[pbhjpbhj]

The same argument could be made against almost any national flag. It represents a force who committed acts against my ancestors that I find deplorable. [Fake example:] Like, USA revolutionaries murdered my ancestors. Or, USA soldiers tortured my family members during the Gulf War.

Obviously the degree is different, so perhaps a Chinese flag for Tibetans, or a Turkish Flag for Armenians [estimates suggest 1.5Million murdered 100years ago], or ...

USA, where I assume the controlling decisions for Reddit are made, is known for "freedom of speech" which makes this sort of control of speech stand out more starkly.

How do you differentiate the supposed support for one set of actions with the apparent support for another equally vile set of actions in such cases. Clearly you can go personal in the analysis, but what about when your personal analysis conflicts with millions of others?