Comment by ncclporterror | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ncclporterror | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> And of course quite a few countries still using English because they were formerly colonized/oppressed/etc. (take your pick) and might have a thing or two to say about having to deal with the British flag.

What about the fact that their language would be listed as "English", therefore reminding them it originated in England? Is listing the language as "English" significantly different from listing it as "<UK flag> English"? Should we rename the language to "Irish" ? Then what about the inhabitants of Ireland who don't identify as Irish?

You can always take the most offensive interpretation "This flag is claiming that Irish people are English, therefore contribute to historical oppression, etc".

But you can also take a more natural and charitable interpretation, which is that most people associate the UK flag to English, and the flag is therefore a convenient visual indication.

> it's complicated for English and it doesn't really get any better for other languages.

I agree, there is complexity and arbitrariness in any "language -> flag" mapping. I am arguing that you can make practical decisions even in the presence of complexity.

> Telling people to grow a tougher skin isn't particularly user friendly or that helpful.

Arguing you can't do something because someone will be offended is also not very helpful: you can almost always find some offensive interpretation of anything.

> Arguing you can't do something because someone will be offended is also not very helpful: you can almost always find some offensive interpretation of anything

You mentioned the sorites paradox earlier. Do you think it could be applied here as well?

> you can almost always find some offensive interpretation of anything.

This is the "perfect is the enemy of good" fallacy. We may not be able to find something that is not offensive to anyone in the world, but we can pick a convention that doesn't actively force hundreds of millions of people to identify themselves with colonial powers that committed genocide against their ancestors.

If this sounds hyperbolic to you, I strongly recommend reading up on the history of English treatment of the Irish over the centuries. Then follow that by learning more about African colonization. This isn't just a matter of growing thicker skin, the intergenerational trauma these people feel is very very real.

What’s reasonable for some is hyperbolic for others. So it feels like emotional abuse / bullying; or at least as a real world example of a utility monster: Someone gets so much harm from a little inconvenience that all people are supposed to bow down to them.

As I said:

> I strongly recommend reading up on the history of English treatment of the Irish over the centuries. Then follow that by learning more about African colonization.

We're not talking about some your-grandpa-defrauded-my-grandpa historical slight, we're talking about genocide systematically executed under the authority of that flag. The emotions experienced by these people are in the same category as those experienced by Jews when they see a swastika. If you don't see how that's a bigger deal than you're making it sound then I don't know how to help you.

If you don’t see why censoring a British flag that represents a language literally called _English_ seems entirely pointless and laughable to some people then I don’t know how to help you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com