Comment by pron | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pron | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

1. No one wants a white holocaust.

2. You may find some communist emblems personally hurtful for ideological and historical reasons, but when people talk about hurtful/offense speech/symbols, they're not talking about personal, subjective offense, but about objective harm. For example, suppose I'm a respected professor, and in one of my packed lectures I tell everyone I know you to be a total idiot. Even though you may not have been in the room or even heard about my statement and so never took personal offense, actual harm has been done to you because your dignity has been diminished in the eyes of those who were in the room, as well as others they may have told what happened to. Now, a swastika or other white-supremacist emblems are similarly degrading[1], but communist ones are not[2], regardless of whatever crimes have been done by communists or how strongly you personally object to communist ideology. For example, few crimes have been nearly as horrendous and catastrophic as the genocides performed under the Spanish flag (or previous, but similar versions thereof), but while some may find the Spanish flag personally objectionable for those reasons or others (say, the Spanish treatment of Catalonia), no one would claim that the flag when presented today dehumanizes anyone or is objectively harmful and so should be banned; on the other hand, presenting the Confederacy flag today (in circumstances that are not for historical discourse) is objectively dehumanizing and harmful.

[1]: As the dehumanization of others is part of their core ideology.

[2]: As the dehumanization of others is not part of the ideology (despite its condemnation of certain practices).

Would you say the same about swastika/nazi flag? My family was a victim of a communist regime, it's incredibly stupid to use those symbols. You can never compare that to Catalonia and Spain, this comparison is absurd.

Spain has caused far more death and harm than communism, and yet no one sees that flag as dehumanizing, because death and harm are not currently the values that flag represent. Similarly, while communism has caused death and harm, they were never the cause of that movement or the values its symbols represent. They are, however, exactly what Nazi flags represent.

This is a horrible discussion to witness on HackerNews.

Every extreme ideology dehumanises those who do not conform to the ideology. Countless people were dehumanised in Stalinist Russia or Pol Pot's Cambodia, because that was seen as necessary for the ideology to be implemented. To claim it was not the primary motive is to make a distinction that has no difference in outcome.

Debates over whether totalitarian ideologies of the left are nicer than totalitarian ideologies of the right have no place here.

Please give it a rest.

The debate is not over totalitarian regimes but over symbols, flags and emblems. If you don't understand the difference between what the communist flag and the Nazi flag represent, you may find it hard to understand why Nazi symbols are banned or restricted in various countries [1], while communist/socialist flags are waved with pride to this day, not only in many Western democracies but even in Russia [2]. In my country (Israel, where over 10% of the population is comprised of people who fled Soviet oppression), communism/socialism has been practiced (although not on a national level) for over 100 years in a democratic way, and on May 1st, kids in leftist youth movements carry red flags and sing the Internationale.

Communist symbols (like, say, the Spanish flag), despite having been adopted by some of the most horrific and oppressive regimes, do not represent oppression or dehumanization, and they have also served as the flags of peaceful, democratic parties and organizations. The same is true for capitalist symbols, which, despite genocidal regimes (e.g. Belgium) are not recognized as hate symbols. Nazi symbols, however, are qualitatively different.

BTW, to the best of my knowledge, even the professor in question is not posting pictures of Stalin or the Khmer Rouge flag.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E2%80%93World_War_II_lega...

[2]: Here you can find a map of countries with at least one political party that's a member of the Socialist International, where communist/socialist symbols/emblems/flags are celebrated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_International

Of course I'm aware of the purportedly benign displays of symbolism by social democratic organisations, and I don't have strong objections to those.

But I'm also well aware of the violent instincts of some people on the far left (including people I know personally), who invoke the supposedly well-intentioned philosophies and symbols of communism to legitimise dark fantasies about violent attacks on others based on their race or class. I don't know much about the professor under discussion here, but from what I can see he doesn't seem to be doing much to distance himself from such conduct, and shows some signs of revelling in it.

As someone who was raised on strong social democratic values, I now often find myself shocked at how much identity-based bigotry and rhetorical violence is tolerated or endorsed by people who claim to be of the left and who claim to stand against bigotry and violence.

But most importantly, I really can't tell you how much I hate to be having this discussion on HackerNews. It is simply not what this site is for, and as a prominent member of this community, I really wish you would think better than to engage in this kind of campaigning here.

It does nothing but make this place less pleasant and less interesting.

That's all from me.

So much on this site is political -- as is much of what is produced by the tech community -- and this discussion, which I did not initiate, is an example. Unfortunately, much of the extremely political debates on this site and in tech in general is done under a veneer of the avoidance of politics. Politics, which is the process by which power (influence) and resources in society are distributed is something that cannot generally be avoided, when the topics discussed are those that appear so frequently on this site. The only difference between politics done under the cover of the apolitical and an overt political discussion, is that the former tends to be a particularly bad and harmful form of politics (as the actual topic of discussion, the distribution of power and resources, namely politics becomes implicit and hidden). As this site is already extremely political -- it is certainly the most political among technical forums for tech professionals -- the least I can do is make the pervasive politics overt. People who frequent this site (as opposed to say, /r/programming) are already exposed to hefty dose of politics, and those who dislike politics probably do not visit HN, and if they do, they avoid items such as this one.

As to the rest of your comment, I don't see what the behavior of some has to do with the meaning of symbols. There are plenty of horrible Americans, including American leaders, who use patriotism and Americanism as a justification for terrible actions. That doesn't mean that Twitter should designate the American flag a hate symbol. Communist symbols fall in the same category, while Nazi symbols do not.

You are just cherry picking, leave your communist symbols home.

No, I don't think I'm cherry-picking when it comes to what communist and Nazi symbols represent. Any comparison between the two is simply unaware of their respective roles. True, both have been adopted by oppressive, murderous regimes, but communist symbols have mainly represented -- to this day -- the idea of worker solidarity, and have been used by hundreds of democratic parties throughout the world. This is not true for Nazi symbols.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com