I think your point here is that we can't trust the narrative of international blocs because they will use propaganda to frame facts in ways intended to protect their interests. I couldn't agree more, and I don't trust the West at all to provide an accurate account of whatever is or isn't happening in Xinjiang.
But that same idea of the inherent untrustworthiness of bloc-promoted narratives makes me suspicious of the narrative offered by China and its diplomatic allies that nothing is going on at all. A non-NATO bloc is still a bloc. It is not somehow transformed into a pure entity free of bias or self-interest. I don't trust this bloc to be objective or accurate in its characterization of events either.
According to China itself stuff is "going on." There is mass internment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang, ostensibly for purposes of de-radicalization and integration into the Chinese economy. Is China detaining millions of Uyghurs like the West is claiming? No, of course not. Are they killing them like the holocaust? Not even slightly—they leave the camps in jobs programs and such. But to pretend nothing is going on at all is disingenuous. There is a case to be made that perhaps the Chinese state is being a bit overzealous with its radicalization efforts, and could be going about them in a more targeted way that doesn't have to involve mass re-education camps, but it's hard to make that sort of argument without Western imperialists from jumping on any criticism as proof of "genocide." That's why a scenario like this is tough.
Likewise, most of the bloc in this image don't give a shit about human rights or anything, just like the West. Governments in general, as they're almost all run by neoliberal ghouls, aren't in that kind of headspace. Instead, they're siding with China because they know which way the wind is blowing.
Sounds like china is doing their own version of the Native boarding schools, I mean Uighurs coming out of these detention centers all talk about how they are forced to lose their culture and religion in these places. That would make it a cultural genocide especially since china admits they just snatch up people for the crime of being Uighur and nothing more
Yeah, I fear that there's a similar dynamic here. Many of the Uyghurs fell under the Wahhabist spell of radical Islam, and that kind of ideology doesn't mix well with a communist state. Likewise, China is heavily pursuing its poverty alleviation deadlines, and pushing the Uyghurs to become more integrated into the Chinese economy helps tremendously with that effort. Hence the job programs, subsidies, etc. Also, Xinjiang is central to the Belt and Road Initiative, and will become something like an economic pivot in the coming decades, so China wants to shore up control and dominance of the region to ensure smooth sailing.
That said, I don't think it's going so far as Native boarding schools like Canada and the United States. Unlike these settler colonial states, in China they're building more mosques, exempting the Uyghurs from the one child policy to encourage population growth, and generally encouraging Uyghur culture to develop, granted within the bounds set by the Chinese state. There's always a tough line to toe when dealing with "regressive" cultures in a progressive state, and China is running straight into those troubles. I don't know if they're handling it perfectly (and the CPC has always been a bit heavy handed when it comes to things like this), but they're certainly not handling it like the largest genocide in recent memory as the US and Canada did.
Lied about "200,000 dead in mass graves " in Yugoslavia
Lied about Wmds
Lied about "Gadaffi handing viagra out to soldiers to rape"
Lied about Syrian "chemical weapons" and fired the original Opcw investigator then doctored the report to be the complete opposite of what the opcw investigation originally concluded
When has China, in the last 40 years, made ridiculous atrocity propaganda to go to war?
All true, and to be honest I have no idea if China has ever used that kind of atrocity propaganda. We can definitely agree that the American narrative is inaccurate and inflammatory.
That wasn't my point, though. I'm not saying that America is correct. I'm saying that we can't trust China's official line because states and political blocs are inherently untrustworthy and will promote narratives that are self-serving. China and its allies are no more immune to that than any other political entity.
For one, things in my own community that I can go out and verify for myself. NATO can provide an official line about how wonderful and free things are here in America, but you don't have to go far out of your backyard to see how bullshit that narrative is.
For another, things that multiple blocs that are ordinarily enemies provide the same narrative for. Back in the day, if NATO and the USSR both claimed we were being invaded by aliens, I would have taken that more seriously than if it was just one party or the other.
I think your point here is that we can't trust the narrative of international blocs because they will use propaganda to frame facts in ways intended to protect their interests. I couldn't agree more, and I don't trust the West at all to provide an accurate account of whatever is or isn't happening in Xinjiang.
But that same idea of the inherent untrustworthiness of bloc-promoted narratives makes me suspicious of the narrative offered by China and its diplomatic allies that nothing is going on at all. A non-NATO bloc is still a bloc. It is not somehow transformed into a pure entity free of bias or self-interest. I don't trust this bloc to be objective or accurate in its characterization of events either.
According to China itself stuff is "going on." There is mass internment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang, ostensibly for purposes of de-radicalization and integration into the Chinese economy. Is China detaining millions of Uyghurs like the West is claiming? No, of course not. Are they killing them like the holocaust? Not even slightly—they leave the camps in jobs programs and such. But to pretend nothing is going on at all is disingenuous. There is a case to be made that perhaps the Chinese state is being a bit overzealous with its radicalization efforts, and could be going about them in a more targeted way that doesn't have to involve mass re-education camps, but it's hard to make that sort of argument without Western imperialists from jumping on any criticism as proof of "genocide." That's why a scenario like this is tough.
Likewise, most of the bloc in this image don't give a shit about human rights or anything, just like the West. Governments in general, as they're almost all run by neoliberal ghouls, aren't in that kind of headspace. Instead, they're siding with China because they know which way the wind is blowing.
Sounds like china is doing their own version of the Native boarding schools, I mean Uighurs coming out of these detention centers all talk about how they are forced to lose their culture and religion in these places. That would make it a cultural genocide especially since china admits they just snatch up people for the crime of being Uighur and nothing more
Yeah, I fear that there's a similar dynamic here. Many of the Uyghurs fell under the Wahhabist spell of radical Islam, and that kind of ideology doesn't mix well with a communist state. Likewise, China is heavily pursuing its poverty alleviation deadlines, and pushing the Uyghurs to become more integrated into the Chinese economy helps tremendously with that effort. Hence the job programs, subsidies, etc. Also, Xinjiang is central to the Belt and Road Initiative, and will become something like an economic pivot in the coming decades, so China wants to shore up control and dominance of the region to ensure smooth sailing.
That said, I don't think it's going so far as Native boarding schools like Canada and the United States. Unlike these settler colonial states, in China they're building more mosques, exempting the Uyghurs from the one child policy to encourage population growth, and generally encouraging Uyghur culture to develop, granted within the bounds set by the Chinese state. There's always a tough line to toe when dealing with "regressive" cultures in a progressive state, and China is running straight into those troubles. I don't know if they're handling it perfectly (and the CPC has always been a bit heavy handed when it comes to things like this), but they're certainly not handling it like the largest genocide in recent memory as the US and Canada did.
deleted by creator
US lied about the Gulf Of tonkin
Lied about "200,000 dead in mass graves " in Yugoslavia
Lied about Wmds
Lied about "Gadaffi handing viagra out to soldiers to rape"
Lied about Syrian "chemical weapons" and fired the original Opcw investigator then doctored the report to be the complete opposite of what the opcw investigation originally concluded
When has China, in the last 40 years, made ridiculous atrocity propaganda to go to war?
All true, and to be honest I have no idea if China has ever used that kind of atrocity propaganda. We can definitely agree that the American narrative is inaccurate and inflammatory.
That wasn't my point, though. I'm not saying that America is correct. I'm saying that we can't trust China's official line because states and political blocs are inherently untrustworthy and will promote narratives that are self-serving. China and its allies are no more immune to that than any other political entity.
Have a look at the ones on the ‘China’ side. Saudi Arabia isn’t exactly a close ally.
Who are you willing to trust then if you're writing off anything coming from a 'bloc'
For one, things in my own community that I can go out and verify for myself. NATO can provide an official line about how wonderful and free things are here in America, but you don't have to go far out of your backyard to see how bullshit that narrative is.
For another, things that multiple blocs that are ordinarily enemies provide the same narrative for. Back in the day, if NATO and the USSR both claimed we were being invaded by aliens, I would have taken that more seriously than if it was just one party or the other.