Nobody was arguing, we were interested in their view. You don't know how close we were on a daily basis.

Discussing politics is always getting into argument territory and always best avoided on social occasions, especially if you do not know the opinions of the people around you.

For instance, I (in Europe) don't "lightly suggest" things in the US are difficult when it comes to guns/Trump/abortion/etc to American colleagues because these are sensitive political topics and nothing good can come out of that. You mentioned it was in South America so maybe another example would be to mention drug cartels and Pablo Escobar to Colombian colleagues.

I can imagine your Chinese colleagues thinking "here we go again..." and politely stirring the conversation to another topic.

You're imagining wrong and assuming a lot of things.

"Lightly suggesting" something is "difficult" is a conversation starter. Not arguing.

Maybe we're getting into "cultural differences" area and we should probably agree to disagree.

I did not say that you were arguing. I just pointed out that you were starting a conversation that could lead nowhere pleasant for anyone so your guests probably wisely stirred away from it.

Or, you’re making a ton of conjecture without knowing the situation, the people involved, their relationship, what was actually said, the emotional context, and are forming all of these opinions stated as fact from a few lines of text on an HN comment.

I wish people were more charitable on HN, on the internet, and in life.

I think what's uncharitable is assuming that someone is 'afraid to speak out' just because they don't want to wade into politics.

What a strange comment, the most uncharitable one I've read in a while on HN. I didn't pick up anything uncharitable at all in the comment you are complaining about, while yours reeks of it - and in the same breath publicly wishing everyone else were more charitable!

What was not charitable in simply suggesting an alternative explanation that did not involve fear of retribution? This is a friendly discussion (or so I thought).

You told the GP how they should not act during dinner conversations, and double downed despite the GP telling you that you didn’t know how close they were. That comes off to me not respecting what they were telling you about their relationship, which is uncharitable in my book. Given my upvotes, I’m not the only one that feels that way.

Separately, plenty of good relationships can discuss politics without issue, and to not do so would leave the world only to their information bubbles.