migrated from China has very little reason to self-censor or dissemble on this topic. After encountering this beguiling attitude in conversations with others, I sought out such a person, an acquaintance who was a Professor of linguistics, who became a U.S. citizen decades earlier and still had close contact. He confirmed it all. This topic has also been a minor obsession for me, and the reading I've done further confirms it. Even when the people might be aware of something their government has done, they feel protected, that the government is acting in their best interests. And that awareness of incidents is rare. I showed a video of Tianmen Square to a Chinese student I knew. Not only hadn't they known about the incident, but their response was, "oh, those people (protestors) shouldn't have been doing that."

ineedasername 7y ago
I think HN would be a more productive environment if downvoting required a responding comment to address the disagreement. In this case, I provide detailed personal experience with individuals that confirm the points I'm making, and it's downvoted. Certainly improper, unproductive, snarky, flame-ish comments are often downvoted, but all too often I see comments downvoted that are simply making reasonable points that someone finds convenient to ignore and downvoted rather than engage in meaningful discussion. I would implorer readers to always downvote and respond when they disagree, and only blindly downvote when the content is in some way counter to the community guidelines. And heck, even then a brief explanation would sometimes be useful to help the commenter understand where they went wrong.