←back to thread

560 points whatsupdog | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.447s | source
Show context
netsharc ◴[] No.45167080[source]
So where's the donkey and where's the cart.

It reads like: citizens have been protesting the government using social media, government desperate to curb dissent bans social media, dissent is now on the streets..

Or maybe it's as straightforward as the media has been reporting.

replies(3): >>45167140 #>>45167146 #>>45167160 #
MangoToupe ◴[] No.45167146[source]
It also seems reasonable that companies have to follow local laws to operate there. Corporations superseding states seems just as dystopian as state repression of dissent. Granted, there is either confusion or misrepresentation as Mastodon is also banned.

The reporting seems pretty meagre; even strictly with these events, how are so many dying from batons and rubber bullets? Sure these can kill, but fourteen people?

replies(3): >>45167498 #>>45167607 #>>45171050 #
1. nirava ◴[] No.45167607[source]
- Local law meant to censor heavily any dissent - several pro corruption measures passed in the last few years - the people have been angry for long - social media just meant people now have to come on the streets

lazily pasting one of my comments from yesterday

"So after sacking the wildly (and deservingly) popular Chairman of the National Electricity Authority, after allowing ministers to set arbitrary and uncapped salaries for themselves and their workers, after obstructing and undermining the wildly (and deservingly) popular mayor of the Capital, and after doing like 15 of these really major, objectively anti-nation things, and getting called out for it in Social Media by the commoners, the 73 year old Prime Minister (in many ways a Trump-like figure; immune to shame or criticism) moves to ban social media in the country. "