Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide(bbc.com)
bbc.com
Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55973215
321 comments
The world would have done nothing about Hitler if he hadn't started invading the rest of Europe [1]. And the CCP is smart enough to focus on economic domination instead of land-war.
This is my greatest fear for humanity right now.
[1] https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/britain-ado...
Edit: Why would this get downvoted? Do you disagree with the interpretation of history (and extrapolation to our current situation), or do you disagree that this prospect is a bad thing?
This is my greatest fear for humanity right now.
[1] https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/britain-ado...
Edit: Why would this get downvoted? Do you disagree with the interpretation of history (and extrapolation to our current situation), or do you disagree that this prospect is a bad thing?
Framing everything in relation to WW2 actually holds people back from looking at the problem and formulating an actual solution. Almost every relevant parameter is wildly different: analogies based on simplified similarities are seductive but fundamentally flawed.
It seems like we want to make it happen again just because it's the story we know.
But it's not going to happen again. There might be a bloody conflict, but it will not have meaningful similarities to WW2.
JBiserkov(2)
[deleted]
Isn’t China’s relationship with Pakistan more about threatening India?
That's the whole point - Muslim countries care about their self-interest over the interest of some muslims in Xinjiang.
Some care about selling oil, some about economy and so on..
Some care about selling oil, some about economy and so on..
Why should they care more or less than the rest of us?
Or phrased differently,
Why should [different religion countries] care less?
(I cannot imagine that there's any good answer to that question)
Why should [different religion countries] care less?
(I cannot imagine that there's any good answer to that question)
This bigotted comment is not welcome here.
While this is true, you could say the same for all the ostensible Christian majority countries that both refuse to acknowledge the Armenian genocide that was inflicted by the Turks and the current genocide in Yemen targeting both Shia Muslims and Christians in the region.
Point is pundits like Sam Harris are full of shit - Religion is only ever evoked when the ruling party's self interest and the regional interpretation of scripture align. Such pundits also ignore the inconvenient fact that many Muslim majority countries often have very old Christian communities yet the same is not true of Christian majority countries. I wonder why?
Point is pundits like Sam Harris are full of shit - Religion is only ever evoked when the ruling party's self interest and the regional interpretation of scripture align. Such pundits also ignore the inconvenient fact that many Muslim majority countries often have very old Christian communities yet the same is not true of Christian majority countries. I wonder why?
> Such pundits also ignore the inconvenient fact that many Muslim majority countries often have very old Christian communities yet the same is not true of Christian majority countries. I wonder why?
What? Muslim majority countries with old Christian communities are because Christianity spread widely in the Middle East after 0 AD, until 7th century AD when Islam came around. Of course there will be residual Christian communities there. But the Christian majority countries became Christian before 7th century AD and were able to halt the spread of Islam post 7th century (Europe), or the country was colonized after the fact by previous Christian countries (USA, South America) where Islam never made it.
What? Muslim majority countries with old Christian communities are because Christianity spread widely in the Middle East after 0 AD, until 7th century AD when Islam came around. Of course there will be residual Christian communities there. But the Christian majority countries became Christian before 7th century AD and were able to halt the spread of Islam post 7th century (Europe), or the country was colonized after the fact by previous Christian countries (USA, South America) where Islam never made it.
We can give them hassle over it. I think the Chinese still want to be seen as honourable.
How about if we do the courageous thing and give them war till they stop?
We are morally no different than Europe prior to Hitler's invasion; knowingly allowing the genocide of others as long as it didn't affect us.
We are morally no different than Europe prior to Hitler's invasion; knowingly allowing the genocide of others as long as it didn't affect us.
Cute thought but it's never going to happen. Hitler was a moron who kept prodding the Allies with invasions that were creeping ever closer West. At that point, the third Reich had become an existential threat to the Allies. They would have never went to war over the plight of some Jews and other hated minorities.
China on the other hand manufactures much of the world's consumer goods and has strong trade ties with dozens of nations. It has also never invaded Europe and shows no sign of having any intention of doing so. It also has a large enough army and nuclear armament to completely flatten any European country that chooses to break from NATO and try to pick a fight with it by itself.
NATO nations sell arms and political support to countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel so clearly morality is not a priority here. The real reason why they keep political pressure on China is because it's a rival to the USA and it's (at least in it's own eyes) communist - which is worse than stoning women and gay people to death, and bombing children hospitals and practising apartheid in the eyes of Washington D.C.
China on the other hand manufactures much of the world's consumer goods and has strong trade ties with dozens of nations. It has also never invaded Europe and shows no sign of having any intention of doing so. It also has a large enough army and nuclear armament to completely flatten any European country that chooses to break from NATO and try to pick a fight with it by itself.
NATO nations sell arms and political support to countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel so clearly morality is not a priority here. The real reason why they keep political pressure on China is because it's a rival to the USA and it's (at least in it's own eyes) communist - which is worse than stoning women and gay people to death, and bombing children hospitals and practising apartheid in the eyes of Washington D.C.
There IS one thing different this time, COVID
Things will happen, it just takes time
Things will happen, it just takes time
What's the relation between COVID and this genocide?
What happens in China does not stay in China? Public perception in other words
Yes - we know this. We've known this for a long time.
The question is what now? Western nations have shown no political will to stand up to China.
The question is what now? Western nations have shown no political will to stand up to China.
When the Holocaust was happening, no one cared. The holocaust was stopped because it aligned with a different interest: to stop nazi Germany. The holocaust was only to make the nazi look bad. Otherwise no one cared about Jews either.
Even soldiers who liberated concentration camps at the end of the were shocked at what they found; many people simply didn't know the extent of what happened until after the war.
I'm confused, didn't the camp happen after the war started ? the aryan supremacy theory predates it but not the mass murdering ..
I never really read timeline details about the concentration camps in WW2.
I never really read timeline details about the concentration camps in WW2.
Most people did not know about the Holocaust until after WW2 started.
FDR/senior government and military officials in the US army knew. They made choices to focus on American interests at multiple points, even as they closed on victory on the European front, they prioritized strategic targets over concentration camps. The USSR ended up being the one to free most of the camps, and conquer most of Germany. Strategic targets are definitely important for protecting soldiers, but really the point here is that the military leaders were aware, and the fact the soldiers were surprised/shocked is a result of them not being informed and/or it being a shocking thing to see even when you know it’s coming.
> they prioritized strategic targets over concentration camps.
Well yeah, that's just Winning Wars 101. If the decision is between "let's knock out these strategic targets so that we can end the war quickly and (assuming we know about them) shut down the concentration camps all at once" v. "let's get bogged down by starting with the concentration camps while the enemy continues to churn out arms and war machines and troops because we couldn't be assed to focus on the strategic targets", the former is really the only reasonable choice.
Well yeah, that's just Winning Wars 101. If the decision is between "let's knock out these strategic targets so that we can end the war quickly and (assuming we know about them) shut down the concentration camps all at once" v. "let's get bogged down by starting with the concentration camps while the enemy continues to churn out arms and war machines and troops because we couldn't be assed to focus on the strategic targets", the former is really the only reasonable choice.
If you want a really damming example more recent than a war our grandparents were children during:
consider that the IDF provided they could get to Entebbe in Uganda at short notice, but failed to muster the moral courage to intervene in Rwanda.
So much for never again.
consider that the IDF provided they could get to Entebbe in Uganda at short notice, but failed to muster the moral courage to intervene in Rwanda.
So much for never again.
> FDR/senior government and military officials in the US army knew.
I'd be interested to see the source material for that.
I'd be interested to see the source material for that.
Are you suggesting that in 1939 (when WW2 started) the US knew about concentration camps? I would very interested in seeing some sources for that.
Regardless, even if they did, I said most people did not know. The president, some higher ups and some people in the military wouldn't account for most people.
Even if the general population knew, not focusing on the camps does not mean they did not care. It means ending the war (which would end the camps) was a more important goal than liberating the camps. Why focus on one thing when you can kill two birds with one stone?
Regardless, even if they did, I said most people did not know. The president, some higher ups and some people in the military wouldn't account for most people.
Even if the general population knew, not focusing on the camps does not mean they did not care. It means ending the war (which would end the camps) was a more important goal than liberating the camps. Why focus on one thing when you can kill two birds with one stone?
No one cared is not correct - a lot of people did. But the holocaust proper started in 1941 and the UK were already full on at war with Germany so there wasn't very much we could do beyond what was already being done.
[deleted]
The powers that be do not care, because they're Muslims.
Do the Muslim countries care, No!
As a muslim, I can tell you that muslims and even non-muslims care a lot. It's a human thing.
Muslim countries are 99% dictatorships, where the leadership doesn't even care about their own people.
Muslim countries are 99% dictatorships, where the leadership doesn't even care about their own people.
That's the interesting part TBH... why is nobody sticking up for them?
Because for all the crap people give America for conducting foreign policy according to its economic interests, everybody else does the same. And right now, doing business with China is lucrative because of their human misery arbitrage.
Because its impossible to say fuck allah in front of a muslim Eduated or not they are way too conformance to religion. I can the same to a christian or any other religion friends and joke about it and does not have to fear.
How is that relevant to the question of why Muslim-majority countries aren't sticking up for Uighurs?
In politics, everything happens primarily to gain or maintain power. If some group of people is not relevant for either, people in power will not stick up for them.
Muslims are hardly a unified front. Look at how many majority-Muslim countries have had civil wars or wars against each other at some point in the last 30 years.
Because Muslim countries by and large are not in geopolitical or economic positions to act unilaterally in any way that is a)remotely effective, and b) not massively costly in economic and political terms.
The willingness to take a financial / trade hit for a random group of people hasn't been a common event as far as governments go... much ever?
Sad but that seems to be the case.
Sad but that seems to be the case.
Everyone is utterly dependent on cheap Chinese manufacturing. The price of manufactured goods would probably quadruple overnight if companies had to abandon China.
It’s not just cheap labor. China has all of cheap labor, lax environmental laws, cheap energy, a very manufacturing friendly government, a tech ecosystem, local expertise, and infrastructure. It’s literally the ideal place to manufacture, at least from an amoral economic perspective. Nobody can compete with China in manufacturing except in niche high skill areas.
It’s not just cheap labor. China has all of cheap labor, lax environmental laws, cheap energy, a very manufacturing friendly government, a tech ecosystem, local expertise, and infrastructure. It’s literally the ideal place to manufacture, at least from an amoral economic perspective. Nobody can compete with China in manufacturing except in niche high skill areas.
It’s interesting to read the pro Chinese propaganda on HN. It’s too bad we can’t see the region from where those comments are coming from. It saddens me that people are forced to stand up for a regime that massacres and enslaves its own people.
This one is from Croatia, I can't trust any airquoted credible cases from western media on China, I've seen no evidence thus far and too much of this: https://i.redd.it/4ugpt0499ri61.jpg
It's interesting to see people treat other people's comments as propaganda just because they are expressing a different view.
Please try take a moment to step in someone else's shoes and engage with what they are saying before calling their comments "propaganda". It's not good faith behaviour.
It's very odd, when there's countless witnesses, satalite imagery, press teams finding these places, and the CCP even admitting to education camps that there are people going "it's not so bad" and defending CCP.
Even if the camps are just "re-education camps", thats still really bad.
Even if the camps are just "re-education camps", thats still really bad.
How do you respond to islamic extremism in your country? Attacks in Tieneman square used to be bad before it was the Uyghurs doing it. Islamic terrorism used to be bad, before it was the Uyghurs doing it. China has a responsibility to deal with this problem, and if there a nice, gentle way to deal with it, I can't think of what it might be.
Nobody has a responsibility to "re-educate" an entire culture. It's a no go, full stop.
Especially because there is not a gentle way, what you end up with is still genocide. Mincing words can't change facts.
The CCP consider extremism every form of dissent. By that standard, nobody is a terrorist, because everybody is a terrorist. And the ultimate consequence is that the party feels entitled to do whatever they want to any citizen. Which is again unacceptable.
The CCP consider extremism every form of dissent. By that standard, nobody is a terrorist, because everybody is a terrorist. And the ultimate consequence is that the party feels entitled to do whatever they want to any citizen. Which is again unacceptable.
It has absolutely NOTHING to do with 'extremism' that's just a cheap CCP talking point. It's about the geopolitical importance of xinjiang: https://youtu.be/ZxvYcByv2M8
> It’s interesting to read the pro Chinese propaganda on HN
And the president of the United States himself dismissed Uighur genocide as being part of China’s ‘different norms’.
https://nypost.com/2021/02/17/biden-says-uighur-genocide-is-...
And the president of the United States himself dismissed Uighur genocide as being part of China’s ‘different norms’.
https://nypost.com/2021/02/17/biden-says-uighur-genocide-is-...
I work with a lot of folks from China and they are bending over backwards trying to defend the CCP. Their argument almost always boils down to "I know people who live in Xinjiang and they say it's not that bad." Equivalent to someone using their one black friend as proof that they can't possibly be racist.
> I work with a lot of folks from China and they (...)
What you say represents about 50% of Chinese researchers in my lab. Those that immediately return to their country after the PhD and you never hear from them again. The other 50% are the complete opposite: they cannot wait to get their family out of the country and never look back, explaining that the country is ruled by a bunch of crazy psycopaths. Curiously enough, there's almost no interaction between both groups, they politely ignore each other (and they are really polite and professional towards everybody also).
What you say represents about 50% of Chinese researchers in my lab. Those that immediately return to their country after the PhD and you never hear from them again. The other 50% are the complete opposite: they cannot wait to get their family out of the country and never look back, explaining that the country is ruled by a bunch of crazy psycopaths. Curiously enough, there's almost no interaction between both groups, they politely ignore each other (and they are really polite and professional towards everybody also).
Once upon a time I used to spend way to much time on Omegle (worldwide random 1:1 chat).
Once a chinese girl was online, we chat about our countries, I explain how much I like china as a kid for martial arts, food, aesthetics, it was friendly and casual (chinese people on omegle often expressed worries about the value of their country, I wanted to make her feel at ease).
Quickly though she started to say it's not all rosey, rules are strict, internet firewall.. suddenly she stopped talking. She typed a bunch of omg omg omg i shouldn't have said that omg sorry disconnect.
It was nothing yet I felt fear in her behavior. All that for expressing very mild discontent about her country. First time I ever felt the impact of politicians on people's mind.. also a 'freedom of speech' felt different after that.
Once a chinese girl was online, we chat about our countries, I explain how much I like china as a kid for martial arts, food, aesthetics, it was friendly and casual (chinese people on omegle often expressed worries about the value of their country, I wanted to make her feel at ease).
Quickly though she started to say it's not all rosey, rules are strict, internet firewall.. suddenly she stopped talking. She typed a bunch of omg omg omg i shouldn't have said that omg sorry disconnect.
It was nothing yet I felt fear in her behavior. All that for expressing very mild discontent about her country. First time I ever felt the impact of politicians on people's mind.. also a 'freedom of speech' felt different after that.
This thread is nothing but personal anecdotes.
So, with enough anecdotes we'll reach statistical significance
No, because anecdotes suffer from sample bias since they are self-reported.
You fail to see the 12 month of 24/7 presence on this site and interaction with all countries. To hell with stats.
It's ultimiately a matter of dependency i.e. econmically well-off Chinese people who have dependencies with CCP (e.g. official party member (6.6% of the population), or owning a family business that interfaces with CCP, even if unofficially, etc), V.S. well-off Chinese with little or no dependencies.
To be where they are now (outside of China receiving education, etc), the former group (or their parents/relatives) fought hard to get benefits from their relationship with CCP, while the later group (or their parents/relatives) fought hard to find a path out of this CCP madness.
And thus the contrast.
My grandfather was a minister and a proud CCP member. But he was the type who believes in doing the moral things and never took bribe. He worked crazy hours and get paid penauts. Most of my relatives saw him as foolish because he basically didn't fight to "get benefits from his relationship with CCP" and stayed poor for all his life. And most of his colleagues and superordinates don't like him because you can't help one another to climb the rank (or generate wealth) like this.
To be where they are now (outside of China receiving education, etc), the former group (or their parents/relatives) fought hard to get benefits from their relationship with CCP, while the later group (or their parents/relatives) fought hard to find a path out of this CCP madness.
And thus the contrast.
My grandfather was a minister and a proud CCP member. But he was the type who believes in doing the moral things and never took bribe. He worked crazy hours and get paid penauts. Most of my relatives saw him as foolish because he basically didn't fight to "get benefits from his relationship with CCP" and stayed poor for all his life. And most of his colleagues and superordinates don't like him because you can't help one another to climb the rank (or generate wealth) like this.
> And most of his colleagues and superordinates don't like him
they don't like him not because of the ladder climb, but because him being a goody-two-shoe means that their corrupt activities are more likely to be shown as "wrong", and therefore, more risky for them.
it's like being a good cop in a department where the other cops are bought and paid for.
they don't like him not because of the ladder climb, but because him being a goody-two-shoe means that their corrupt activities are more likely to be shown as "wrong", and therefore, more risky for them.
it's like being a good cop in a department where the other cops are bought and paid for.
Thanks for this post. Every support or opposition towards authority boils down to economic incentives. Glad to hear from some one from the inside.
[deleted]
The question is, are their psychopaths crazier than our psychopaths.
I politely refuse to partake in this kind of questions :)
Maybe, maybe not, but our psychopaths are restrained by a government designed to be inefficient and to frustrate tyrants.
We just had an attempted fascist coup in the USA and it failed hilariously. The swamp is a good thing. It’s there to bog down tyrants in mud. Efficient government is dangerous.
We just had an attempted fascist coup in the USA and it failed hilariously. The swamp is a good thing. It’s there to bog down tyrants in mud. Efficient government is dangerous.
My intention was to point out the irony of Chinese nationals wanting to immigrate to the US, ostensibly because China is ruled by a bunch of "crazy psychopaths". When the reality is that the US is also run, at least in part, by a bunch of crazy psychopaths.
But my point was not well taken.
But my point was not well taken.
Even though I agree with what you said in terms of internal politics, I think when it comes to geopolitics, things start to get much uglier and multiple times more cruel. And since this topic is about foreign politics, I don’t think the US is any better than China. An American might think different, but I’m not one.
The US is better than China internally, but I mostly agree that China is not substantially worse than the US in terms of foreign policy.
Reminds me of that joke:
I asked my friend from North Korea how life is.
He said he can't complain.
I asked my friend from North Korea how life is.
He said he can't complain.
There were a whole series of posts on HN, and other sites by folks who talked about people traveling in the area and not seeing anything.
I don't know what that is supposed to mean / why we would assume you'd notice it ...
On HN and elsewhere people mentioned how they were happy people could travel through the area and not have to worry about "thieves" and they'd make some comparisons to travel in the west, a sort of chilling random concern considering the topic.
Often the same link was posted to a western blogger apparently paid to travel to the region. With the link the posts noted that the blogger didn't mention genocide.
I don't know what that is supposed to mean / why we would assume you'd notice it ...
On HN and elsewhere people mentioned how they were happy people could travel through the area and not have to worry about "thieves" and they'd make some comparisons to travel in the west, a sort of chilling random concern considering the topic.
Often the same link was posted to a western blogger apparently paid to travel to the region. With the link the posts noted that the blogger didn't mention genocide.
They build huge compounds (found easily through news websites) where they put everyone behind closed doors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_internment_camps
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_internment_camps
>I know people who live in Xinjiang and they say it's not that bad
Because they have a different definition of "bad". If you follow closely, the mainland Chinese or CCP have different definition of the same word for literally everything.
Why is it bad to force them learn Mandarin and forget about their old language? Where the job markets are and to help them better integrate into the society.
Why is it bad to give them birth control pills? Or reeducating them? etc. They are doing / supporting these regime with a smile on their face as they think they are doing good.
Because they have a different definition of "bad". If you follow closely, the mainland Chinese or CCP have different definition of the same word for literally everything.
Why is it bad to force them learn Mandarin and forget about their old language? Where the job markets are and to help them better integrate into the society.
Why is it bad to give them birth control pills? Or reeducating them? etc. They are doing / supporting these regime with a smile on their face as they think they are doing good.
The simple fact is that we don't know what is going on in Xinjiang and most of the reports in the West about what is allegedly going on there are by people who have a vested interest in making it sound as bad as possible or who likely have links with Western governments. On top of that very few people in the West know anything at all about China, its culture, and its history.
So, as a matter of intellectual honesty, I don't think it is possible to have strong opinion and to use extremely strong terms to describe the situation there as if that was fact.
That's really a common problem when information is withheld. On the one hand it obviously arouses suspicion but on the other hand it also allows over-the-top narratives and rumours to spread, and it is very difficult to separate facts from propaganda, from the other side's propaganda, from fantasy...
So, as a matter of intellectual honesty, I don't think it is possible to have strong opinion and to use extremely strong terms to describe the situation there as if that was fact.
That's really a common problem when information is withheld. On the one hand it obviously arouses suspicion but on the other hand it also allows over-the-top narratives and rumours to spread, and it is very difficult to separate facts from propaganda, from the other side's propaganda, from fantasy...
Im pretty sure that people said the same thing about the jews under hitler. Human beings are very good at denying and rationalizing away unpleasent truths.
The US and UK have a long history of funding terrorists in hopes of regime change too. We spent years treating ISIS and their supporters like they were the victims in Syria...
[deleted]
[deleted]
An older family member grew up in WW2 Europe under German occupation. I asked them about general everyday life during the war and the holocaust. Besides getting bombed on en route to school, it "wasn't that bad". I don't know if it's justification or stockholm syndrome. Part of me speculates people in these situations suspend their reality as a survival mechanism.
This is the key observation of Imre Kertész's book Sorstalanság about his surviving Auschwitz and Buchenwald as a deported Hungarian Jew. He is frustrated by people asking him postwar about how terrible the camps were. His thinking sort of goes like this: the human spirit is strong and can survive anything an oppressor throws at it, but to ask about the horrors of the death camps is to suggest that they were capable of breaking one’s spirit.
In the end (I don’t know if this counts as a spoiler or not) Kertész even admits to feeling nostalgia for some of the moments in the camps.
In the end (I don’t know if this counts as a spoiler or not) Kertész even admits to feeling nostalgia for some of the moments in the camps.
I'm Chinese. Many languages and expressions in this thread not only detests me but also represent the very opposite of western critical thinking.
I appreciate the western style of logical thinking. You are being taught in schools how to tell the truth and bust lies, to criticize, to doubt, to ask questions no one dares to ask. You are taught definitions of fallacies, the art of debate, the wisdom of introspection.
I envy you, having been taught so many ways to learn, to listen, to ask.
You know, in China, they don't teach you those. They fill you with hard knowledge, 1+1=2 kind of knowledge. There's always only one correct answer: the answer from the textbook, from the instructor, from the authority. No question is asked unless you forgot what you should have memorized.
I envy you, having the freedom to argue 1+1=0 and discover binary.
As Chinese, we've been taught to believe, to repeat, to bow down to seniors, teachers, authorities.
It's the way of life here.
It's also the reason I came to the US.
And yet, here we are.
"You cannot trust anything reported out of China."
"No use in trying to discuss this anyone from China. They are totally brainwashed."
Do you hear the racists in these words? Do you feel the rejection of listening, the denial of communication, the blockage of thinking in those expressions?
Chinese are liars. -- is what they want to say.
Because the west has free speech and free press, so everything the western media report must be the truth. -- is what they believe.
Folks, where is your doubt? Where is your wisdom of knowledge?
Just because Chinese people were taught to remember the only answer, doesn't mean they can't think critically. Have you ever listened to them? Are you dismissing them just because of where they were born or how they were taught?
Just because you have a free press, doesn't mean your media is unbiased. Who are their sponsors? What political spectrum do they stand for? Is it economically or politically beneficial to talk trash about China?
Now you have to ask: What's your defense for the CCP? How brainwashed are you? Do you condemn the CCP for what they alleged doing?
My answer is simple: I will stay doubtful until I have first-hand contact or undeniable evidence showing one way or the other. Until then, I can't say if those allegations are real or not. If they were real, I (and I believe most Chinese people) would condemn the practice, and would like to demand a change.
"I know people who live in Xinjiang and they say it's not that bad." -- It's a very common argument lot of Chinese people would use. Because it's relatively easy to find people living in Xinjiang or who come from Xinjiang online. Me too, had several conversations with folks from the area, some on Telegram where they were using VPN to connect, and some are friends of friends. Of course, we would talk about the headlines all over the western media. And every time, the answer I got is they are still working, living, studying as normal. There were conflicts in some areas in the southern part, but I haven't got any more detail than that.
These conversations are not proof of China not doing what it's been alleged to do. But you have to understand it's much more difficult to prove something you didn't do instead of something you did, and yet these kinds of personal encounters are the closest things we have to give us a perspective of the situation in the area.
To think back, what is the closest encounter you had to the situation in Xinjiang? Did you talk to any victim from the area? Of course, you would immediately argue that CCP wiped clean all witness and evidence, so finding a victim is almost impossible, which is another allegation that's almost impossible to prove otherwise --- how convenient of you.
But anyway, the closest encounter of yours is almost always the media stories you read, from western media, all over the places. But have you ever doubt that why all stories about China are negative? Why people are saying things to discredit every word comes out Chinese people's mouth? Doesn't it feel strange to you?
And it's not easy for someone to speak up for China either. I -- writing these words, am seriously worried about losing my job in the US just because of this. So I'm using an alias account. YouTubers that speaking up for China are constantly being depromoted, demonetized, restricted for sharing, or banned for their words. Is it free speech should look like? Is the west deliberately running some kind of campaign to discredit and disconnect China from the rest of the world?
Of course, that's an allegation without concrete proof. But you can find it is logically sound. There are many political movements and campaigns by the US and other five eye countries trying to contain the political and economical development of China - so their countries can continue to sit on top of the world's hegemony. It's not strange that these political and economical campaigns had affected public opinion and implanted negative views of China in its citizens' minds.
We can have a lot of allegations back and forth. Maybe they are all wrong - or all true. But the bottom line is, what kind of thinking you want to promote.
If you are spreading denial and racism, I would condemn you regardless if your arguments are true or not.
Please, don't let a Chinese person point out your fallacies. We were supposed to not learned that.
I appreciate the western style of logical thinking. You are being taught in schools how to tell the truth and bust lies, to criticize, to doubt, to ask questions no one dares to ask. You are taught definitions of fallacies, the art of debate, the wisdom of introspection.
I envy you, having been taught so many ways to learn, to listen, to ask.
You know, in China, they don't teach you those. They fill you with hard knowledge, 1+1=2 kind of knowledge. There's always only one correct answer: the answer from the textbook, from the instructor, from the authority. No question is asked unless you forgot what you should have memorized.
I envy you, having the freedom to argue 1+1=0 and discover binary.
As Chinese, we've been taught to believe, to repeat, to bow down to seniors, teachers, authorities.
It's the way of life here.
It's also the reason I came to the US.
And yet, here we are.
"You cannot trust anything reported out of China."
"No use in trying to discuss this anyone from China. They are totally brainwashed."
Do you hear the racists in these words? Do you feel the rejection of listening, the denial of communication, the blockage of thinking in those expressions?
Chinese are liars. -- is what they want to say.
Because the west has free speech and free press, so everything the western media report must be the truth. -- is what they believe.
Folks, where is your doubt? Where is your wisdom of knowledge?
Just because Chinese people were taught to remember the only answer, doesn't mean they can't think critically. Have you ever listened to them? Are you dismissing them just because of where they were born or how they were taught?
Just because you have a free press, doesn't mean your media is unbiased. Who are their sponsors? What political spectrum do they stand for? Is it economically or politically beneficial to talk trash about China?
Now you have to ask: What's your defense for the CCP? How brainwashed are you? Do you condemn the CCP for what they alleged doing?
My answer is simple: I will stay doubtful until I have first-hand contact or undeniable evidence showing one way or the other. Until then, I can't say if those allegations are real or not. If they were real, I (and I believe most Chinese people) would condemn the practice, and would like to demand a change.
"I know people who live in Xinjiang and they say it's not that bad." -- It's a very common argument lot of Chinese people would use. Because it's relatively easy to find people living in Xinjiang or who come from Xinjiang online. Me too, had several conversations with folks from the area, some on Telegram where they were using VPN to connect, and some are friends of friends. Of course, we would talk about the headlines all over the western media. And every time, the answer I got is they are still working, living, studying as normal. There were conflicts in some areas in the southern part, but I haven't got any more detail than that.
These conversations are not proof of China not doing what it's been alleged to do. But you have to understand it's much more difficult to prove something you didn't do instead of something you did, and yet these kinds of personal encounters are the closest things we have to give us a perspective of the situation in the area.
To think back, what is the closest encounter you had to the situation in Xinjiang? Did you talk to any victim from the area? Of course, you would immediately argue that CCP wiped clean all witness and evidence, so finding a victim is almost impossible, which is another allegation that's almost impossible to prove otherwise --- how convenient of you.
But anyway, the closest encounter of yours is almost always the media stories you read, from western media, all over the places. But have you ever doubt that why all stories about China are negative? Why people are saying things to discredit every word comes out Chinese people's mouth? Doesn't it feel strange to you?
And it's not easy for someone to speak up for China either. I -- writing these words, am seriously worried about losing my job in the US just because of this. So I'm using an alias account. YouTubers that speaking up for China are constantly being depromoted, demonetized, restricted for sharing, or banned for their words. Is it free speech should look like? Is the west deliberately running some kind of campaign to discredit and disconnect China from the rest of the world?
Of course, that's an allegation without concrete proof. But you can find it is logically sound. There are many political movements and campaigns by the US and other five eye countries trying to contain the political and economical development of China - so their countries can continue to sit on top of the world's hegemony. It's not strange that these political and economical campaigns had affected public opinion and implanted negative views of China in its citizens' minds.
We can have a lot of allegations back and forth. Maybe they are all wrong - or all true. But the bottom line is, what kind of thinking you want to promote.
If you are spreading denial and racism, I would condemn you regardless if your arguments are true or not.
Please, don't let a Chinese person point out your fallacies. We were supposed to not learned that.
"You cannot trust anything reported out of China" does not need to mean what you are taking it as. It is true you cannot trust anything reported out of China. But that's not the same as saying not to believe anything reported out of China. The former is a fact, you should be skeptical instead of blindly trust a country known for propaganda. The latter is racist, saying nothing China says is true. There are a few people saying forms of the latter. But most here seem to be saying more the former, that strong skepticism is needed. This isn't inherently racist, and it even aligns with your whole point here, thus is the opposite of a fallacy.
Sometimes you need to look a bit further than logical correctness. Yes the two sentences are logically equivalent:
"You cannot trust anything reported out of China" "Not all things reported out of China can be trusted"
But the language you choose to use has its emotional implication. Ask any Chinese, which of the two sentences is more biased.
"You cannot trust anything reported out of China" "Not all things reported out of China can be trusted"
But the language you choose to use has its emotional implication. Ask any Chinese, which of the two sentences is more biased.
Nitpick, but those 2 sentences are not logically equivalent:
"You cannot trust anything reported out of China" = "Nothing reported out of China can be trusted",
while
"You cannot trust something reported out of China" = "Not all things reported out of China can be trusted"
"You cannot trust anything reported out of China" = "Nothing reported out of China can be trusted",
while
"You cannot trust something reported out of China" = "Not all things reported out of China can be trusted"
I understand the feeling of my follows, they are hot-blood emotional beings.... What I could summarise more abstractly is this: they are not discrediting the news sources abroad, but instead, because chinese society / us people are well connected (in real person). It's almost impossible to hide any major events in China, even with large scale blockage. Everyone talks to everyone. Hence the reaction from a lot of people from China is due to the fact that they understand the situation 'better' than just seeing what's reported.
I had a similar reaction back in 2010 when talking to a scientist from Libya (during the internal conflict). He was in real shock of what's been known for ages of his country in the west. Of course it doesn't mean everything in the western media is wrong. But he knew some facts that had simply not surfaced at all in people's view. I have a similar feeling now.
I had a similar reaction back in 2010 when talking to a scientist from Libya (during the internal conflict). He was in real shock of what's been known for ages of his country in the west. Of course it doesn't mean everything in the western media is wrong. But he knew some facts that had simply not surfaced at all in people's view. I have a similar feeling now.
> because chinese society / us people are well connected (in real person)
Most Uyghurs don't even speak your language. That generalization of well-connectivity doesn't apply at all. Unless you speak Äynu, you are likely talking mostly with Han Chinese in Xinjiang (or Uyghurs who had undergone severe Sinicization).
> It's almost impossible to hide any major events in China, even with large scale blockage
It is impossible to hide "major events" only when jounralists are free to roam around in China.
I have a jounralist friend whose grandfather was a Chinese war hero (i.e. he is a 红三代). He is now a US citizen, and works for a respectable news media. He had internal CCP connections but were denied Chinese visa when he was working on the Uighur story in 2017. This had never happened before, even when he was investigating the controversial story with Bo Xilai.
Most Uyghurs don't even speak your language. That generalization of well-connectivity doesn't apply at all. Unless you speak Äynu, you are likely talking mostly with Han Chinese in Xinjiang (or Uyghurs who had undergone severe Sinicization).
> It's almost impossible to hide any major events in China, even with large scale blockage
It is impossible to hide "major events" only when jounralists are free to roam around in China.
I have a jounralist friend whose grandfather was a Chinese war hero (i.e. he is a 红三代). He is now a US citizen, and works for a respectable news media. He had internal CCP connections but were denied Chinese visa when he was working on the Uighur story in 2017. This had never happened before, even when he was investigating the controversial story with Bo Xilai.
I appreciate your comment but I didn't imply that the connection was seamless between ethnic groups. Your thinking assumes that there is a huge segregation between the two populations and anyone who cross-over would be 'Sinicization' / radicalisation. But reality is more complex than that. If you been or watched any videos from Xinjiang (unfortunately most not in English) you would see alot of locals (ethnic minorities) supporting the current way of life or even the law enforcement themselves (which I don't want to argue about its right or wrong here).
I don't see how the journalist story relates to this. I know exactly the kind of profile he has. Most people in/out of China know the limit of political freedom and the sensitivity changes according to political tides. It'll be quite strange that he pretends he didn't know the severity. But that's exactly my point: these events muddle the water and hide the real serious issues.
I don't see how the journalist story relates to this. I know exactly the kind of profile he has. Most people in/out of China know the limit of political freedom and the sensitivity changes according to political tides. It'll be quite strange that he pretends he didn't know the severity. But that's exactly my point: these events muddle the water and hide the real serious issues.
> But have you ever doubt that why all stories about China are negative
This struck a chord with me. I think most people who read news regularly can agree that nearly 100% of the news about China these days are negative, and never anything positive. We can all wonder why that is.
This struck a chord with me. I think most people who read news regularly can agree that nearly 100% of the news about China these days are negative, and never anything positive. We can all wonder why that is.
> I think most people who read news regularly can agree that nearly 100% of the news about China these days are negative, and never anything positive.
That's only relevant if you compare it to other topics and there's a discrepancy. There's very little positive content in the political news I read, even when it's about Western countries. If something works or is going well it's almost not news by definition, at least it's less likely to appear on the front page.
That's only relevant if you compare it to other topics and there's a discrepancy. There's very little positive content in the political news I read, even when it's about Western countries. If something works or is going well it's almost not news by definition, at least it's less likely to appear on the front page.
Because most of the "positive advances" they make are a direct consequence of their inhumane government that can afford to do whatever it wants or just plain PR. Just look at their COVID response, for example.
Of course it's political as well, but there's no way around that.
Of course it's political as well, but there's no way around that.
Yes, but then you could make entirely the same point about the US. But generally this isn't done, especially not here. That's what makes it xenophobic.
I'm curious, what are your thoughts on first-hand survivor accounts such as these?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071
https://www.voanews.com/south-central-asia/china-uses-rape-t...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/12/uighur-xinjian...
These are real people. They aren't Western "plants", and it would be a pretty big conspiracy for them to all coordinate and "lie" about the things they detail. Sure, western media is biased, but I would still trust it a lot more when reporting on such matters than Chinese media because the latter have a lot more to lose and are also single-mindedly focused on controlling the narrative when it comes to any sort of press or public release of information because ultimately they are an extension of the Chinese government in a very direct way.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071
https://www.voanews.com/south-central-asia/china-uses-rape-t...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/12/uighur-xinjian...
These are real people. They aren't Western "plants", and it would be a pretty big conspiracy for them to all coordinate and "lie" about the things they detail. Sure, western media is biased, but I would still trust it a lot more when reporting on such matters than Chinese media because the latter have a lot more to lose and are also single-mindedly focused on controlling the narrative when it comes to any sort of press or public release of information because ultimately they are an extension of the Chinese government in a very direct way.
The problem is that there are always examples where such witnesses or whistleblowers were planted by actors in the US, like Li-Meng Yan, a supposed whistleblower supported by Steve Bannon. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/business/media/steve-bann...
Or the Nayirah case: "In her emotional testimony, Nayirah claimed that after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital, take the incubators, and leave the babies to die." Which was all a lie, but a convenient argument for the Iraq war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony
I certainly think it is possible that these atrocities actually happen in China, OTOH it fits all too well into the anti-China warmongering in the US.
Or the Nayirah case: "In her emotional testimony, Nayirah claimed that after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers take babies out of incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital, take the incubators, and leave the babies to die." Which was all a lie, but a convenient argument for the Iraq war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony
I certainly think it is possible that these atrocities actually happen in China, OTOH it fits all too well into the anti-China warmongering in the US.
>planted by actors in the US, like Li-Meng Yan
She isn't an actor. She's a bit of a conspiracy theorist type from Hong Kong on the Wuhan lab leak stuff. I'm not sure how that's relevant to anything much here beyond that it pays to check your sources.
She isn't an actor. She's a bit of a conspiracy theorist type from Hong Kong on the Wuhan lab leak stuff. I'm not sure how that's relevant to anything much here beyond that it pays to check your sources.
Like a normal person, I'm against any inhumane treatment in any form against innocent people.
These personal stories from these victims are most likely true. I feel sad and angry about what happened to them and would like to see changes.
You know, even average schools in China looks more like a prison than actual prisons in the west. (Which remind me of this: https://www.schoolprison.com/ )
You will often find 8-12 students packed in a small 10-20m^2 room with thousands of students in each building. Many schools would also have fences or walls all around to prevent students from escaping. Some photos:
https://ss1.bdstatic.com/70cFvXSh_Q1YnxGkpoWK1HF6hhy/it/u=41... https://ss3.bdstatic.com/70cFv8Sh_Q1YnxGkpoWK1HF6hhy/it/u=17...
These re-education camps/concentration camps (whatever you call them) are surely a downgrade from average schools because they are completely out of the government's pocket and constructed in a short period.
Only that, can seem inhumane to many people in developed country, even exaggerated by some BBC documentary, but it's just a reflection of average living condition in China.
It's not difficult to realize part of the CCP's narrative must hold some truth -- the Xinjiang situation was mostly a response to the non-stopping terror attacks in the region for the last couple of decades. And depending on the "radicalization level" of the people being contained, the security level of these camps must be ranging from a lot more usual to heavily guarded.
So yes, there will be prison-level camps and many near-prison-level camps.
I believe most of these incidents reported by western media are conducted independently by the officials in the camps under stricter lock-down, which provided an out-lawed environment for them to conduct the crimes. However, I don't believe any of these are systematically orchestrated and oversaw by the CCP from the top down. If you argue otherwise, you better provide some strong proof, i.e. recording of high-rank CCP officials admitting such an evil plan. Because it's a very, very serious allegation.
Those individuals who conducted these crimes are directly responsible for what they did and must be held responsible. There also must be regulations on these camps to make sure incidents like these never happen again.
Then where's the justice held? You must then ask. I don't have a solid answer to it. I hope those responsible already got what they deserve. But those verdicts probably won't be made public. You surely can understand why given the heat on all of this.
But I'm more confident that the CCP has placed better regulation on all the camps to prevent such incidents from happening again. The reason is CCP has invited western reporters to visit and investigate on the ground. Of course, they probably won't find any evidence that those incidents ever happened, but they will be shown with all the regulations of these places to a degree that no problem can be found. Surely western reporters also understand that very well -- most haven't responded to the invitation because they know they won't be able to dig more dirt on this.
Another level of discussion is whether it's humane to force/mandate people to attend re-education camps. If you want we can get into that as well.
I think if you really want to help people in those camps, you should start talking about donations, improving their living conditions, providing educational resources, even collaboration on education projects, help them graduate/get out of there, and get a job sooner.
I want to show some folks on HN, even with Chinese people, you can have a civil and reasonable conversation on controversial topics. We are not liars, nor monsters without compassion. We are also normal people, just like you. It's completely up to you to listen or deny.
You know, even average schools in China looks more like a prison than actual prisons in the west. (Which remind me of this: https://www.schoolprison.com/ )
You will often find 8-12 students packed in a small 10-20m^2 room with thousands of students in each building. Many schools would also have fences or walls all around to prevent students from escaping. Some photos:
https://ss1.bdstatic.com/70cFvXSh_Q1YnxGkpoWK1HF6hhy/it/u=41... https://ss3.bdstatic.com/70cFv8Sh_Q1YnxGkpoWK1HF6hhy/it/u=17...
These re-education camps/concentration camps (whatever you call them) are surely a downgrade from average schools because they are completely out of the government's pocket and constructed in a short period.
Only that, can seem inhumane to many people in developed country, even exaggerated by some BBC documentary, but it's just a reflection of average living condition in China.
It's not difficult to realize part of the CCP's narrative must hold some truth -- the Xinjiang situation was mostly a response to the non-stopping terror attacks in the region for the last couple of decades. And depending on the "radicalization level" of the people being contained, the security level of these camps must be ranging from a lot more usual to heavily guarded.
So yes, there will be prison-level camps and many near-prison-level camps.
I believe most of these incidents reported by western media are conducted independently by the officials in the camps under stricter lock-down, which provided an out-lawed environment for them to conduct the crimes. However, I don't believe any of these are systematically orchestrated and oversaw by the CCP from the top down. If you argue otherwise, you better provide some strong proof, i.e. recording of high-rank CCP officials admitting such an evil plan. Because it's a very, very serious allegation.
Those individuals who conducted these crimes are directly responsible for what they did and must be held responsible. There also must be regulations on these camps to make sure incidents like these never happen again.
Then where's the justice held? You must then ask. I don't have a solid answer to it. I hope those responsible already got what they deserve. But those verdicts probably won't be made public. You surely can understand why given the heat on all of this.
But I'm more confident that the CCP has placed better regulation on all the camps to prevent such incidents from happening again. The reason is CCP has invited western reporters to visit and investigate on the ground. Of course, they probably won't find any evidence that those incidents ever happened, but they will be shown with all the regulations of these places to a degree that no problem can be found. Surely western reporters also understand that very well -- most haven't responded to the invitation because they know they won't be able to dig more dirt on this.
Another level of discussion is whether it's humane to force/mandate people to attend re-education camps. If you want we can get into that as well.
I think if you really want to help people in those camps, you should start talking about donations, improving their living conditions, providing educational resources, even collaboration on education projects, help them graduate/get out of there, and get a job sooner.
I want to show some folks on HN, even with Chinese people, you can have a civil and reasonable conversation on controversial topics. We are not liars, nor monsters without compassion. We are also normal people, just like you. It's completely up to you to listen or deny.
> But I'm more confident that the CCP has placed better regulation on all the camps to prevent such incidents from happening again.
Regulations are not worth much without enforcement. Enforcement requires inspections to verify regulations are being followed and punishment if they're not. But if the regulations are not being followed, then cheating the inspections is another way to avoid punishment. It's much cheaper to put on a show for the inspectors than to make permanent improvements. So a lot of cheating is to be expected.
Regulations are not worth much without enforcement. Enforcement requires inspections to verify regulations are being followed and punishment if they're not. But if the regulations are not being followed, then cheating the inspections is another way to avoid punishment. It's much cheaper to put on a show for the inspectors than to make permanent improvements. So a lot of cheating is to be expected.
> the Xinjiang situation was mostly a response to the non-stopping terror attacks in the region for the last couple of decades
The Chinese crackdown on Xinjiang goes back well beyond the terror attacks. There used to be a secular, non-violent Uighur movement for their rights, including Uighur communists who simply wanted the right to use their own language at all times and not Chinese, like the laws ostensibly allow. However, in the 1980s and 1990s the Beijing regime imprisoned many of those activists or sent them into exile. At the same time, Han settlers were entering the area even though it was clear that this would change the region’s demographics.
Once the secular and non-violent activism was shut down, there arose out of desperation new trends that were violent and/or Islamist. But that doesn’t mean the CCP’s policy of Uighur assimilation and Han settlement didn’t come first.
The Chinese crackdown on Xinjiang goes back well beyond the terror attacks. There used to be a secular, non-violent Uighur movement for their rights, including Uighur communists who simply wanted the right to use their own language at all times and not Chinese, like the laws ostensibly allow. However, in the 1980s and 1990s the Beijing regime imprisoned many of those activists or sent them into exile. At the same time, Han settlers were entering the area even though it was clear that this would change the region’s demographics.
Once the secular and non-violent activism was shut down, there arose out of desperation new trends that were violent and/or Islamist. But that doesn’t mean the CCP’s policy of Uighur assimilation and Han settlement didn’t come first.
I appreciate your point. But it is only one-sided story. Both sides have been victims of historical conflict, there is a long history of han ethnic people being driven away too. Arguing who did wrong first is a bit like a religious debate. Look at the globe one shouldn't fail to see it's a common pattern (Palestine etc). To argue who has the ultimate rights to the land is a tricky and dangerous task.
Another observation I have is that there's little mention of the history of Xinjiang itself. The long-standing threat from Russian influence starting from before Republic of China (ROC) period. And the autonomous Muslim defense against russian puppet gov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_rebellion_in_Xinjiang_... and even the later alliance with the communist party. Sure you could argue from one-side that all that is happening is wrong but unfortunately a lot of the evidence today are from anti-china alliance such as epoch times, which in my opinion really hides the real issues of the chinese society.
Another observation I have is that there's little mention of the history of Xinjiang itself. The long-standing threat from Russian influence starting from before Republic of China (ROC) period. And the autonomous Muslim defense against russian puppet gov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_rebellion_in_Xinjiang_... and even the later alliance with the communist party. Sure you could argue from one-side that all that is happening is wrong but unfortunately a lot of the evidence today are from anti-china alliance such as epoch times, which in my opinion really hides the real issues of the chinese society.
You talk about Russian influence as a "threat", and Han influence as something natural that needs to be protected. I appreciate your respectful message, but please notice that another equally defensible position would be the opposite one: considering Han influence a "threat" to be protected against.
I apologise for my choice of words, I'm not a native speaker, nor could I do it in a more diplomatic way.
However I do agree with you, for the opposite it might well see han population as a threat, probably right from the early dynasties. I have by no means implied Russian influence is 'evil', it is simply the historical narrative. It is only natural that from 1900s the powers around that area want to take control in the geopolitics. Same situation today.
My point is that if you understand the situation better (which is hard because of language / culture barriers, similar to middle east crisis), you might be able to know more nuances of the issue.
However I do agree with you, for the opposite it might well see han population as a threat, probably right from the early dynasties. I have by no means implied Russian influence is 'evil', it is simply the historical narrative. It is only natural that from 1900s the powers around that area want to take control in the geopolitics. Same situation today.
My point is that if you understand the situation better (which is hard because of language / culture barriers, similar to middle east crisis), you might be able to know more nuances of the issue.
> the Xinjiang situation was mostly a response to the non-stopping terror attacks in the region for the last couple of decades.
How does CCP define terrorists? Do they show you how do they investigate then decide they are terrorists?
CCP can define any attacks as terrorist. In case it's a revolt against inhumane treatment, can they say they are under terroristic attack from CCP?
How does CCP define terrorists? Do they show you how do they investigate then decide they are terrorists?
CCP can define any attacks as terrorist. In case it's a revolt against inhumane treatment, can they say they are under terroristic attack from CCP?
Your assertion Western journalists haven't visited is false; see a summary here [1].
The whole site is very good - and the independent journalist speaks Chinese and is fairly unbiased (excerpt from site "the US makes a big deal out of the treatment of Muslims in China while underwriting genocide in Yemen"). Especially the analysis on the leaked documents [2].
[1] https://wokeglobaltimes.com/aac16063149c4e37a8e3ee58066c4837...
[2] https://wokeglobaltimes.com/c227d529f6f0469392edbe07980f9f70
The whole site is very good - and the independent journalist speaks Chinese and is fairly unbiased (excerpt from site "the US makes a big deal out of the treatment of Muslims in China while underwriting genocide in Yemen"). Especially the analysis on the leaked documents [2].
[1] https://wokeglobaltimes.com/aac16063149c4e37a8e3ee58066c4837...
[2] https://wokeglobaltimes.com/c227d529f6f0469392edbe07980f9f70
I didn't say none of them visited. I even mentioned BBC documentary.
I apologise then; I got the impression that you thought they had not visited because of the following in your post.
> Surely western reporters also understand that very well -- most haven't responded to the invitation because they know they won't be able to dig more dirt on this.
> Surely western reporters also understand that very well -- most haven't responded to the invitation because they know they won't be able to dig more dirt on this.
I'd add this one to the list: https://www.vice.com/en/article/qj4x7v/most-dystopian-place-...
Is this true for Chinese academics though? Are Chinese mathematicians uncreative and uninspired? Are Chinese scientists disadvantaged vs western scientists due to conformist thought?
We were being taught that way, but not all people will become uncreative. In fact it's the opposite, your creativity has nothing to do with how you were taught. It's all about how you think. Even with conformist education there can be evolutionary talents coming out of it. It's my whole point writing this thread.
Beautifully written. But you mislead. You start by criticizing the Chinese education system and then you say there is no way to verify the story of CCP, so CCP may not be the bad people. That the impression you provide in this post and in reply post to this one.
Here's another view point. CCP is anti democracy. Any Chinese citizen who oppose the authority of CCP must be encouraged in the interest to promote democracy.
Here's another view point. CCP is anti democracy. Any Chinese citizen who oppose the authority of CCP must be encouraged in the interest to promote democracy.
This is the classic US reason for invading another country, plundering it and then fucking off. It has to be done to spread "democracy". Guess what: It's not very democratic to waltz into some country and tell them how to act and how to appoint their leaders.
I don't think most people consider the CCP the same as Chinese people. I surely don't.
That doesn't mean there isn't a strong correlation with the country and it's political leaders. In my opinion, a country may be judged by it's leaders.
That doesn't mean there isn't a strong correlation with the country and it's political leaders. In my opinion, a country may be judged by it's leaders.
It's always ironic to see people claim their very smart Chinese colleagues being brainwashed, when these colleagues have experience in both east and west - they're not the ones with singular perspective and the information deficit. Chinese who have lived through daily propaganda inherently understands nature of propaganda. Very few take official news sources at face value. Not to mention more multilingual Chinese with English fluency able to share news from across the wall. You can't say the same about anglosphere and Chinese information literacy. The amount of absolutely ignorant western commentary on China is staggering, where as Chinese net actually has western perspectives that somewhat comport with reality. Access to free information ≠ being informed. China's Great Fire Wall is crudely designed to produce ignorance via hardware, the elegant strategy in manufactured consent is ignorance subsumed at the biologic level. Free Fifth Estate generates dogmatism in absence of media literacy and produce a polity seemingly indistinguishable from state media but accompanied by staggering obliviousness. Incidentally, in terms of foreign reporting, BBC is functionally satisfying it's position as state funded propaganda. Those from global south diaspora in the west will attest how egregious BBC foreign reporting is.
This becomes part of the problem. China has tried to merge the concept of the country, the people and the government into one homogeneous thing. Now any criticism of the regime is considered "racist"?
In a parallel reality where Germans are a different race, maybe criticizing Nazis is racism.
> But you have to understand it's much more difficult to prove something you didn't do instead of something you did
Do you think the authorities could be more transparent about what is happening in these regions?
Do you think the authorities could be more transparent about what is happening in these regions?
That would only feed the western media what they want, so no, I don't expect more details from the government. It's almost the de-facto solution that China use to address foreign publicity -- no comment.
But that doesn't mean they will ignore the problem, but on the contrary, they always take care the situation swiftly and always show off their results one way or the other. If you know China enough you should be familiar with how they operate.
What matters is they are giving all the resources to the people in the camp, and implementing strict regulation and accountability for all the activities in the camp, to make sure everything is running humanely and lawfully.
But that doesn't mean they will ignore the problem, but on the contrary, they always take care the situation swiftly and always show off their results one way or the other. If you know China enough you should be familiar with how they operate.
What matters is they are giving all the resources to the people in the camp, and implementing strict regulation and accountability for all the activities in the camp, to make sure everything is running humanely and lawfully.
> I don't expect more details from the government.
And yet you trust them to do the right thing. I think that's where most of the disagreement comes from. A politician in the Western world who would try to avoid transparency would be suspect, we would think they did something wrong. I think westerners tend to judge the CCP on the same basis, but apparently you trust them.
What have they done to earn your trust?
How do you make sure that they don't abuse this trust (especially without transparency)?
Surely it would be possible for them to lose your trust, if they abused it. What kind of situation would that be?
And yet you trust them to do the right thing. I think that's where most of the disagreement comes from. A politician in the Western world who would try to avoid transparency would be suspect, we would think they did something wrong. I think westerners tend to judge the CCP on the same basis, but apparently you trust them.
What have they done to earn your trust?
How do you make sure that they don't abuse this trust (especially without transparency)?
Surely it would be possible for them to lose your trust, if they abused it. What kind of situation would that be?
This is beautiful, thank you
These days people don't believe medias fully even in the western world.
I think it's more a question of having bad medias (that can and did lie) is probably easier to trust than having no medias. Big communist countries (and other non communist, like Tunisia or some middle east ones) had a history of removing journalists.
I think it's more a question of having bad medias (that can and did lie) is probably easier to trust than having no medias. Big communist countries (and other non communist, like Tunisia or some middle east ones) had a history of removing journalists.
[deleted]
[deleted]
You cannot trust anything reported out of China, absolutely nothing. I do not doubt that there are people being slaughtered and massacred as I write, but anything reported out of China must be taken deeply suspicious, especially if it comes from the government. The Chinese government is the single greatest threat to freedom, and human rights this world has ever seen.
You don't need to trust anybody's reporting, you can go browse Weibo or Toutiao or Douyin and go see for yourself what regular Chinese people are saying all across China right now. Sure, anything overly political is (self-)censored and there's some actual paid wumao shills in there, but day-to-day stuff like grumbling about local government incompetence is widespread. Here's the Xinjiang hashtag, go nuts:
https://m.weibo.cn/search?containerid=231522type%3D1%26t%3D1...
https://m.weibo.cn/search?containerid=231522type%3D1%26t%3D1...
The Xinjiang hashtag isn't really a good target, because it's high-profile enough that there's probably a dedicated team of censors monitoring it.
And of course Weibo search doesn't work for Uyghur content. Try finding this post using any of the words in it: https://m.weibo.cn/detail/4606432605644442 I found it by searching for Uyghur words in Latin script to find someone posting in Uyghur, then looking through their posting history.
I think Weibo is pretty much useless as a source of unfiltered information, unless you're already a heavy Weibo user and can just stumble across things instead of having to rely on search.
And of course Weibo search doesn't work for Uyghur content. Try finding this post using any of the words in it: https://m.weibo.cn/detail/4606432605644442 I found it by searching for Uyghur words in Latin script to find someone posting in Uyghur, then looking through their posting history.
I think Weibo is pretty much useless as a source of unfiltered information, unless you're already a heavy Weibo user and can just stumble across things instead of having to rely on search.
Self censorship is huge. I admire dissidents living under authoritarian regimes who are brave enough to share their stories, whether they remain there or escape.
Read the thread you're replying to - there's little self-censorship.
How would you measure the amount of self-censorship?
And American imperialism is what, just and benign?
newacct583(5)
>The Chinese government is the single greatest threat to freedom, and human rights this world has ever seen.
How so? Its ability to expand its control beyond its current reach is pretty limited. It is surrounded by the lands and military forces of Russia, India, and the US and its client states like Japan and South Korea.
How so? Its ability to expand its control beyond its current reach is pretty limited. It is surrounded by the lands and military forces of Russia, India, and the US and its client states like Japan and South Korea.
US/UK were bombing these Uighur extremists/separatists just a few years ago. Now they are seen as useful pawns in the trade/economic war with China, so the genocide narrative gets mainstreamed by the usual suspects (the same ones that tried to hide the fact that we (US/UK) were arming/training/funding ISIS and visiting Uighur/Turk terrorists in Syria).
vivekpandian(2)
Are their friends who live in Xinjiang Han or Uyghur?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and all we have are unreliable narrators. The only thing more upsetting for some Americans than a genocide in Xinjiang is no genocide in Xinjiang.
Americans aren't very interested in defending human rights, but they're deeply invested in defending the lie that they are interested in defending human rights.
Americans aren't very interested in defending human rights, but they're deeply invested in defending the lie that they are interested in defending human rights.
I live in Hong Kong and that's exactly how I talk with people abroad totally panicking over the situation here. It's... not THAT bad. Certainly not as bad as portrayed, sometimes, west of the world.
Not saying I have any clue about Xinjiang or that the CCP is positive for the country, but I feel uneasy everyone switched from prisoner camps to genocide - it seems to distract away from the actual issue to move into borderline hysteria.
A bit like the HK situation moved from an extradition issue over a taiwan murder to a large "save Hong Kong" hysteria... But whatever, you used the racist card, what can we say ...
Not saying I have any clue about Xinjiang or that the CCP is positive for the country, but I feel uneasy everyone switched from prisoner camps to genocide - it seems to distract away from the actual issue to move into borderline hysteria.
A bit like the HK situation moved from an extradition issue over a taiwan murder to a large "save Hong Kong" hysteria... But whatever, you used the racist card, what can we say ...
Didn’t the situation in Hong Kong escalate from people being concerned about the extradition thing to the Chinese government now suspending elections?
Not really, it escalated towards the police being violent then died with a poof when teenagers realized they fucked us all.
The Chinese gov doesn't care and doesn't want to care, they are being bamboozled by the true winners of the situation: the DAB party using the communist paranoia to consolidate their local power acting as good little patriots (when every law they passed is anti-communist, really, and pro-status quo).
So the DAB suspended the legislative election after they lost the district one, for one year. They can act like that with the blame being directed at China by constantly looking the other way when asked to give an opinion about China and acting as if they were under order. But it serves 0 chinese interest, it makes the entire population hate China and China hate the population, with the DAB cementing itself into the only barrier still there before the army intervenes.
It's so obvious yet so missed by everyone that it's painful to watch. I hope there's a masterplan in Beijing, but I doubt they even understand what people think in Beijing, let alone in Hong Kong, so ...
And the DAB represents a large class of the population, too: the elders, the rent-owners, the large corporations, the traditional post-colonial Hong Kong. That's the people you see on the sideline shaking their head and taking picture in mass when the kids burn a metro station. The journalists don't film it, but I'm there with everyone just commenting at the monkeys while the western media stream them with a close angle as if they were fighting China or for freedom... While nobody is communist in Hong Kong, not even the metro station they hate so much !
I saw my entire family switch to the DAB during the protests so maybe I'm under bias thinking this produced exactly the opposite effect all sides looked for: Hong Kong is not more independent, Hong Kong is not more Chinese, but the DAB sure is more powerful - we'll see what happens if they restore the election, but at this point they can get away with not doing it and say "oh but without us it's the PLA so calm down"
The Chinese gov doesn't care and doesn't want to care, they are being bamboozled by the true winners of the situation: the DAB party using the communist paranoia to consolidate their local power acting as good little patriots (when every law they passed is anti-communist, really, and pro-status quo).
So the DAB suspended the legislative election after they lost the district one, for one year. They can act like that with the blame being directed at China by constantly looking the other way when asked to give an opinion about China and acting as if they were under order. But it serves 0 chinese interest, it makes the entire population hate China and China hate the population, with the DAB cementing itself into the only barrier still there before the army intervenes.
It's so obvious yet so missed by everyone that it's painful to watch. I hope there's a masterplan in Beijing, but I doubt they even understand what people think in Beijing, let alone in Hong Kong, so ...
And the DAB represents a large class of the population, too: the elders, the rent-owners, the large corporations, the traditional post-colonial Hong Kong. That's the people you see on the sideline shaking their head and taking picture in mass when the kids burn a metro station. The journalists don't film it, but I'm there with everyone just commenting at the monkeys while the western media stream them with a close angle as if they were fighting China or for freedom... While nobody is communist in Hong Kong, not even the metro station they hate so much !
I saw my entire family switch to the DAB during the protests so maybe I'm under bias thinking this produced exactly the opposite effect all sides looked for: Hong Kong is not more independent, Hong Kong is not more Chinese, but the DAB sure is more powerful - we'll see what happens if they restore the election, but at this point they can get away with not doing it and say "oh but without us it's the PLA so calm down"
Yes and million things build up over the years.
I take this issue very serious issue and I've spent a significant amount of time researching it. I think there is a settler-colonial project occurring in Xinjiang, but there are some serious problems with many of the western sources that undermine the credibility of this report.
Report https://14ee1ae3-14ee-4012-91cf-a6a3b7dc3d8b.usrfiles.com/ug...
The evidence for most of these accusations come from Adrian Zenz and ASPI. The report says:
> the works of Dr Zenz, ASPI and similar others would be accorded significant weight and would have probative value in establishing the relevant facts.
Adrian Zenz is the key source for almost all of the genocide claims but I think him and his claims should be scrutinized. The Grayzone did a very critical analysis of Zenz and his claims that is worth exporing if you are actually interested in this subject. https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-...
I think global attention could help the people of Xinjiang, but not if it’s hijacked by western governments who have an axe to grind with China.
Report https://14ee1ae3-14ee-4012-91cf-a6a3b7dc3d8b.usrfiles.com/ug...
The evidence for most of these accusations come from Adrian Zenz and ASPI. The report says:
> the works of Dr Zenz, ASPI and similar others would be accorded significant weight and would have probative value in establishing the relevant facts.
Adrian Zenz is the key source for almost all of the genocide claims but I think him and his claims should be scrutinized. The Grayzone did a very critical analysis of Zenz and his claims that is worth exporing if you are actually interested in this subject. https://thegrayzone.com/2021/02/18/us-media-reports-chinese-...
I think global attention could help the people of Xinjiang, but not if it’s hijacked by western governments who have an axe to grind with China.
The credibility is in the statements of the Chinese that both deny and defend the practice.
No. The credibility comes from the actual evidence provided.
True. But evidence is also given by the perpetrator through denial and accidental confirmation.
We will never do anything, because iphone.
American dependency on cheap foreign labor dictates a lot of inaction, from China concentration camps to Middle Eastern human rights violations.
Here is an alternative: https://puri.sm/products/librem-5-usa. Before complaining about the price, try to find any other phone made in USA.
PDF of the legal opinion
https://14ee1ae3-14ee-4012-91cf-a6a3b7dc3d8b.usrfiles.com/ug...
from https://www.glanlaw.org/single-post/legal-opinion-concludes-...
This is the single most dodgy looking url I've ever shared.
https://14ee1ae3-14ee-4012-91cf-a6a3b7dc3d8b.usrfiles.com/ug...
from https://www.glanlaw.org/single-post/legal-opinion-concludes-...
This is the single most dodgy looking url I've ever shared.
FWIW, usrfiles.com seems to be a CDN associated with wix.com. glanlaw.org has DNS registered with wix, so I expect they're hosting there too.
Funny, at the non-dodgy URL, the opinion is the opposite: https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-...
"Despite the Trump administration’s declaration of a genocide in Xinjiang, upheld by the Biden administration, some legal experts suspect China’s behavior may fall short of actual genocide."
This opinion by those legal experts with their nitpicky definitions of 'actual genocide' is probably related to the absolute lack of any mass casualties. Not that such technical concerns should stand in the way of nationalist rhetoric.
"Despite the Trump administration’s declaration of a genocide in Xinjiang, upheld by the Biden administration, some legal experts suspect China’s behavior may fall short of actual genocide."
This opinion by those legal experts with their nitpicky definitions of 'actual genocide' is probably related to the absolute lack of any mass casualties. Not that such technical concerns should stand in the way of nationalist rhetoric.
I don't believe there is sufficient evidence for mass casualties, but the OP is arguing a different tack: they're saying that we have evidence for forced sterilization and targeted oppression of the Uyghur culture, which by their sources can be construed as genocide.
[deleted]
As far as I know, forced sterilization only happens when someone exceeds their allotment of children. This is a China-wide policy, in place for decades, that isn't ethnic-specific.
The Uyghurs, in fact, have a higher allotment of children than Han Chinese. Which is.. the opposite of genocide, really, if you're letting their population grow more than the "non-genocided" population.
The Uyghurs, in fact, have a higher allotment of children than Han Chinese. Which is.. the opposite of genocide, really, if you're letting their population grow more than the "non-genocided" population.
> State Department Lawyers Concluded Insufficient Evidence to Prove Genocide in China
> The U.S. State Department’s Office of the Legal Advisor concluded earlier this year that China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity—but there was insufficient evidence to prove genocide, placing the United States’ top diplomatic lawyers at odds with both the Trump and Biden administrations, according to three former and current U.S. officials.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-...
> The U.S. State Department’s Office of the Legal Advisor concluded earlier this year that China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity—but there was insufficient evidence to prove genocide, placing the United States’ top diplomatic lawyers at odds with both the Trump and Biden administrations, according to three former and current U.S. officials.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-...
But not at odds about the "crimes against humanity" part, right? Basically everyone except the CCP's PR department agrees that China is engaging in an ethnic cleansing.
This article isn't disagreeing with that, it's not debating that the State department over-exaggerated or misrepresented the extent of the problem. Instead, it's arguing a semantic point that "cultural" genocide is harder to pin down than overt WW2-style death camps. It argues that if we call this genocide, then nobody will care about a bigger issue down the road. But given that the United States and other allies have been shockingly derelict in holding China to account over what is widely agreed to be an ethnic cleansing, the decay of the word "genocide" as an accurate descriptor of a coordinated effort to eliminate a culture should not be our top worry right now.
I do not buy the article's concerns. It is wild to me that people can argue we're being too aggressive talking about China right now. We are not being aggressive enough. International courts are not pursuing China strongly enough right now. The CCP is being ignored even though the actual facts of the case are agreed on by almost everyone even in this article -- that China is attempting to eliminate an entire culture, and they are deploying horrifying methods in the pursuit of that goal.
This article isn't disagreeing with that, it's not debating that the State department over-exaggerated or misrepresented the extent of the problem. Instead, it's arguing a semantic point that "cultural" genocide is harder to pin down than overt WW2-style death camps. It argues that if we call this genocide, then nobody will care about a bigger issue down the road. But given that the United States and other allies have been shockingly derelict in holding China to account over what is widely agreed to be an ethnic cleansing, the decay of the word "genocide" as an accurate descriptor of a coordinated effort to eliminate a culture should not be our top worry right now.
I do not buy the article's concerns. It is wild to me that people can argue we're being too aggressive talking about China right now. We are not being aggressive enough. International courts are not pursuing China strongly enough right now. The CCP is being ignored even though the actual facts of the case are agreed on by almost everyone even in this article -- that China is attempting to eliminate an entire culture, and they are deploying horrifying methods in the pursuit of that goal.
>Basically everyone
Plurality of countries, including majority Islamic countries, have stated positions that still support Chinese actions in XJ as counter insurgency. CCP has and maintained the dominant narrative.
>semantic point
Semantics is the only context that matters if the goal is to trigger legal consequences. Cultural genocide doesn't legally exist, it's a more apt label but one that does not have any diplomatic consequences. Hence effort to over-exaggerate, which has and will fail for the simple reasons that 1) it's not correct 2) China has more support.
>being too aggressive
Outside of possibly a few FVEY countries making effort to coordinate their own deliberations, the majority of the world will not adopt genocide label because they understand the US led initiative is bullshit and self-serving. There's a reason Pompeo tried to bypass straight into genocide despite crimes against humanity being a more appropriate label as determined by the review findings of his own state department. Crimes against humanity, while more formalized than cultural genocide, still does not have comprehensive convention or consequences. No one is obligated to sanction or punish crimes against humanity. And if it ever did, it would open up US actions to similar scrutiny. It's why the Hague Invasion Act exists.
Plurality of countries, including majority Islamic countries, have stated positions that still support Chinese actions in XJ as counter insurgency. CCP has and maintained the dominant narrative.
>semantic point
Semantics is the only context that matters if the goal is to trigger legal consequences. Cultural genocide doesn't legally exist, it's a more apt label but one that does not have any diplomatic consequences. Hence effort to over-exaggerate, which has and will fail for the simple reasons that 1) it's not correct 2) China has more support.
>being too aggressive
Outside of possibly a few FVEY countries making effort to coordinate their own deliberations, the majority of the world will not adopt genocide label because they understand the US led initiative is bullshit and self-serving. There's a reason Pompeo tried to bypass straight into genocide despite crimes against humanity being a more appropriate label as determined by the review findings of his own state department. Crimes against humanity, while more formalized than cultural genocide, still does not have comprehensive convention or consequences. No one is obligated to sanction or punish crimes against humanity. And if it ever did, it would open up US actions to similar scrutiny. It's why the Hague Invasion Act exists.
danShumway(1)
Hence why the original Genocide accusation had to be laundered first through Zenz / Victims of Communism, why this "opinion" was commissioned by NED funded Uighur organizations. Why lying Pompeo only backed the genocide label at the end of his term despite your linked assessment by his own state department. It's delusional to think commissioned legal opinions still funded by US interests is going to make genocide stick when state department legal minds could not. Articles like this are, and have always been used for purpose of political theatre.
The amount of comments in this thread which appear to assume that 'genocide' means exclusively physical harm is concerning.
Just for the record: as per the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide [1], genocide is officially defined as either physical _or_ mental harm.
[1] https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-...
Just for the record: as per the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide [1], genocide is officially defined as either physical _or_ mental harm.
[1] https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-...
And there's also that:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_stages_of_genocide
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_stages_of_genocide
This article downplays the most horrendous act of genocide: systematic, state-endorsed RAPE of Uighur women and girls (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071)
Mass extermination is obvious, but here's another way to destroy a nation: through the deepest, most unutterable form of demoralization.
And I think the reason it's not more in the headlines is precisely because of its nature: we don't want to think about this kind of act, on a mass scale, perpetrated by one of the most powerful nations in the world, indirectly supported by Western economies and politics.
The BBC report is considered credible. The best thing we can do is to spread it, and hope it becomes viral - so that business with China becomes absolutely socially unacceptable.
Mass extermination is obvious, but here's another way to destroy a nation: through the deepest, most unutterable form of demoralization.
And I think the reason it's not more in the headlines is precisely because of its nature: we don't want to think about this kind of act, on a mass scale, perpetrated by one of the most powerful nations in the world, indirectly supported by Western economies and politics.
The BBC report is considered credible. The best thing we can do is to spread it, and hope it becomes viral - so that business with China becomes absolutely socially unacceptable.
Indirectly supported by all the cheap unnecessary shit we buy.
This is something that future generations are going to look back at with a lot of shame. It's going to end up being in textbooks as another thing where students wonder why we were OK with genocide happening under our noses.
In the US at least, we are not taking this problem seriously enough. There's a lot of acknowledgement that something bad is happening, but not a lot of clear coordination on an international scale to actually stop it. I am generally a non-interventionist, but this is an area where we need to get more involved and we need to be more forceful about pulling the economic and social levers that we have at our disposal.
It still feels like we're just treating this like "problematic" behavior from a contentious ally, rather than a genocide. At least in the US, we are still not really grappling with the gravity of that word.
In the US at least, we are not taking this problem seriously enough. There's a lot of acknowledgement that something bad is happening, but not a lot of clear coordination on an international scale to actually stop it. I am generally a non-interventionist, but this is an area where we need to get more involved and we need to be more forceful about pulling the economic and social levers that we have at our disposal.
It still feels like we're just treating this like "problematic" behavior from a contentious ally, rather than a genocide. At least in the US, we are still not really grappling with the gravity of that word.
We have no leverage and the global economic system doesn’t care enough. Let’s be real, China is the new world super power. The US is still riding the coattails of prior success.
We’re a confused divided country and China has a brutally efficient system of exploitation the US needs.
We’re a confused divided country and China has a brutally efficient system of exploitation the US needs.
Moral authority over martial or material. Nature wins without effort. Storms and earthquakes go where they want, regardless of who lives or dies.
The USA doesn't need the competition. Leave us alone please, for just once in our history. Our entire existence, the world has waged war against us.
Imaging black holes. Probes inside the Sun. Ever growing size of matter waves. Find peace please, or I build a horrible weapon of coarse resuscitation, a gravity application of pair production and coherent control that doesn't kill, but keeps people alive.
The USA doesn't need the competition. Leave us alone please, for just once in our history. Our entire existence, the world has waged war against us.
Imaging black holes. Probes inside the Sun. Ever growing size of matter waves. Find peace please, or I build a horrible weapon of coarse resuscitation, a gravity application of pair production and coherent control that doesn't kill, but keeps people alive.
> Our entire existence, the world has waged war against us.
For the most recent part of it, it has rather been the inverse.
For the most recent part of it, it has rather been the inverse.
Meanwhile Apple and other companies are actively lobbying against forced labor bill in the US.
I think the most shocking part of that article was the Chinese response. I can imagine a similar response from Nazi Germany.
--
"Some anti-China forces in the West have concocted and disseminated plenty of false information about Xinjiang and fabricated "lies of the century" in various forms," the embassy said. "They have smeared China's image and slandered its policies on Xinjiang." It added: "Anyone who is fair-minded can see that the true intent of those forces is to suppress and contain China's development... Their moves are driven by a Cold War mentality, hegemonic worldview and zero-sum game mindset. China will never allow such farce and vicious demonization to succeed. Lies may mislead people for a while, but cannot win the trust of the world. Facts and truth will eventually bust all lies."
--
"Some anti-China forces in the West have concocted and disseminated plenty of false information about Xinjiang and fabricated "lies of the century" in various forms," the embassy said. "They have smeared China's image and slandered its policies on Xinjiang." It added: "Anyone who is fair-minded can see that the true intent of those forces is to suppress and contain China's development... Their moves are driven by a Cold War mentality, hegemonic worldview and zero-sum game mindset. China will never allow such farce and vicious demonization to succeed. Lies may mislead people for a while, but cannot win the trust of the world. Facts and truth will eventually bust all lies."
It reads like a caricature of authoritarian propaganda. They're not even trying to be subtle.
> A legal opinion is the professional judgement of a respected QC - an independent expert in their field - who assesses the evidence and the law and comes to a conclusion. It does not have a legal standing, like a court judgement, but can be used as a basis for legal action.
> This opinion was commissioned - but not paid for - by the Global Legal Action Network, a human rights campaign group that focuses on cross-border legal issues, and the World Uighur Congress and the Uighur Human Rights Project.
> This opinion was commissioned - but not paid for - by the Global Legal Action Network, a human rights campaign group that focuses on cross-border legal issues, and the World Uighur Congress and the Uighur Human Rights Project.
The word 'genocide' is a little tricky, it kind of implies death-camps, at least in the popular imagination, I mean, the first basis of comparison I think for most of us is the Nazi Holocaust.
A note below talked about the DoJ's concerns about 'proving genocide' etc. - it's besides the point.
If they are putting 1M people in jail due to their ethnicity and doing this crazy psychological programming, it's bad enough, the 'forced sterilization' and 'removal of children' is a very serious thing as well, but that doesn't need to happen for this to be 'very very bad'.
We might need to use a different word to describe this, that fits a little more directly to what is happening.
If China was not powerful, there would be trade sanctions, if not embargoes, which is something to consider.
The issue needs to be addressed, it steps beyond the CCP's usual arguments of 'internal problems are not your business'.
A note below talked about the DoJ's concerns about 'proving genocide' etc. - it's besides the point.
If they are putting 1M people in jail due to their ethnicity and doing this crazy psychological programming, it's bad enough, the 'forced sterilization' and 'removal of children' is a very serious thing as well, but that doesn't need to happen for this to be 'very very bad'.
We might need to use a different word to describe this, that fits a little more directly to what is happening.
If China was not powerful, there would be trade sanctions, if not embargoes, which is something to consider.
The issue needs to be addressed, it steps beyond the CCP's usual arguments of 'internal problems are not your business'.
Do we have good evidence to support the 1M figure?
[deleted]
What’s most sad about all of this is that there is really nothing the US can do to stop the genocide. No matter how many times it’s discussed, no matter how many people and politicians call attention to it, there’s really nothing the West can do. A decision was made between what’s more important: Human rights, or a new iPhone. The West chose the iPhone. China has been killing innocent people and putting them in camps for decades. It will not change unless western government and companies decide enough is enough, and stop buying Chinese goods.
"After the end of the second world war, the British view was grim. It was that the balance of power in the pacific had been totally shattered in favor of the United States. One response by London, was to support Mao Tse-tung's communist insurrection, against the pro-American, Kuomintang government of generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek in China. FDR's personal representative in China, general Patrick J. Hurley, saw as a post-war goal, a strong unified China under Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT. The British backed Mao, with the idea that the communists could become the warlords of Bejing and northern China, while the KMT might hang on in the south, below the Yangtze river. Stalin was going to be encouraged by the British to detach Manchuria, Mongolia, and Chinese Turkestan, sometimes known as Xinjiang. The British especially hated Chiang and the KMT, who were the heirs to Sun Yat-sen's opposition to colonialism, and his support for modern economic development. The British by themselves would not have been able to consolidate Mao's regime. They were aided by the pro-British Harriman faction in the United States, including Dean Acheson and general George C. Marshall, who effectively made president Harry Truman their puppet in foreign affairs. The turning point came in 1945 and 1946, when Marshall was sent on a mission to China, which resulted in a half-year cutoff of US military aid to Chiang Kai-shek at a critical turning point in the Chinese civil war. After that, Mao made the long march to sieze most of China by the end of 1949. The British were among the first to recognize Mao's government, and supply him was strategic goods through Hong-Kong. After Mao's victory, the British oligarchs were looking for wars to cut the US down to size in the far east, and restore the balance of power. The result was the Korean war. Korea had been divided north and south between the Soviets and the US, although by early 1950, both had gone home. Harriman's friend Acheson declared that the US had no interest in South Korea, then Kim Il-sung of North Korea attacked. Suddenly Harriman and Acheson discovered that the fate of the free world depended on Korea, and they convinced Truman to fight. Truman ordered MacArthur to do the impossible, to save Korea with inferior forces. MacArthur's defense of Pusan, and then the Inchon invasion defeated North Korea and stunned the British plotters. Their gambit had backfired, and US supremacy was greater than ever. So the British turned once again to their favorite device; treachery. There was in those years a stable of triple agents based in London, especially in the foreign office. These included Kim Philby, the first secretary of the British embassy in Washington. Then there was Guy Burgess, the second secretary at that same embassy. Donald Maclean was the head of the American desk in Whitehall. Other associates of this group included sir Anthony Blunt, of Buckingham Palace, and Lord Victor Rothschild, of British intelligence. There was also Lester B. Pearson, the Canadian foreign minister. These men were triples. On the surface they were British agents. Scratch deeper and they were working for the KGB, which had recruited them at Cambridge in the 1930's, but at the deepest level, they were loyal to the British monarchy. It was British policy to stab the US in the back, so as to restore the balance of power. Having some triple agents around meant that the British could do this and get away with it, with plausible deniability. If the spies should be blown, the British could claim that it had been the KGB all along. The Philby-Rothschild group of triple agents were decisive in the Korean war. Phibly and Maclean were able to send Moscow, Bejing and Pyongyang, all of MacArthurs orders from President Truman. These included restrictions against carrying the war to China, with bombing, blockade, or hard pursuit. When Mao was sure that MacArthur's hands would be tied, he commited massive Chinese forces to Korea in November of 1951. Philby and Maclean obligingly saw to it, that Mao got all of MacArthurs military dispatches. So the communists knew exactly where and when to strike."
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
aaron695(3)
I had no idea genocide included destroying a culture without killing the people who belong to it. Eg. by adoption, sterilization, indoctrination, punishment for practicing it, etc. Genocide seems like a misleading word here when typical cases are population-scale killings. But if that's the definition the UK government uses, then they have to be consistent.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
Article II b: Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Article II d: Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Article II b: Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Article II d: Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
1996(3)
mosseater(7)
How many people have died in this so called genocide?
If you omit “so called” this might be a good question.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
Article II b: Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Article II d: Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Article II b: Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Article II d: Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Great we all agree on that. Now what?
Asking since most of the people in this thread are taking it as a given: what is the strongest evidence pointing to the fact that China is carrying out a genocide?
For example, I've been fairly bothered by the consistent citing of unreliable sources for the Tiananmen square death counts (ie. that British cable that cited 10k+).
Lots of people seem to be calling any deviation from the "accepted" line to be "brainwashed", Winnie the Pooh jokes, etc.
For example, I've been fairly bothered by the consistent citing of unreliable sources for the Tiananmen square death counts (ie. that British cable that cited 10k+).
Lots of people seem to be calling any deviation from the "accepted" line to be "brainwashed", Winnie the Pooh jokes, etc.
I can go to another part of the BBC web site and read about the British killed in the past 6, 7, and 8 years while going halfway across the world to kill Muslims in the country bordering west Xinjiang.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-30224841
Meanwhile when China deals with Muslim terrorism within its own borders there's calls of "genocide" (I suppose something akin to England's genocide in Bengal during World War II, or in Ireland in the 19th century etc.)
Perplexing to see westerners who go to the other side of the world to bomb weddings in Afghanistan get into a Calvinist/liberal "moral" froth about China confronting (mostly non-violently) Muslim terrorism within its own borders, slightly west of the where the west has been occupying for two decades.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-30224841
Meanwhile when China deals with Muslim terrorism within its own borders there's calls of "genocide" (I suppose something akin to England's genocide in Bengal during World War II, or in Ireland in the 19th century etc.)
Perplexing to see westerners who go to the other side of the world to bomb weddings in Afghanistan get into a Calvinist/liberal "moral" froth about China confronting (mostly non-violently) Muslim terrorism within its own borders, slightly west of the where the west has been occupying for two decades.
>China deals with Muslim terrorism
The scale seems dramatically wide and largely ethic focused compared to a military conflict.
But what I really wonder if you compare it to "bombing a wedding"... are you ok with that?
The scale seems dramatically wide and largely ethic focused compared to a military conflict.
But what I really wonder if you compare it to "bombing a wedding"... are you ok with that?
Nothing is going to happen now when China is obviously more powerful. Moreover, none of the Muslim countries care, ME countries will happily sell China oil and Pakistan touts it’s relationship with China.