4 ms·

[flagged]

by tomp 5y ago

[flagged]

whimsicalism 5y ago
I disagree if the sterilization is applied even-handedly as an application of their two-child law. I am skeptical that a lineage is being exterminated if, at minimum, they can have replacement level number of births. The Uyghur population is growing faster than the Han population is. But backing up a bit - really what I'm taking issue with is the word "genocide." We can call horrendous, human rights violating policies for what they are without having to fall back on calling something a "genocide." Not everyone who disagrees with you is PRC funded. I would encourage you to look over the HN guidelines as you seem to have forgotten some of them. [0] [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- lumost 5y ago
  > The Uyghur population is growing faster than the Han population is. This seems to be the crux of your argument justifying the PRCs sterilization policy. As others have noted forced sterilization is a crime against humanity regardless of reason. Justification of forced sterilization based on a believed “correct” ethnic ratio is abhorrent.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    [flagged]
    - abduhl 5y ago
      You’re advocating for a position on China’s 2 child policy that, in America, would most certainly would be deemed unconstitutional under a disparate impact framework. I know we’re talking about China here, but most Western countries have recognized that you can target a subgroup without saying you’re targeting a subgroup. You’re basically arguing that the Holocaust would not be a genocide as long as Germany was universally applying its no [insert Jewish characteristic] policy. Just to underscore my point here, almost every aspect of your viewpoint on the genocide China is committing is abhorrent and untenable if you believe in human rights.
      - whimsicalism 5y ago
        So you are saying that having lots of children is intrinsic to being Uyghur? It's a Uyghur "characteristic"? The US law around this issue is in flux, see for instance [0], where policies that were neutrally applied but impacted people a specific religion were ruled constitutional. This specific case was later rendered moot by congressional action. Regardless, is the claim that China is conducting a genocide, or that its actions would be in violation of the Civil Rights Act if it were a US state? Are we enforcing the Civil Rights Act globally now? [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith
        abduhl 5y ago
        US common law like disparate impact is always in flux - it’s common law. The minutiae of disparate impact edge cases is irrelevant under your argument where the universal application of the 2 child policy somehow requires China to round up, sequester in internment camps, and ultimately sterilize a particular group. I won’t bother replying to the rest of your post about religious beliefs and children because it’s an attempt to derail the conversation by focusing on details that are relevant only to the particular framing you’re advancing.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- throwawayay02 5y ago
  Do you have anything against the Uyghur population growing faster and replacing the Han?
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    No, I think such concerns are stupid. I also don't think the Uyghurs are "replacing the Han." But I do find it interesting that China is apparently conducting the first genocide in history where the population being genocided is increasing rather than decreasing.
dang 5y ago
> Are you a PRC-funded troll or misinformation spreader? You can't post like this to HN, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. If you have evidence of abuse, you should send it to us at hn@ycombinator.com so we can look into it. If you don't, you should remember that the vast majority of these perceptions on the internet are completely imaginary. Either way, you should be editing such swipes out of your comments here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Plenty of past explanation at these links: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26652363 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26652363 (<-- Mini-FAQ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26637365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26637365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27397695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27397695
- tomp 5y ago
  Sorry. I said it partially tongue-in-cheek. What would be an appropriate response to someone who's posted several comments to the same top-level post, all of which are grossly misleading and/or complete strawmen? Obviously I don't have evidence of "abuse" (is this even abuse? obviously people can be trolls without being big-co/gov funded) but I'd like to point out the above fact to other commenters who might not have noticed it otherwise.
  - dang 5y ago
    In terms of posting to HN itself, an appropriate response would be to refute bad arguments with better arguments and/or incorrect information with correct information—or alternatively, to remember that to a first approximation, everyone is wrong on the internet, and just let it go. You don't need to do more than that for other commenters; they can take care of themselves. If an account is behaving badly, such as by repeatedly breaking the site guidelines, sending a heads-up to hn@ycombinator.com so we can look into it is also an appropriate response.

[flagged]

by tomp 5y ago

[flagged]

I disagree if the sterilization is applied even-handedly as an application of their two-child law. I am skeptical that a lineage is being exterminated if, at minimum, they can have replacement level number of births. The Uyghur population is growing faster than the Han population is. But backing up a bit - really what I'm taking issue with is the word "genocide." We can call horrendous, human rights violating policies for what they are without having to fall back on calling something a "genocide." Not everyone who disagrees with you is PRC funded. I would encourage you to look over the HN guidelines as you seem to have forgotten some of them. [0] [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

lumost 5y ago
> The Uyghur population is growing faster than the Han population is. This seems to be the crux of your argument justifying the PRCs sterilization policy. As others have noted forced sterilization is a crime against humanity regardless of reason. Justification of forced sterilization based on a believed “correct” ethnic ratio is abhorrent.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  [flagged]
  - abduhl 5y ago
    You’re advocating for a position on China’s 2 child policy that, in America, would most certainly would be deemed unconstitutional under a disparate impact framework. I know we’re talking about China here, but most Western countries have recognized that you can target a subgroup without saying you’re targeting a subgroup. You’re basically arguing that the Holocaust would not be a genocide as long as Germany was universally applying its no [insert Jewish characteristic] policy. Just to underscore my point here, almost every aspect of your viewpoint on the genocide China is committing is abhorrent and untenable if you believe in human rights.
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      So you are saying that having lots of children is intrinsic to being Uyghur? It's a Uyghur "characteristic"? The US law around this issue is in flux, see for instance [0], where policies that were neutrally applied but impacted people a specific religion were ruled constitutional. This specific case was later rendered moot by congressional action. Regardless, is the claim that China is conducting a genocide, or that its actions would be in violation of the Civil Rights Act if it were a US state? Are we enforcing the Civil Rights Act globally now? [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith
      - abduhl 5y ago
        US common law like disparate impact is always in flux - it’s common law. The minutiae of disparate impact edge cases is irrelevant under your argument where the universal application of the 2 child policy somehow requires China to round up, sequester in internment camps, and ultimately sterilize a particular group. I won’t bother replying to the rest of your post about religious beliefs and children because it’s an attempt to derail the conversation by focusing on details that are relevant only to the particular framing you’re advancing.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
throwawayay02 5y ago
Do you have anything against the Uyghur population growing faster and replacing the Han?
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  No, I think such concerns are stupid. I also don't think the Uyghurs are "replacing the Han." But I do find it interesting that China is apparently conducting the first genocide in history where the population being genocided is increasing rather than decreasing.

dang 5y ago

> Are you a PRC-funded troll or misinformation spreader? You can't post like this to HN, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. If you have evidence of abuse, you should send it to us at hn@ycombinator.com so we can look into it. If you don't, you should remember that the vast majority of these perceptions on the internet are completely imaginary. Either way, you should be editing such swipes out of your comments here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Plenty of past explanation at these links: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=true&page=0&query=by:dang%20astroturf https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27398725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26652363 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26652363 (<-- Mini-FAQ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26637365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26637365 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27397695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27397695

tomp 5y ago
Sorry. I said it partially tongue-in-cheek. What would be an appropriate response to someone who's posted several comments to the same top-level post, all of which are grossly misleading and/or complete strawmen? Obviously I don't have evidence of "abuse" (is this even abuse? obviously people can be trolls without being big-co/gov funded) but I'd like to point out the above fact to other commenters who might not have noticed it otherwise.
- dang 5y ago
  In terms of posting to HN itself, an appropriate response would be to refute bad arguments with better arguments and/or incorrect information with correct information—or alternatively, to remember that to a first approximation, everyone is wrong on the internet, and just let it go. You don't need to do more than that for other commenters; they can take care of themselves. If an account is behaving badly, such as by repeatedly breaking the site guidelines, sending a heads-up to hn@ycombinator.com so we can look into it is also an appropriate response.