3 ms·

I would argue that stifling debate with black and white thinking is more responsible for allowing tyrants to thrive.

• thinkingemote 5y ago
  The grandparent of this sub-thread was talking about "cheering for one side". That is a far far long way from "stifling debate". I agree with your sentiments totally but no debate is being stifled. HN on the whole is supporting the side that the vast vast majority of the world is siding with. There are good reasons to in most people's minds. Supporting one side and allowing others to disagree is compatible with no censorship. We are seeing, however, that Russia is doing what China is doing and enacting stronger censorship. Is that a positive sign or not? I would say that it is a sign of a repressive regime. A discussion is also different from a debate. Its an important difference in how you approach conversations online.
  • mohanmcgeek 5y ago
    Answering "why are you cheering for one side?" With "cuz the other side is evil" is stifling debate. But this is geopolitics we're talking about: There isn't a good side and an evil side.
    • Thorrez 5y ago
      I'm sure Ukraine has done some bad things. But Russian invading is worse than anything Ukraine did, so most people on HN are mad at Russia. >But this is geopolitics we're talking about: There isn't a good side and an evil side. Are you stating that as an absolute fact? There's never been an evil side in global geopolitics? Is it possible for there to be an evil side in geopolitics in the future?