I've pretty much given up on this stuff because it's just so goddamn tiring. I've yet to find anything that I would consider a true genocide, but like fuck if I don't feel like some Holocaust denier because honestly some of the talking points aren't that far removed: "several foreign agencies visited the camps and found no issue" is not far off from "The Red Cross visited a concentration camp and found no sign of genocide", even if the reality might be different. "No Muslim country has condemned the camps" feels like a no true Scotsman thing. (I misspoke here, see a couple follow up comments to see what I mean)
I know it's all manufactured consent but f u c k if it isn't tiring to try and counter. Plus it makes me look like some raving conspiracy theorist, which gets in the way of doing actual work to get libs to shut the fuck up.
Also I don't wanna have the unfortunate possibility that we're wrong on this, and then I'm left with my pants down, y'know?
I know that. You know that. The average left-of-centre person who's not already into the whole critical support for China thing doesn't know that. And unfortunately, it's not the hill I want to die on, because I'm not really a fan of incarceration in any case (yes, I'm aware these are re-education camps for extremists, no, I don't have a better idea, that doesn't mean I like it). There's so much propaganda to cut through to get the average left-of-centre person to the truth on the matter, enough that one missed step in the discussion and you lose them. I'm not good enough to do that, and it's an exhausting conversation to have. I leave it to other comrades.
A lot of the arguments against it have shades of real life holocaust denial arguments. Yes, there's a difference in the reality behind the arguments, but it's just that close enough to make the average person uncomfortable and I'm not nearly good enough with rhetoric or good enough at dealing with conflict to wanna get involved, y'know?
Yeah I mis-spoke, I'm not sure what the words I'm looking for are but like... every time I've brought it up I've got someone in my mentions (not here, natch) screaming about China pumping money into Muslim majority countries so they won't speak ill of them or some other silly shit, and it's absolutely silly shit, but then I've gotten wrapped up in a debate on hegemony and shit. I absolutely, personally, think that the fact no Muslim country has spoken against China on this to be extremely telling (that is, that the camps are not genocidal), but as I've mentioned in a few other comments, I come at this from the position of living and dealing with left-of-centre people who I don't want to alienate for a couple bits of political point scoring.
I come at this from the position of living and dealing with left-of-centre people who I don’t want to alienate for a couple bits of political point scoring.
You do you of course but this sort of compromise is always won by right wing views. The further left you are the i more rational and "reasonable" we believe to be so maybe just maybe it is ok to concede in one random point here and there and be pragmatic about, left unity and all that garbage nonsense.
The problem is life is dynamic and issues arise both old and new and if at every point you start to concede to right wing points eventually you are not a socialist or even a left winger but just an American right winger centrist/liberal.
My point is for now you may believe conceding this is a compromise for the best except there is 100% there will be a new issue in the future that you'll either have to draw a line over or concede yet again.
I'm not going to sit here and judge you since I don't know you personally, but honestly IMO this sort of attitude will not be sustainable long term.
It is ok to say hey I don't want to be at forefront of ideological battles with people that I care about in my life, but it is kind of shitty to pretend it is just about "political point scoring".
Not even a bad thing. They think it will harm China but it is for the best these international sporting events have been a disaster for countries around the world.
Greece went into serious debt in order to fund their event.
Brazil fucked itself even at the hands of a left wing government hosting the World Cup which is now going to fucking Qatar.
Let the liberals boycott these events and then watch the spectacle of them trying to justify these institutions aren't just corrupt money laundering criminal organizations. Fuck sports.
unfortunate reality is that it could be some sort of cultural genocide, I.e. changing their way of life by coercion. At the same time, their independence will result in cute military bases and short range missiles on chinese border, and changing their way of life just the same. Shitshow all around, in conclusion, us empire delenda est
it could be some sort of cultural genocide, I.e. changing their way of life by coercion.
This is a massive allegation that needs clear evidence to support it.
People who live under American-imperialist soft power are too fucking comfortable throwing around accusations of genocide. They also have a horrible track record actually opposing genocide.
Which is why I specified cultural part? I don’t think they murder them or anything like that, I think they are trying to integrate them in their economy, which, depending on your view of china, can be construed as capitalist integration for exploitation or elevation to modern living standards
If you read a report of residential (sorry was wrong word) schools in usa or australia or canada for native Americans from liberal source, what would be the markers of difference with re-education camps in china? The only thing I see is the age of students
If there was evidence of China separating families, forbidding native languages, erasing all references to Uighur cultural identity, and sterilizing women - I would reconsider my position.
The only thing I see is the age of students
You are either whitewashing American crimes against indigenous people, or pushing unverified genocide allegations against China. Which is it?
Like, I actually cannot believe you wrote that. What the fuck.
I’m strictly referring to the practice of carrying of young Native American children to schools circa start of 20th century I think, not wider american genocide. The alleged goal was to integrate native americans by force into “civilized” society.
If my post reads like I’m dismissing other crimes, I apologize, maybe I should be more precise in wording.
Separation of families is precisely the allegation against china, no? main difference is that kids are not ripped from family at non-speaking age, and their language forgotten, so that’s a plus.
What is the evidence for this? Even the BBC's coverage of the vocational school highlighted the fact that attendants at the schools went home at night. Are you saying Uighurs can't bring their children to class?
Tl;dw the erasure and othering of a culture was an integral part of the original definition of genocide, but when counties were voting on language (I think in the UN) to determine what could be punished as a genocide, many member countries refused to sign a law that included cultural erasure, forced assimilation, and the like because they were afraid that they could be prosecuted under such a law.
So our narrow definition of genocide comes from a process where the criminals got to write the rulebook.
Oh shit cultural genocide isn't real? Thank god that means the the irish weren't kept from speaking you know irish or that occitan is still a thriving and alive language, hey all those kids that got ripped from their families because they were roma and had to be 'civilized' it's ok it's a relatively peaceful integration program.
I'm Roma, tbh I wouldn't call what people did/do to us "cultural genocide" it is just straight up genocide. I don't know if there is a specific difference (ESL speaker)? But I don't see why it should be separated from a regular genocide and can feel like a downplay of the absolute horrendous extremes countries have gone to in trying to get rid of us completely. But again if there is a specific difference between genocide and cultural genocide, let me know. Maybe I am misinterpreting.
The original author who coined the term genocide would agree with your definition. The UN definition is narrower in scope, primarily because if it kept the original scope then many UN countries would refuse to sign the law out of fear they could be prosecuted for their own treatment of ethnic groups.
I'm sorry should we stop using the word cultural genocide because it could be used against leftist countries? Seriously fuck off if a government has systemically kept a people from speaking their language or passing on their culture or stop the teaching of said language and culture or tries to "educate" children in order to get rid of the 'unwanted' cultural elements I'm going to call it cultural genocide. If your honest line of thinking is "We shouldn't use words like cultural genocide because it could be used against countries like China" let me both put your mind at ease and tell you what I think. People already use that language and will continue to use that language whether all leftists stop using it or not, and second I don't fucking care about China, I'm not talking about China, I'm talking about cultural genocide being a real thing that has been used successfully and unsuccessfully to exterminate certain cultures, and I use exterminate quite deliberately here, I could give you other examples of cultural genocide where you can then go "Ok mass graves in Catalonia, enforced Castilian in schools as well as myriad of other things done under Franco were bad, but can we please not call it cultural genocide let's just call it Castillianization." like can we only call something a cultural genocide when it's accompanied by smokestacks burning people, like it needs more violence because you imagine the whole thing as a completly non-violent affair.
Can you suggest a name for it then? It’s ethnoculturecide? I agree the word is hyper charged tbh with images of death camps, which are not related to this.
Genocide is the word for this. The author who coined the term genocide considered the cultural erasure and othering of an ethnic group to be an integral part of the definition of genocide, and that these things by themselves were sufficient to label something as a genocide without needing mass murder in addition to these things.
The UN definition narrowed the scope of genocide because many member nations would refuse to sign a law that included cultural erasure, forced assimilation, and the like out of fear that they could be prosecuted under such a law. The idea that these things aren't as serious and don't count as "real" genocide is the result of the criminals getting to write the rulebook.
That’s what I’ve said though about end state though. I agree motivation of organizers is likely nefarious, but the fact that they find sympathetic ears indicates some deep problem on the ground, be it oil developments and immigration of Chinese engineers, or kneejerk reactions from changing world around them in general, or maybe something else.
I don’t have any issues with any of that, I find coercive vocational training problematic, but it’s hard to penetrate the degree of coercion through propaganda
In most cases participation in these vocational schools is voluntary. They encourage lots of people to sign up.
It's only mandatory in limited circumstances, such as if you have documented ties to extremist groups, or you have been convicted for a crime and have been assigned to a vocational school as part of your sentence.
And of course these kind of laws and programs can be abused, but I've seen absolutely nothing to suggest a pattern of abuse in any of the other policies, development, rhetoric, and practices in the region.
Regarding the genocide claims, my approach is to sweep aside the anecdotal reports from witnesses and say that I will only focus on the data cited in support of the claim.
The data is pretty sketchy and needs to rely on percentages to make the claims - 250 sterilisations per 100,000 people is not a genocide, and the idea that 80 percent of IUD installations are performed in Xinjiang is similarly ridiculous given the underlying source suggests it's a tenth of that.
Vocational and re-education centres are concerning but we're not proposing to invade France, and the sites identified as camps are clearly rubbish when you look at them on Google maps.
Oh yeah, I try to do that when I can, but on a smaller scale. I've brought some people personally around to it by pointing out how every claim loops back to Adrian Zenz, one whacked out guy, and how the majority of the numbers come from the most dubious of claims (1 guy in 8 random rural villages guessed at how many people are in camps, therefore it's millions being genocided, for instance). I try to sus that out one on one when I can.
It's a gamble I'm outwardly not willing to take. I'll be incredibly smug about it if we're all right and, I dunno, tomorrow the camps close because the last extremist has been re-educated and a search for graves turns up like... one guy who died of natural causes during the whole thing. But if I'm wrong? That's a lot of social capital to spend on that gamble.
As far as I'm aware, all the schools have closed over a year ago. There hasn't been any new terrorist attacks, and the deradicalization programs have been considered to be a success.
I get the hesitation, but the idea of mass tyrannical detainments in concentration camps just doesn't make sense. Primarily because that kind of extreme government repression would only create more radicalization which would result in more terrorist attacks and increasing sympathy for a separatist movement, but instead we see the opposite happen.
I've pretty much given up on this stuff because it's just so goddamn tiring. I've yet to find anything that I would consider a true genocide, but like fuck if I don't feel like some Holocaust denier because honestly some of the talking points aren't that far removed: "several foreign agencies visited the camps and found no issue" is not far off from "The Red Cross visited a concentration camp and found no sign of genocide", even if the reality might be different. "No Muslim country has condemned the camps"
feels like a no true Scotsman thing.(I misspoke here, see a couple follow up comments to see what I mean)I know it's all manufactured consent but f u c k if it isn't tiring to try and counter. Plus it makes me look like some raving conspiracy theorist, which gets in the way of doing actual work to get libs to shut the fuck up.
Also I don't wanna have the unfortunate possibility that we're wrong on this, and then I'm left with my pants down, y'know?deleted by creator
I know that. You know that. The average left-of-centre person who's not already into the whole critical support for China thing doesn't know that. And unfortunately, it's not the hill I want to die on, because I'm not really a fan of incarceration in any case (yes, I'm aware these are re-education camps for extremists, no, I don't have a better idea, that doesn't mean I like it). There's so much propaganda to cut through to get the average left-of-centre person to the truth on the matter, enough that one missed step in the discussion and you lose them. I'm not good enough to do that, and it's an exhausting conversation to have. I leave it to other comrades.
A lot of the arguments against it have shades of real life holocaust denial arguments. Yes, there's a difference in the reality behind the arguments, but it's just that close enough to make the average person uncomfortable and I'm not nearly good enough with rhetoric or good enough at dealing with conflict to wanna get involved, y'know?
I feel you. I can pick up your slack in the posting wars comrade.
deleted by creator
Yeah I mis-spoke, I'm not sure what the words I'm looking for are but like... every time I've brought it up I've got someone in my mentions (not here, natch) screaming about China pumping money into Muslim majority countries so they won't speak ill of them or some other silly shit, and it's absolutely silly shit, but then I've gotten wrapped up in a debate on hegemony and shit. I absolutely, personally, think that the fact no Muslim country has spoken against China on this to be extremely telling (that is, that the camps are not genocidal), but as I've mentioned in a few other comments, I come at this from the position of living and dealing with left-of-centre people who I don't want to alienate for a couple bits of political point scoring.
deleted by creator
You do you of course but this sort of compromise is always won by right wing views. The further left you are the i more rational and "reasonable" we believe to be so maybe just maybe it is ok to concede in one random point here and there and be pragmatic about, left unity and all that garbage nonsense.
The problem is life is dynamic and issues arise both old and new and if at every point you start to concede to right wing points eventually you are not a socialist or even a left winger but just an American
right wingercentrist/liberal.My point is for now you may believe conceding this is a compromise for the best except there is 100% there will be a new issue in the future that you'll either have to draw a line over or concede yet again. I'm not going to sit here and judge you since I don't know you personally, but honestly IMO this sort of attitude will not be sustainable long term.
It is ok to say hey I don't want to be at forefront of ideological battles with people that I care about in my life, but it is kind of shitty to pretend it is just about "political point scoring".
get ready for next year when everyone wants to boycott the olympics in china :)
Not even a bad thing. They think it will harm China but it is for the best these international sporting events have been a disaster for countries around the world. Greece went into serious debt in order to fund their event. Brazil fucked itself even at the hands of a left wing government hosting the World Cup which is now going to fucking Qatar.
Let the liberals boycott these events and then watch the spectacle of them trying to justify these institutions aren't just corrupt money laundering criminal organizations. Fuck sports.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
unfortunate reality is that it could be some sort of cultural genocide, I.e. changing their way of life by coercion. At the same time, their independence will result in cute military bases and short range missiles on chinese border, and changing their way of life just the same. Shitshow all around, in conclusion, us empire delenda est
This is a massive allegation that needs clear evidence to support it.
People who live under American-imperialist soft power are too fucking comfortable throwing around accusations of genocide. They also have a horrible track record actually opposing genocide.
Which is why I specified cultural part? I don’t think they murder them or anything like that, I think they are trying to integrate them in their economy, which, depending on your view of china, can be construed as capitalist integration for exploitation or elevation to modern living standards
And I quoted the "cultural" part. Cultural genocide is the intentional destruction of cultural artifacts and the eradication of a cultural identity.
Neither of these are cultural genocide.
If you read a report of residential (sorry was wrong word) schools in usa or australia or canada for native Americans from liberal source, what would be the markers of difference with re-education camps in china? The only thing I see is the age of students
If there was evidence of China separating families, forbidding native languages, erasing all references to Uighur cultural identity, and sterilizing women - I would reconsider my position.
You are either whitewashing American crimes against indigenous people, or pushing unverified genocide allegations against China. Which is it?
Like, I actually cannot believe you wrote that. What the fuck.
I’m strictly referring to the practice of carrying of young Native American children to schools circa start of 20th century I think, not wider american genocide. The alleged goal was to integrate native americans by force into “civilized” society.
If my post reads like I’m dismissing other crimes, I apologize, maybe I should be more precise in wording.
Separation of families is precisely the allegation against china, no? main difference is that kids are not ripped from family at non-speaking age, and their language forgotten, so that’s a plus.
What is your evidence of this? Even the BBC's coverage of the camp covered the fact that students are only at the schools during the day.
China is literally separating families though. They don't get to keep their children in the internment camps.
What is the evidence for this? Even the BBC's coverage of the vocational school highlighted the fact that attendants at the schools went home at night. Are you saying Uighurs can't bring their children to class?
With the Xinjiang camps, I haven't seen evidence of and/or have seen evidence suggesting the lack of:
You can never show evidence that proves something isn't happening.
Show me evidence that you don't beat your wife.
Yeah hence why I said 'suggesting' instead of 'proving'
deleted by creator
Here's a really good video that talks about the problem you bring up.
Tl;dw the erasure and othering of a culture was an integral part of the original definition of genocide, but when counties were voting on language (I think in the UN) to determine what could be punished as a genocide, many member countries refused to sign a law that included cultural erasure, forced assimilation, and the like because they were afraid that they could be prosecuted under such a law.
So our narrow definition of genocide comes from a process where the criminals got to write the rulebook.
Good thing there are no liberals amongus :dun-dun-dun: :ancom-heart:
Edit: emphasis on real bugs me, maybe change it to physical?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Oh shit cultural genocide isn't real? Thank god that means the the irish weren't kept from speaking you know irish or that occitan is still a thriving and alive language, hey all those kids that got ripped from their families because they were roma and had to be 'civilized' it's ok it's a relatively peaceful integration program.
I'm Roma, tbh I wouldn't call what people did/do to us "cultural genocide" it is just straight up genocide. I don't know if there is a specific difference (ESL speaker)? But I don't see why it should be separated from a regular genocide and can feel like a downplay of the absolute horrendous extremes countries have gone to in trying to get rid of us completely. But again if there is a specific difference between genocide and cultural genocide, let me know. Maybe I am misinterpreting.
The original author who coined the term genocide would agree with your definition. The UN definition is narrower in scope, primarily because if it kept the original scope then many UN countries would refuse to sign the law out of fear they could be prosecuted for their own treatment of ethnic groups.
https://youtu.be/m316DcYhb8w
deleted by creator
I'm sorry should we stop using the word cultural genocide because it could be used against leftist countries? Seriously fuck off if a government has systemically kept a people from speaking their language or passing on their culture or stop the teaching of said language and culture or tries to "educate" children in order to get rid of the 'unwanted' cultural elements I'm going to call it cultural genocide. If your honest line of thinking is "We shouldn't use words like cultural genocide because it could be used against countries like China" let me both put your mind at ease and tell you what I think. People already use that language and will continue to use that language whether all leftists stop using it or not, and second I don't fucking care about China, I'm not talking about China, I'm talking about cultural genocide being a real thing that has been used successfully and unsuccessfully to exterminate certain cultures, and I use exterminate quite deliberately here, I could give you other examples of cultural genocide where you can then go "Ok mass graves in Catalonia, enforced Castilian in schools as well as myriad of other things done under Franco were bad, but can we please not call it cultural genocide let's just call it Castillianization." like can we only call something a cultural genocide when it's accompanied by smokestacks burning people, like it needs more violence because you imagine the whole thing as a completly non-violent affair.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Can you suggest a name for it then? It’s ethnoculturecide? I agree the word is hyper charged tbh with images of death camps, which are not related to this.
deleted by creator
Eh, that’s fair enough :100-com:
Genocide is the word for this. The author who coined the term genocide considered the cultural erasure and othering of an ethnic group to be an integral part of the definition of genocide, and that these things by themselves were sufficient to label something as a genocide without needing mass murder in addition to these things.
The UN definition narrowed the scope of genocide because many member nations would refuse to sign a law that included cultural erasure, forced assimilation, and the like out of fear that they could be prosecuted under such a law. The idea that these things aren't as serious and don't count as "real" genocide is the result of the criminals getting to write the rulebook.
Here's a great video on the topic:
https://youtu.be/m316DcYhb8w
deleted by creator
That’s what I’ve said though about end state though. I agree motivation of organizers is likely nefarious, but the fact that they find sympathetic ears indicates some deep problem on the ground, be it oil developments and immigration of Chinese engineers, or kneejerk reactions from changing world around them in general, or maybe something else.
deleted by creator
I don’t have any issues with any of that, I find coercive vocational training problematic, but it’s hard to penetrate the degree of coercion through propaganda
In most cases participation in these vocational schools is voluntary. They encourage lots of people to sign up.
It's only mandatory in limited circumstances, such as if you have documented ties to extremist groups, or you have been convicted for a crime and have been assigned to a vocational school as part of your sentence.
And of course these kind of laws and programs can be abused, but I've seen absolutely nothing to suggest a pattern of abuse in any of the other policies, development, rhetoric, and practices in the region.
Regarding the genocide claims, my approach is to sweep aside the anecdotal reports from witnesses and say that I will only focus on the data cited in support of the claim.
The data is pretty sketchy and needs to rely on percentages to make the claims - 250 sterilisations per 100,000 people is not a genocide, and the idea that 80 percent of IUD installations are performed in Xinjiang is similarly ridiculous given the underlying source suggests it's a tenth of that.
Vocational and re-education centres are concerning but we're not proposing to invade France, and the sites identified as camps are clearly rubbish when you look at them on Google maps.
Oh yeah, I try to do that when I can, but on a smaller scale. I've brought some people personally around to it by pointing out how every claim loops back to Adrian Zenz, one whacked out guy, and how the majority of the numbers come from the most dubious of claims (1 guy in 8 random rural villages guessed at how many people are in camps, therefore it's millions being genocided, for instance). I try to sus that out one on one when I can.
deleted by creator
It's a gamble I'm outwardly not willing to take. I'll be incredibly smug about it if we're all right and, I dunno, tomorrow the camps close because the last extremist has been re-educated and a search for graves turns up like... one guy who died of natural causes during the whole thing. But if I'm wrong? That's a lot of social capital to spend on that gamble.
As far as I'm aware, all the schools have closed over a year ago. There hasn't been any new terrorist attacks, and the deradicalization programs have been considered to be a success.
I get the hesitation, but the idea of mass tyrannical detainments in concentration camps just doesn't make sense. Primarily because that kind of extreme government repression would only create more radicalization which would result in more terrorist attacks and increasing sympathy for a separatist movement, but instead we see the opposite happen.
deleted by creator