I read the post. "Could China's approach be done better? Almost certainly" Says who and per what standards. China's defused the Xinjiang situation already.
Also Obama funded this lol, so progressive!
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2019-12-05/Fighting-terrorism-in-Xinjiang-MaNLLDtnfq/index.html
It could be done better with more resources. My biggest issue with what I’ve heard of it so far is how crude the metrics for determining vulnerability are, and how one-size-fits-all the programme seems to be.
Now I understand that having a team of psychologically trained Imam to interview every detainee might not be feasible, given resource constraints. But that sort of assessment would be ideal.
Regarding the programme itself, it teaches basic mandarin, civics, and possibly some specific vocational skills. That’s great, but it’s also crude. I’ve heard some relatives of detainees express concern that their relatives weren’t in need of vocational skills, or mandarin. This suggests that the programme isn’t suitable for all people at all levels.
Personally, I’d like to see a family and community driven approach to deradicalisation, rather than a mass-produced one. Again, I get that with limited resources that may not have been feasible.
This is why I called it ‘the most humane response to extremism we’ve seen so far’. I won’t condemn them for the approach taken, but I’m also not so pessimistic as to think that there’s no way to do better.
So you don't like it because its not enough doctrine? People are crying as it is.
I get that with limited resources that may not have been feasible.
So if you understand why its not feasible why do you still complain.
also not so pessimistic as to think that there’s no way to do better.
Uh, you didn't actually propose anything "family and community driven approach rather than a mass produced one" means you want to leave it to individual families and not the state?
A good post until
Mmmnah. The West version of deradicalization is their Drone Programme.
Do you know how we can tell that you didn't read the entire post?
I read the post. "Could China's approach be done better? Almost certainly" Says who and per what standards. China's defused the Xinjiang situation already.
Also Obama funded this lol, so progressive! https://news.cgtn.com/news/2019-12-05/Fighting-terrorism-in-Xinjiang-MaNLLDtnfq/index.html
It could be done better with more resources. My biggest issue with what I’ve heard of it so far is how crude the metrics for determining vulnerability are, and how one-size-fits-all the programme seems to be.
Now I understand that having a team of psychologically trained Imam to interview every detainee might not be feasible, given resource constraints. But that sort of assessment would be ideal.
Regarding the programme itself, it teaches basic mandarin, civics, and possibly some specific vocational skills. That’s great, but it’s also crude. I’ve heard some relatives of detainees express concern that their relatives weren’t in need of vocational skills, or mandarin. This suggests that the programme isn’t suitable for all people at all levels.
Personally, I’d like to see a family and community driven approach to deradicalisation, rather than a mass-produced one. Again, I get that with limited resources that may not have been feasible.
This is why I called it ‘the most humane response to extremism we’ve seen so far’. I won’t condemn them for the approach taken, but I’m also not so pessimistic as to think that there’s no way to do better.
Oh so you think its underfunded?
So you don't like it because its not enough doctrine? People are crying as it is.
So if you understand why its not feasible why do you still complain.
Uh, you didn't actually propose anything "family and community driven approach rather than a mass produced one" means you want to leave it to individual families and not the state?