llIIlIlIllIIlIl

It's incredibly funny to me how concerned western netizens seem to be about Chinese astroturfing... as if it's an actual problem they need to worry about.

99.9999% of comments you'll find online are highly critical of China. The most upvoted submissions on Reddit and HN are often those critical of China. Most Americans (60% last time I checked) already have a negative view of China and their knee-jerk reaction is to support anything or anyone who speaks out against the CCP.

Does anyone really think 17 bots on Twitter tweeting messages in Chinese is going to change this?

We currently live in a world where people don't feel comfortable expressing dissenting opinions about Hong Kong and China from their primary accounts. Any dissenting opinion is immediately suppressed and the user in question surrounded by a hostile interrogation squad.

When they make anonymous green accounts for the specific purpose of airing these opinions, they get accused of astroturfing because they "only discuss" the specific subject. Just think about the irony of that for a second as it relates to what HK supporters purport to be fighting for.

Trying to bury every single thought that doesn't perfectly conform with the common narrative is unscalable and will only serve to amplify the counter-narrative.

I see this happening everywhere in relation to the unrest in HK. Ideally, ideas should be discussed on their merit and in the light of day. When faced with what is perceived as dissent, strong counter arguments should be made instead of shutting down discourse.

In my opinion, this censorious attitude will be damaging to the pro-democracy movement’s cause in the long term.

EDIT: response to jeremysalwen’s comment below since it seems my comments are either being rate limited or filtered.

> If the 50 cent army ever came to HN, it would look like the above two comments.

Thank you.

I could not have asked for a better example of what I meant than your comment. I've seen variants of this type of comment repeated everywhere on HN and Reddit to shut down legitimate discourse. I have only made extremely neutral comments, and yet here I am feeling like I’m being surrounded by a suspicious lynch mob. If you think turning every exchange of ideas into the Spanish Inquisition is the best way to support the plight of the protestors then I’d disagree, but that’s your prerogative.

Also, if an echo chamber is what people want HN to be, I can live with that. I just think it’d be a pity because I enjoy reading discussions with a diversity of opinion - more specifically, I enjoy reading high quality responses to actual dissenters, not unsubstantiated witch-hunting or low effort dismissals to every ‘threat’ real or imagined.

Do you think the above scenario is completely implausible? If so, why?

Please don't make assumptions about my motives.

Imagine knowing that your people are fighting for freedom from CPC rule and mainlanders flooding into HK, taking your jobs and housing and driving up prices for essential goods. Then you get a group of obnoxious and oblivious mainlanders heading to HK on a luxury spending holiday demanding this and that from the flight hostesses.

Now imagine being an HK Cathay cabin crew member making not so great pay and living in the most expensive city in the world by far. This could be a tinder box for incidents like verbal assaults, jostling and shoving and if enough passengers get involved, it could transform into a real flight risk.

> is participation in the protest a reliable indicator for the likelihood of it

Humans are capable of many things right or wrong when they are desperate to get their message across. Doubly true when they believe their fight is for justice.

Yeah that could be one possible solution. Not allowing Cathay flights over mainland China could be considered another.

It could be disinformation, but I've read that some Cathay pilots and cabin crew were reprimanded for participating in the protests.

Also, I don't necessarily mean a terrorist incident. Any kerfuffle at 35,000ft would be enough grounds to turn an airplane around and land it at the nearest runway as per standard safety practices.

With HK-mainland tensions at an all time high, I don't think this can be completely ruled out.

> When the Chinese aviation authority, absurdly, accused the airline of imperilling safety because its employees had joined the protests, Cathay dumped its chief executive.

Question: Is there even remotely a legitimate security concern here? Let's say in a hypothetical scenario, the unrest spirals out of control into a state of complete desperation. The HK government and the CCP refuse to compromise on any of the five demands, and the protestors refuse to stand down.

Let's say politically polarized HK pilots and cabin crew are flying a plane full of mainlanders.

Would you be 100% comfortable being a passenger on that plane as a mainlander?