If you think some other post is way off base, it's best to assume good faith as the guidelines ask and reply patiently with correct information, not name-calling like "anti-western conspiracy theories". If you do the latter, there's a good chance you'll make the situation worse by increasing the distance between us instead of bridging it.
That's a gross mischaracterization of what was posted.
It is a sad day when providing facts is described as "anti-western".
> we just get inflammatory rhetoric
We? Inflammatory? The facts speak for themselves. If the truth hurts, then perhaps the problem is the reader's attachment to invalid notions.
If you're going to post about a divisive topic that's prone to flamewar like this one, you need to do so in the spirit of the site no matter how many facts or how much truth you possess. Otherwise you just damage the container here, and increase the amount of alienation between people, which harms HN and doesn't help the world much either. The cause of the truth is only served to the extent that people can hear you. Would you mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the spirit of this site more to heart when posting here?
I've written about this kind of thing before, if more explanation or context would be helpful:
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
I'm surprised but I'm open to being corrected. Please help me identify which statement I made which is considered "flamewar style".
> We? Inflammatory? The facts speak for themselves. If the truth hurts, then perhaps the problem is the reader's attachment to invalid notions.
These are the sorts of things people post when they've left the path of curious conversation and are just lashing back against what someone else said.
Also, you Godwinized the thread (invariably a flamewar marker) by taking some horrific quotes from Churchill and escalating that into full Hitlerhood. Again, that's not the path of curious conversation—that's fighting a demon. You can't do both at the same time; none of us can.
If you post in this way, you end up producing the opposite of what you presumably want. Instead of getting people to expand their view of Churchill to include more of his shadow, you push them into locking their current picture down even more, because that is how people react to battle moves. All you'll get in that case is equally inflamed reactive posts back. No one's mind will be changed, only intensified. That is the flamewar style.
Also, you've created accounts to do this sort of flamewar on HN before, and we've asked you not to before, and now you've done it again. That's a seriously bad pattern. Please don't do that. I understand that you have good reason to feel the way you do, and that it's based on valid information that ought not to be so quickly rejected by Western readers. But coming at them with a flaming sword only recreates the problem—and meanwhile it contributes to destroying HN, which helps no one.
Also, your quotes are talking about China, not India, and don't seem to mention genocide?
There’s no shortage of good historical resources on the Bengal famine which demanded at its peak 3x as much food as was sailing past to war-torn Europe, and with which Churchill asked FDR for assistance, but instead we just get inflammatory rhetoric.