Something that always gets me, in my own thinking, is where the line is between “as a people they don’t want to be contacted” and “the individuals who live there don’t want to be contacted”.
Obviously we owe some respect/boundaries to a foreign society in its collective.
But when other societies are committing genocide we don’t (or shouldn’t) simply ask that country’s representatives whether it’s okay for us to stop them.
Then China must feel real threatened. According to this, it’s against the law in China to even say you don’t agree with the law.
“A citizen, when exercising the right of freedom of the press, shall abide by the Constitution and the law, and shall not oppose the basic principles established by the Constitution or damage the interests of the State, the society or the collective, or the lawful freedom and rights of other citizens.”
A million Uyghurs, whose only apparent crime is being Muslim, have been sent to labor camps and undergone forced sterilization.
Tiananmen Square started out as people peacefully protesting government corruption, and ended in the state murdering them.
With respect to free speech, there’s not even a comparison there with respect to America. It’s not “potato potato”.
…says the guy on Lemmy criticizing the U.S. government and not getting thrown in jail for it.
I’d like to pretend that he’s not really the president. It’s not really working out that great for me.