These are all your opinions and personal values. I agree with all of them on a personal level. Where I think we disagree is that this is some kind of "pro speech" vs. "anti speech" battle. I see it more as a global US led Imperium attempting to impose their opinions and personal values on people throughout the world regardless of what those citizens or governments think. I'm in the US, me and my countrypeople shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong. Just like China shouldn't get a say in what happens in the US. Why isn't that enough?

This is a atopical line of inquiry & ignores what is happening. It's an ad-hominem argument against the US.

Open society is far more than the US. 43% of the nations of the world are democratic according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index#By_regime_ty....

And it continues the filter of seeing this as open society being an imposition. If you have a closed society & the open society of the internet doesn't fit your society, you shouldnt be on the internet. Your closed society doesn't want to participate, then fine, if it must: go elsewhere.

You've decided "Open society" == good. This is a value judgement not a law of nature.

"if you have a closed society... you shouldn't be on the internet"

Again, according to you. what lengths would you be willing to go to impose this on other people?

I don't want anyone in a closed society and I'd go through great lengths to help people trapped in close societies have access to open connectivities like the internet.

If a society wants to be closed though, your society has the onus of responsibility to enforce closing. Your society can't impose that position on everyone. Hence me saying the society probably shouldnt be on the most open connected free connectivity on the planet, one created by open society & which enables open social values.

> You've decided...

It looks like you have decided here friend. I never openly said that, although heck the words I use build a pretty lopsided case. I think everyone should decide for themselves though, and come to their conclusions. To me the choice seems obvious & it's hard to see what is to respect about closed, but I'm open. I'm open to learning.

In a more open society, members can choose for themselves, i.e. they have more autonomy.

In a more closed society, more choice is taken away from you.

The title of this post is "Tech Bosses Are Letting Dictators Censor What Americans See", the article is about China getting a say in what happens in the US.

We don't get a say in what happens in Washington either. Frankly, in the present day USA, it's a minor miracle when the county road commissioner will fill a pothole in a timely fashion.

> ...people shouldn't get a say

Perhaps people should get a say and the governments should take a turn being forced to serve the people instead.

“ I'm in the US, me and my countrypeople shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong.”

This is only if you assume all people are not created equal.

We don't know what Chinese citizens think because it's impossible to conduct independent opinion polls on political topics. So, how do you know that the majority of Chinese don't agree with our opinions and personal values on freedom of expression?

Countries always seek to extend their influence. The USA and China play the same game, just with different tactics. There will never be "enough".

> shouldn't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong

I guess it's just too bad that Hong Kongers don't get a say in what happens in Hong Kong.