I could go on and on about Adrian Zenz, his terrible methodologies; about terrorist groups trained by Isis and utilized by American for creating unrest in Xinjiang; stats about real population numbers in Xinjiang; about differences between American and Chinese anti-terror efforts regarding radical islamic terror groups; about infrastructure building in the area, investment by China; about the number of mosques per capita; about the preservation of regional identity that Xi is working towards; etc. Etc.
But, regardless, just saying that I don't believe that there is religious persecution in Xinjiang means, in their eyes, that I don't care about our Muslim brothers and sisters.
It's similar to talking about Hong Kong.
Libs use these places as tools to spread liberalism, so caring about the actual policies, people, and reality is a disadvantage to conversation.
How can I approach these subjects?
Hey, Muslim here too. From what I know of Uyghurs (and I have been looking into this for a long time even before it was big news), it's not similar to internment camps (imo). It is more like re-education schools, deradicalizing people who have been radicalized by ETIM. If you don't know much about ETIM/Panturkic Imperialism, definitely read up on it. It's been affecting and will affect worldwide Muslim issues for a while now and to come. Uyghur Muslims were being radicalized and there were a lot of attacks in China. The schools focus in deradicalization, teaching Uyghurs Mandarin and skills, etc. Things to help them better "assimilate" if you will. There are some issues with that of course. But Indonesia was doing the exact same thing, and Western news was praising it highly while now lying and saying these schools in China are concentration camps. America has bombed Uyghurs before. America has specifically pointed out wanting to create issues in Xinjiang specifically as it is full of oil. It is incredibly complex. It is even more complex if one doesn't read Uyghur, Turkish, or Chinese -- which a lot of old sources talking about all of this tend to be in.
Again, there is issues to discuss when singling out ethnic groups for reeducation. However, as a Muslim again, Wahhabism is something I never want to support. As a Greek Gypsy, Panturkish Imperialism is also something I never want to support. Is deradicalizing programs probably the best option? I'm not sure. But it is nothing like they say it is in Western news.
I highly recommen ** this ** article. It details descrimination Uyghurs face, as well as discussing the radicalization targeting them. This situation is horribly complex, in a way most Westerners/Americans are not used to handling historical context in. It's not even a thing Muslims can really claim to understand on the basis of also being Muslim; the history of Turkey/Central Asia/China are completely necessary to understand here. But I think it's really important to learn, even just Panturkic extremism in general.
Yes, thank you for this. I certainly don't want my question to come across as asinine nor as simplistic as good/bad. I don't support the detention of anyone on a cultural basis, but I know that the situation in china is being drastically misrepresented in western media as part of an anti-china propaganda campaign.
It is a complex topic, and that is what I want to clarify with people i know - that it isn't China bad, it is a particular strategy that China has developed to deal with an issue that has the potential to destabilize the west of their country.
It's something no one is ever going to agree on 100% because of it's intricacies. It's become one of those things I just don't even try to bring up to liberal friends. I find HK protests easier to tackle than this. It's too many facets really.
deleted by creator
Sorry if it seemed like I was saying you specifically can't have an opinion because of the history thing, I didn't mean that. I was moreso talking about how Western Muslims oversimplify this specific situation, but I didn't mean you specifically.