Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by remotecool | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

remotecool

They are only investigating this company because they don't like the government cracking down on protestors in HK.

Tear gas is better than bullets.

View on HN

Journalists investigating current events? Huh.

Next you’ll be telling me scientists only investigate results of experiments!

Police only investigate results of crimes!

What’s next? Washing laundry after it’s dirty?

Where will it end!!

Bullets are better than hauling everyone off to secret prisons where they are tortured to death over months. So I guess bullets are cool!

No tear gas is best.

The best is not to use and provoke violence at all.

What should people do if they form a consensus that they are being oppressed and asking politely fails to yield the desired result?

They should grow first as much as possible before considering to fight with much bigger enemy so that the winner would be unknown. To do so they should define a problem as time-space independent one. It is global problem here that we still haven’t developed tools to force countries to comply with their own laws to stop violence. We need worldwide consensus here what everyone should do in this case before he hits the same problem.

Is your argument that the solution to violence is no violence? I believe that assertion is self evidently useless and harmful to the discussion. We would do a lot better to try and raise the tenor of the conversation by discussing interesting viewpoints, not asserting that the solution to something is to simply stop doing it

My answer to violence is to be smarter. It is global problem here that we still haven’t developed tools to force countries to comply with their own laws to stop violence. We need worldwide consensus here what everyone should do in this case before he hits the same problem.

These blanket statements about “violence” are mostly devoid of meaning. What are we defining as violence in this context such that someone could be “smarter” to avoid it? Is the suggestion that someone getting assaulted should be “smarter” to solve their problem? What about protesters that are being attacked by the police? What about a country that is being invaded? I don’t understand how intelligence can fix “violence” or what “violence” even is in this context.

Moreover, asserting that we need “world wide consensus” strikes me as an incredibly naïve point. Is there anything that everyone agrees on? Are we stuck with violence until everyone agrees? Grand statements about getting along don’t seem to chip away at the problem at all. In fact, I would assert that they are fiercely counterproductive; one can say we all need to get along and until then we have no culpability.

What I mean is to fight back with your brain but not with your body. Someone getting assaulted should be “smarter” to not fight back physically with much bigger opponent. You should look how Edward Snowden or Julian Assange fight back.

“world wide consensus” means to create big enough entity who is ready to act when law is violated anywhere in the world so that its actions can hurt violator. Imagine the world where open-source is replaced by such entity.

How does one get from these

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d10k4e/dont_let_t...

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/cv9y4c/protesters...

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d0iqpy/2000_medic...

to these

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/cutlyk/who_is_mor...

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d0re3y/police_doi...

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/cxz64b/300_uncut_...

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d0yl4g/police_dep...

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d10ewo/8_seconds_...

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/cp0gb2/hk_police_...

https://www.reddit.com/r/China/comments/c04o32/french_journa...

? Now consider that's just the tip of the iceberg, the result of a few minutes of searching and scrolling. I know there's instances of protesters being violent, but it's

a.) not possible for 30% of a city to be on the streets at the same time, without even more supporting them, and it's not possible for all these brave, peaceful, beautiful people to be singing songs like they do, for a protest that's just instigated by a bunch of hooligans or Western intelligence agencies, or however the attempts to smear them go.

b.) not possible to explain most of the police brutality by any action on behalf of the protesters. Which some police apparently call "cockroaches", instances of that being caught on video, too.

Violence is justified when you are under an oppressive government. See american revolution and similar violent uprisings. That's the reality. The whole non-violent activism only works when your government isn't oppressive and can actually be reformed through non-violent movements.

I agree violence is justified when someone violates rules. China did violate ‘Article 5 of the Basic Law’ before 2047. So it is global problem that we still haven’t developed tools to force countries to comply with their own laws to stop violence. Or is USA trade war kind of punishment for China?

HKPF throwing tear gas at journalists with no protesters even around:

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/d1b4kg/hong_kong_...

Yeah, leave the labour extorting weapons manufacturer alone, guys!

The workers are paid over minimum wage.

Working conditions might suck, but why is this any different than any small company with poor working conditions?

Workers of the world unite!

Seize the means of production!

The only thing the working classes have to lose are their shackles.

You can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you.

> why is this any different than any small company with poor working conditions?

Because what they manufacture is a weapon that's being exported and used against civilian protesters?

Couldn’t the HK police buy it from somewhere else? Or domestically produce?

If so, that doesn't excuse American citizens profiting off the suppression of civilians in other countries.

> If so, that doesn't excuse American citizens profiting off the suppression of civilians in other countries.

If the product can be trivially sourced elsewhere, what's the point? Do you believe it might hurt their image and sales elsewhere? Or is this just a moral line you hold dear?

What does this change? "Someone else would do it anyway" has never been a valid excuse for doing shitty things.

Yes, but every little thing that increases their costs in time or money slightly reduces their symmetrical advantage.

Yes? That's how news works, finding a local angle on a foreign story?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com