←back to thread

1444 points feross | 1 comments | | HN request time: 2.109s | source
Show context
aero-glide2 ◴[] No.32641737[source]
I don't really agree with this, but consider this argument : Is it really a bad thing if different countries have different understanding of what's allowed/not allowed? If the whole world had the same system of governance, that could be dangerous too.
replies(8): >>32641842 #>>32641873 #>>32642266 #>>32644802 #>>32644850 #>>32644973 #>>32645126 #>>32651119 #
S201 ◴[] No.32641842[source]
Because the people of China didn't choose this: their oppressive and authoritarian government did it for them.
replies(5): >>32641944 #>>32641964 #>>32643829 #>>32644009 #>>32647367 #
darawk ◴[] No.32641964[source]
This is right. If people vote for censorship in a democracy, that's a perfectly fine form of governmental heterogeneity. What's happening in China is not that.
replies(6): >>32642181 #>>32642677 #>>32642839 #>>32643454 #>>32645266 #>>32647554 #
welshwelsh ◴[] No.32642677[source]
I completely disagree.

An individual's rights should have nothing to do with the people who happen to surround them and what they happen to think.

If different countries allow different things, that would mean that what a person is allowed to do would depend on where they happen to live, which is usually close to where they happened to be born. That doesn't make any sense to me- the lottery of birth should have no impact on one's rights.

replies(4): >>32642890 #>>32643369 #>>32645268 #>>32646268 #
1. micromacrofoot ◴[] No.32642890[source]
Despite the ideology that it shouldn’t matter, the lottery of birth is probably the single largest factor on someone’s life trajectory today - changing that is incredibly difficult and would likely require the dissolution of many countries