←back to thread

The Big [Censored] Theory

(pudding.cool)
1444 points feross | 1 comments | 29 Aug 22 17:34 UTC | HN request time: 0.235s | source
Show context
aero-glide2 ◴[29 Aug 22 18:32 UTC] 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 ◴[29 Aug 22 18:40 UTC] 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 ◴[29 Aug 22 18:49 UTC] 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 ◴[29 Aug 22 19:48 UTC] 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. fallingfrog ◴[30 Aug 22 00:25 UTC] No.32645268[source]▶
It’s certainly an interesting philosophical problem, finding the balance between the individual and the society. My take on it is this: decisions should be made by the people who those decisions affect. In the case of censorship I agree with you completely- my watching a slasher flick does not give you nightmares. If I were playing devils advocate I might say that it corrodes the national character or something like that- but that to me is a very weak argument.