[bingbong70]

>I see pasabagi criticizing xtian’s specific comments and approach.

I see him implying that the comments/observations are not in good faith and that he might be paid for taking the positions he takes. This seems completely unnecessary and quite rude.

>Assuming any negative comment about China to be an attempt to scam us into a war also seems like a mistake.

You may not recognize the increased sinophobia in the west but it is part of a well funded centralized effort to demonize and increase the potential for kinetic warfare between western countries and China. The fact that HN acts like an echo chamber for state approved anti-Chinese perspectives doesn't help matters.

A close reading of sino-western historic/economic relations results in a very different perspective than the one which is promoted in western MSM by corrupted organizations.

[dang]

Since your account has been using HN primarily (exclusively?) for ideological battle, I've banned it. We ban such accounts because they destroy the curious, thoughtful conversation this site is supposed to exist for. Regardless of what you happen to be battling for or against, that's not allowed here. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[zepto]

> You may not recognize the increased sinophobia in the west but it is part of a well funded centralized effort to demonize and increase the potential for kinetic warfare between western countries and China.

Is it? It’s clearly geopolitical, but the claim that it’s intended to lead to kinetic warfare seems like something you don’t have evidence for.

[sudosysgen]

The fact that so much of it is funded by defence contractors isn't a clue? Google ["Xinjiang" "ASPI"] for examples.

Or maybe the massive buildup of missiles and warplanes around China could be a clues? We are now at a stage where geopolitical hostility with China has a good chance of turning kinetic if exacerbated, and there is funding from exactly the parties that would stand to benefit from that, so I don't see how this lacks evidence.

[zepto]

> Or maybe the massive buildup of missiles and warplanes around China could be a clues?

If there is such a buildup (evidence?), it seems like a natural response to check China’s increasing overtures towards Taiwan, a key strategic ally.

There is no evidence that anyone wants a kinetic war for its own sake or that any development in that direction is ‘just’ a product of the defense industry.

China is involved in geopolitics and just as much as the US.

What’s curious here is not the invocation of well known bad acts by the US.

It’s the presentation of China as a benign victim who has no geopolitical ambitions, oppressive behavior, or political repression.

[meowface]

[flagged]

[dang]

You haven't represented that account's commenting history accurately, and the site guidelines ask you specifically not to post like this. It's nasty and extremely tedious.

If you're worried about abuse, the guidelines ask you to email [e-mail] so we can look into it. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules from now on.

[meowface]

I'm not worried about abuse and have no reason to believe any is occurring in this or the other poster's case, as I wrote. If I suspected actual attempted "influence" activity etc. I definitely would've reported it instead of posting about it. I also find it unfair and unsubstantiated that other posters are accusing either of them of being supposed "shills" or "agents".

I was just kind of taken aback by the nature of their comment history and reacted emotionally, in part because of the radical defense of what I see as the Chinese government's inhumane and genocidal policy towards Uighurs. And as I wrote, if it were extremely jingoistic support of the US government and intelligence community, or QAnon narratives or something, I think I would view it similarly; though I probably wouldn't have reacted as emotionally, since my impetus was the response to the treatment of that group.

I disagree that I haven't represented their commenting history accurately. The majority of their posts appear to be either of that nature or about Bitcoin, with the plurality being of that nature. I also included a link to their comments for anyone else to verify, and I quoted each of their posts in full to ensure no context was missing. (However, I should've qualified "almost every comment" as "almost every political comment".)

I understand it violates the rules and is nasty and tedious, though. I apologize and will refrain in the future.

[xtian]

I am a natural born US citizen of primarily German descent. I have zero connection to China, any Chinese institutions, or any Chinese nationals. I asked this extremely aggressive zepto person what proof they would accept of that, and I got downvoted with no response. Are we just making up stories about anyone who disagrees with us now? How do we know all of the anti-China people in this thread have no connection to the US state department or intelligence apparatus?

[dang]

Your account has existed for 10 years so I'm not going to ban you outright just now, but the fact that you're using HN primarily (exclusively?) for nationalistic and ideological flamewar is a serious abuse of the site. We ban accounts that do this, regardless of what they're battling for or against. If you want to keep posting to HN, we need you to seriously recalibrate how you're doing it, and reorient to the intended use of the site, as described here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

The users foolishly accusing you of being a communist agent are also breaking the rules. That's not relevant to the fact that you're abusing HN.

Actually, I would have a lot more sympathy if you did have a personal connection to China. HN's Chinese users (and those with other connections, such as their family background or couple relationship or work history) are under extreme pressure in these threads, because the forum is majority Western, aligned with Western media and geopolitical views, and a subset of the majority users have the kind of adamancy (and even aggression) that can only come from ignorance. That's a serious problem—users of Chinese background have even been hounded off this site, just for sincerely trying to represent their own viewpoint. I've even been personally accused of being Chinese (as if that were somehow an insult) just for trying to bring more respect into these threads. If you or anyone is interested, you can see some of that moderation history at these links:

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

None of that applies to your case, though, if I'm reading your comments correctly, because you seem to be posting strictly out of ideological battle. That's, unfortunately, much cheaper and more destructive behavior. We don't allow it here, because the purpose of the site is curious conversation in which people relate to and learn from each other. Smiting enemies is precisely the opposite spirit of that.

I know what it feels like to hold a minority ideological viewpoint too (having been in that situation many times)—it comes with a feeling of righteousness and resentment that causes one to lash out and feel justified in treating others disrespectfully because, after all, one's cause is right and the truth is more important. Unfortunately this syndrome is poison to the sort of internet forum we're trying for here. Regardless of how right you are (or feel you are), or how important the truths you bring are (or you feel they are), we're going to ban you if you continue this way. We have no choice but to do that, in order to try to preserve HN for its intended purpose. Moreover, it makes little difference how right you are or what truths you're bringing, if this is the way you're going about it, because people don't listen when they're being blasted.

[zepto]

I think the response to your claims about who you are is likely to be because it’s neither verifiable, nor relevant to your arguments here. It’s what you are saying that people are responding to. Not your nationality.

> I asked this extremely aggressive zepto person

I’m curious if you can quote anything in support of your description of me as ‘aggressive’.

Also, you have made it clear that you are an activist who is against many US actions, but what makes you think anyone here is “anti-China?’”.

Most people in the thread seem to regard both the criticisms of the US and, the China’s oppression of the Uighurs as credible.

[xtian]

It’s seemed pretty relevant to a lot of people in this thread. Your general tone is aggressive. I’m curious if you can quote anywhere where I’ve made it clear I’m an activist. That’s not how I think of myself. I’m posting on a computer programmer forum.

The kinds of claims you consider normal about China are in fact anti-China to anyone who’s bothered to learn a little bit about their system and how people there feel about it.

[zepto]

> Your general tone is aggressive.

Can you quote something I have written with an aggressive tone?

>> I’m curious if you can quote anywhere where I’ve made it clear I’m an activist.

Here’s a quote:

“Why do I need to say something bad about China? I’m a US citizen. That’s the only country I have any chance of impacting through criticism.”

And another:

“My only aim is to dissent against the manufacturing of consent for another bloody US war. What’s yours?”

You have an acknowledged political agenda behind your comments here.