Hacker News Reader

Oh come on now - don't pretend that comment was some neutral statement of fact. It was a clear implication of moral failure in your opponent's argument. And it's not really persuasive to then double down on a false dilemma (is my out-group evil, or just stupid?).

Think of it as a scissor statement.

Either it's the most mild, milquetoast statement possible or it's a declaration of war against Human Rights, Mom and Apple Pie.

I said "can", not "you always do". That said, context matters, and in the wrong context, a terse factual statement will be taken by almost everyone at anything but face value.

It is probably due that that phrase could be considered a negative commentary on CCP's take on human rights.

I've noticed that anything indicating a negative regarding China is squashed hard anymore on HN.