It's really frustrating, I was talking to someone about how successful China has been in de-radicalization of reactionaries. But they responded to this by saying they're only successful because, and I quote "put them all in concentration camps and killed them"
Has anyone here been successful in deprogramming people about this topic? If so any good sources I can use to dissuade them? I tried telling them that the UN report, if you read it, just says that there's concerns about abuse by internment offcials, and there's no evidence of genocide. But when I say this they just dismiss it as if the UN is controlled by the PRC. It's like a religion to liberals to believe anything bad about China and can get really frustrating.
Well I don't mean it in bad faith. I don't mean to put people on the spot with gotchas. I allow people to look into it as long as they want to. The point is that with both Kashmir and Rohingyas you can find confirmed kills, even massacres.
I don't understand this. Can you explain more?
there is a list here of terror attacks, mostly associated with the ETIM (East Turkestan Islamic Movement) shootings, bombings, car attacks
I still don't understand your point. Sorry. Do you mean to say that the terrorist attacks can be seen as the Uyghur people fighting back?
yes. those are uyghurs fighting the government, and many of them were killed i.e. martyrs. terrorist is just a political designation, many 'terrorists' can represent positive forces so simply arguing that being designated terrorist invalidates the ETIM is going to fall flat if you support or defend groups the US/Israel calls terrorist.
which is why US/NATO designations of uyghur terror groups as terrorists is an important factor
I can't say for sure that you are wrong. But the western consciousness does not acknowledge these terror attacks.
The last one happened in 2014 and the process of setting up reeducation centres happened after that, which is the foundation of the claims of genocide. Plus the terror attacks were terrorism in the rawest sense, which makes it almost impossible to frame them as a genuine struggle.
if you can get into the details of specific acts, ideology, and background of these groups it indeed is hard to argue. all i'm saying is your initial argument should not be presented in a way that makes you look like a fool through the simple addition of context prior to 2014. no one died? these
terroristsfreedom fighters died