Hey Chapos, Does anyone have a list of resources on how the Falun Gong are behind the vast majority of information we get about Xinjiang, and the organ harvesting, etc? I'm writing a research paper and i know I came across this on reddit but it probably got deleted with the ban.
I would not say that is the case at all.
Falun Gong definitely originated the organ harvesting myth and have been shilling it for decades but this latest stuff with the genocide claims is basically the work of Adrian Zenz, the psychotic Christian lunatic from Germany who has never visited the region and cannot read or speak Chinese AND Radio Free Asia, a CIA/State Department propaganda arm that's part of a cold war era legacy anti-communist propaganda effort. It's been boosted and abetted by intelligence agencies, US elected representatives, and the usual CIA, American/NATO disinfo NGOs/"think" tanks that purport to be independent but are actually just tools the US/West uses for plausible deniability and enhanced credibility/perceived independence. These groups basically took the existing falun gong organ nonsense and ran with it for Xin'Jiang because hey it sounds good and it's been said before and we all know a lie is more effective when repeated.
@skollontai is a tool and the fact their useless dismissive (but in no way rebutting) reply is upvoted confirms for me this place is full of too many liberals. Liberals shut the fuck up challenge. There is not any (reliable) academic literature on this stuff because it's current events and current events of political contention at that, and if there was... guess who would be writing it? Some fucking RAND corporation person who worked for the State Dept for 5 years and who uses and cites... guess what US news articles and "reports" from such reliable institutions as the Victims of Communism foundation, defense-intel affiliated think tanks and so on. It's not an area of academic study. It's something based entirely on the contentions of the completely credibility bankrupt lunatic Zenz, the obedient, shameless US bourgeois media (privilege everyone, these people saw the lies of Iraq, saw a million killed and shrugged with indifference at the idea that institution is corrupt), and the statements of imperialist politicians who believe the CIA when they tell them something. And on the other side you have the clearly exasperated Chinese state and media denying these ludicrous accusations. (Hey racists, how can you disprove a negative? Prove for me right now there isn't a teapot orbiting Saturn. You cannot you fucking charlatan and anyone in academia or even a passing respect for science understands the Chinese position, they could install cameras and livestream it and the media would claim the facilities are fakes and the real ones are built under a mountain, it's just a matter of moving goalposts in typically dishonest fashion) There have been no teams of academics dispatched by the west to that area to study these accusations nor will there likely ever be. In fact the EU has consistently been making up excuses as to why they cannot come tour the area despite repeated Chinese invitations to investigate the claims themselves. It would be because it would put them in the sticky situation of debunking the very important western narrative to contain and ultimately attempt to balkanize China to maintain western capitalist hegemony.
The document the fool skollontai refers to dismissively contains a strong rebuttal of western media lies and a peeling back to some extent of what is really going on. In any objective setting it is strong evidence. However I will caution you that many fools like this person exist in US academia and elsewhere, their prejudices, their chauvinistic obedience to and blindness to US imperialism, US atrocities, US LIES, US propaganda prevent them from being able to objectively assess the situation and with such smooth-brained, mentally colonized persons the very best you can hope for is a draw by disabusing them of their sources and claims having any more veracity than the Chinese ones, they will of course in such a situation continue to believe without reason in the narrative spun by the imperialist bourgeois press because fundamentally they reject the notion the US is evil, is an evil empire, lies, is full of fascists, etc and have accepted based on decades of anti-China, anti-communist programming that the other side, China, is on some level wicked or engages in bad behavior by the nature of its system. In this way they remind me of the conviction filled young earth creationists. Let me speak to that person and to you and everyone else when I say. Such people do not matter. They are irrelevant liberals and if you see them, downvote them and make fun of them.
People laugh for all kinds of reasons. I've seen creationists laugh at biologists. It's ultimately about prevailing prejudices and acceptable opinions and dogmas. Which yes, do exist in science including the hard sciences as well and is the reason why a scientist might laugh at something. The reason academics on the other hand in other fields might laugh is less grounded than a geologist chortling at a young earth creationist insisting the Earth is 6000 years old. It's because of their stature, prejudices, ideas they've internalized and accept as gospel and a certain elitism all too common in the bourgeois academic world that leads to looking down on those who don't share the consensus as ill informed, undereducated, etc.
No, it just proves that most China stans - aka US MLs - are asleep. Check back in a few hours.
Lol, not much for book learnin' are we? If every person who spent their life researching a topic told me I was wrong, I'd be a bit concerned. Thankfully, I find that usually academia seems more hostile to left-wing ideas from the outside; the academics chosen to be interviewed on the TV or in major newspapers are often following a liberal line, but that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of people doing work that can be useful to leftists in the field. This is more a problem with journalism than the academy.
The point of my post is that literally everything you say could be true (it isn't, but not getting into it), and the comrade who asked the question would still get a bad grade on his paper if he used these dubious sources. Maybe he's happy to sacrifice his grades, but he should be aware of that risk.