deleted by creator

I've always thought this is a good take on the topic. It's a little long, so here's the basic idea:

First, let’s just establish using safe, American sources that a bunch of Uyghur people went to fight with ISIS in Syria, then returned. Let’s also establish that there have been consistent terrorist attacks with significant casualties and that the CIA and CIA front-groups have funded and stoked Islamic extremism across the world for geopolitical gain.

Now, we need to consider potential responses.

The CPC could give up and surrender Xinjiang to ISIS. This option condemns millions of people to living under a fundamentalist Islamic State, including many non-Muslims and non-extreme Muslims. This option creates a CIA-aligned state on the border, and jeopardises a key part of the Belt and Road initiative, which is designed to connect landlocked countries for development and geopolitical positioning. This option also threatens the CPC’s legitimacy, as keeping China together is a historical signifier of the Mandate of Heaven.

The next option is the American option. Drone strike, black-site, or otherwise liquidate anyone who could be associated with Islamic extremism. Be liberal in doing so. Make children fear blue skies because of drones. When the orphaned young children grow up, do it all again. You can also throw a literal man-made famine in there if you want.

The final option is the Chinese option. Mass surveillance. Use AI to liberally target anyone who may be at risk of radicalisation for re-education. Teach them the lingua franca of China, Mandarin. Pump money into the region for development. When people finish their time in re-education, set them up with state jobs. Keep the surveillance up. Allow and even celebrate local religious customs, but make sure the leaders are on-side with the party...

Could China’s approach be done better? Almost certainly. Is it the most humane response to extremism we’ve seen so far? That’s for you to decide.

What's going on in Xinjiang isn't a genocide in that, the internment camps aren't death camps and there isn't any evidence for mass sterilisation, but there is institutionalised discrimination and mass internment based on racial and ethnic profiling.

The Chinese goverment line, and what people in this thread will tell you, is that this is necessary to combat "islamist extremism" and terrorism, but that's reactionary garbage. There's nothing inherently terroristic about expressing Uyghur cultural identity or practicing the Islamic faith, and both of those things have been criminalised in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region. There are laws against wearing veils or "unusual" beards.

And again, criminalising expressing Uyghur cultural identity and the practice of the Islamic faith was in no way warranted. As opposed to what some people in this thread are telling you, the whole region is not and never has been on the verge of erupting into an Islamic State stronghold. The number of people carrying out terror attacks and, and the casualties of those terror attacks, are measured in the tens and hundreds, while the number of people imprisoned and whose faith and cultural identity has been criminalised by the "anti-terror" laws is in the tens and hundreds of thousands.

It's true that the Uyghur seperatist movement has gained momentum over the past few decades. If instead of looking for reactionary (it's because of their religion! or their race!) or conspiratorial (It's entirely the CIA's fault!) reasons, we look for a materialist reason we'll find that the Uyghur natives of Xinjiang have some pretty legitimate complaints about institutional discrimination worsening their material conditions that their government has repeatedly failed to address. The following is from a 2002 paper by Chien-peng Chung, a political science professor at Lingnan University whose main research interest at the time was the Xinjiang situation.

The government's call to develop the west has accelerated migration by Han Chinese into Xinjiang, thereby exacerbating tensions. In 1949, the region was almost 80 percent Uighur; today, that figure has dropped to 45-50 percent. Many Uighurs do not speak Mandarin Chinese, which is usually the prerequisite for any good-paying job or government position, and few are as well educated as the immi grants. As a result, the Han dominate commerce in Xinjiang's urban areas and are frequently seen by the locals as having the region's best jobs in the government, the Communist Party, and the military. The Han also usually live in newer neighborhoods and go to informally segregated schools.

Rather than allowing the flow of immigration into Xinjiang to remain unchecked, the Chinese regime should regulate it so that immigrants do not compete unnecessarily with the locals for jobs, schools, or state services. Beijing should encourage public-sector corporations, oil companies, and government agencies to increase their hiring of ethnic minorities. Quotas for Uighur admission into colleges and government positions should also be expanded and enforced. The government must also allocate funds fairly among Han and Uighur neighborhoods. Cleaning up the area around China's nuclear test site at Lop Nor in the Taklimakan Desert, where soil and groundwater pollution are causing birth defects and health problems among the local inhabitants, would be another important step.

Furthermore, as guaranteed in the Chinese constitution, the government must uphold religious freedom. Muslim Uighurs who openly practice their faith complain of harassment by the authori ties. The government must respect Muslim customs and allow the free functioning of mosques and religious schools, interfering only if they are found to be educating or harboring militants. Political changes are required as well: less gerrymandering in favor of Han Chinese among Xinjiang's administrative units, more proportionate ethnic representation in party and government structures, and more devolution of power from Beijing to the region. Hunting down terrorists is only a partial solution to the violence in Xinjiang. Unless China listens to the Uighurs and treats them better, its troubled western region is unlikely to be calmed any time soon.

Basically, he's saying that the reason the seperatist movement is turning violent again is that Uighur people's material conditions were getting worse, and if those material conditions improved the seperatist movement would both lose supporters and get less violent.

What the CPC ended up doing instead of confronting the material needs was level increasingly severe punishments against increasingly more avenues of religious and ethno-cultural expression and using the :shocked-pikachu: increasingly escalating terrorist violence resulting from this radicalising people to justify increasingly harsher measures.

Like, duh the C.I.A. supports the Uighur seperatist movement, they’re a largely reactionary separatist movement on the Chinese side of a China/NATO-puppet-state border, what’s not to love, but the movement would have almost certainly existed whether or not the CIA was involved. And yeah the NYT and it's ilk are lying scum and NATO "intervening" is about the worst thing that can happen to any situation ever. This is a forum for revolutionary communists, noone's going to disagree with you on those points.

But there has been a Uighur seperatist movement in Xinjiang longer that there has been a CIA, for most of its history its been a lot less violent than it was in the last two decades and the violence in the last two decades is at least as much a result of the CPC’s atrocious mishandling as it was of any CIA meddling, and the CPC's response to the growing dissatisfaction of the Uighur population in Xinjiang has been reminiscent in its its racism, escalation, and brutality of Bush’s inestimably worse war on terror that the CPC repeatedly tried to equate it with.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

CIA began funding and arming the separatists who have called for an "East Turkistan"

Çatlı's acts of political agitation among the Uyghurs were designed to further the CIA's goal of transforming the Chinese province into a new Islamic republic, which the Agency had named East Turkistan. Since Xinjiang remained the primary source of oil and natural gas for much of mainland China, the creation of East Turkistan would serve to deprive the country of its vital natural resources, making China considerably less of an economic and political threat to the United States and the Western world. The Tarim Basin in the southern half of Xinjiang contained as much crude oil as Saudi Arabia.16 The new country was officially formed in Washington, DC, on September 14, 2004. Amidst the waving of American and Uyghur flags, Anwar Yusuf Turani, the prime minister, spoke of the new country's need of economic assistance and international recognition. Following the speech, Turani returned to his home—not in Xinjiang but in Fairfax, Virginia.17

Paul L. Williams - Operation Gladio_ The Unholy Alliance between the Vatican, the CIA, and the Mafia -Prometheus Books (2015)Page 292,

Throughout the 1990s, hundreds of Uyghurs were transported to Afghanistan by the CIA for training in guerrilla warfare by the mujahideen. When they returned to Xinjiang, they formed the East Turkistan Islamic Movement and came under Çatlı's expert direction.21 Graham Fuller, CIA superspy, offered this explanation for radicalizing the Chinese Muslims: The policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them [Muslims] against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power, and especially to counter the Chinese influence in Central Asia.22

This policy of destabilization was devised by Bernard Lewis, an Oxford University specialist on Islamic studies, who called for the creation of an “Arc of Crisis” around the southern borders of the Soviet Union by empowering Muslim radicals to rebel against their Communist overlords.

p.292, ibid

Why is US in Afghanistan according to US Colonel Lawrence Wilkinson

"Here is what it (the US beaureaucray) has decided for Afghanistan and that you don’t know this either we’re in Afghanistan as we were in Germany post-world War two that is for at least a half a century. It has nothing to do with Kabul and State Building. Nothing to do with fighting the Taliban or proving that we can reconcile with the Taliban and nothing to do with fighting any terrorist group it is everything to do with three primary strategic objective objectives.

And as a former military officer as a professional I don’t necessarily object to these objectives. I just think the American people probably ought to be told about them and there ought to be a debate as to whether or not they want to spend their money on these objectives.

First objective is to be in the place that Donald Rumsfeld discovered was the most difficult country in the world to get military power into in 2001 and take my word for it it is look at it on a map and leave it there because it is the only hard power of the United States has that sits proximate to the central base Road initiative of China that runs across Central Asia if we had to impact that with military power we are in position to do so in Afghanistan.

Second reason we’re there is because we’re cheek and jowel with the potentially most unstable nuclear stock pile on the face of the earth in Pakistan we want to be able to leap on that stockpile and stabilize it if necessary.

And the third reason we’re there is because there are 20 million Uyghurs and they don’t like han chinese and Xinjiang province in western china. And if the CIA has to mount an operation using those Uyghurs. As Erdogan has done in turkey against assad there are 20,000 of them ended up in Idlib, syria right now. For example that’s why the Chinese might be deploying military forces to Syria in the very near future to take care of those Uyghurs that Erdogan invited in well the CIA would want to destabilize China and that would be the best way to do it. To ferment unrest and to join with those we use in pushing the Han Chinese in Beijing from internal places rather than external

Not saying it’s going on right now. You didn’t hear that but it is a possibility. So that’s why we’re there and I’ll wager they’re not a handful of Americans who realize that our military has decided that, for these strategic reasons which are well thought out, we’re going to be in Afghanistan for the next half century." - Col Lawrence Wilkinson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91wz5syVNZs&feature=youtu.be&t=1248

In 2018 the USA bombed East Turkestan Islamic Movement and here's a US general talking about it. In 2020 US took ETIM off their terrorist list in an exact replay of the Kosovo Liberation Army. In 1996 KLA was a disparate tiny group. US takes them off the list and gets the muhjadeen training and arming them and within a few years the KLA is the main force that destroys the rump state of Yugoslavia and the US carves off Kosovo and implants a military base so large "it can withstand any internal revolutions of the country" (Diana Johnstone, Yugoslavia and Western Delusions)

https://video.ploud.fr/videos/watch/4573f9cc-ea0b-4480-9f29-7484ad903ecc

Uyghurs have been influenced by Wahhabist Islam and have been fighting all over the ME in ISIS /Al Qaeda and Al Nusra.

https://www.greanvillepost.com/2019/07/22/march-of-the-uyghurs/

What China is basically doing is a de-radicalisation program and putting those they deem at risk through trade schools to get jobs afterward. Is it heavy handed? Almost certainly.

Are China Nazis? Well the West has set an entire region on fire and sent it back to the dark ages and China is educating their population so they dont fall for radical islam.

Instead of you know sanctioning, carpet bombing, torturing or slitting the throats of children while waving nazi flags like the West does

Whatever the capital-t Truth is is inseparable from geopolitical manoeuvring. The only way to get closer to the truth is to do first hand research and analysis, which is very hard.

Whatever the "Correct Take" is, you will not obtain it through osmosis on Twitter and the rest of the online.

You can search the site and find some relatively comprehensive comments with info about it

There’s a lot of sus stuff about the west ramping up these allegations that we’ve seen including the cia talking about using Uighurs and radicalizing them against China back in the 00s this ama attempted back before the narrative really took hold and even the libs on Reddit were side eyeing it when they discovered who the person was. If they did this today you can be sure the comments would be full of “oh it’s so sad how the Chinese just let this genocide happen” we westerners would never do something like that, let’s not talk about the Japanese, Ice, indigenous people or anything.”

Here’s a comment from a bit back that is pretty ironic now considering it’s about Canada’s treatment of its indigenous

There are more but I haven’t saved everything I could. There’ve been videos made by Uighurs showing them working with cpc people and other comments outlining how most of what we know in the west either comes from zenz or radio free Asia which is known to be an asset of the cia.

Ultimately like the other comment said it’s gonna be hard to cut through all the propaganda here to get at the absolute truth but knowing what we know about capital and how often they’ve lied to manufacture consent for their ends (wmds, that the ussr planned to attack the west in the 20th century and then the cia released a paper saying that that was lie and just wanted to ramp up the military, etc) I’m not inclined to take what their propaganda arms have to say about their new public enemy #1 at face value

Just want to add something here for all the debates of "well it's not actually a genocide, it's only camps, blah blah blah." When the UN wrote up the credentials for what constitutes a genocide, plenty of countries involved specifically fought to take out certain definitions so that they wouldn't be liable to the actions they were doing at the time. A perfect example is one of the criteria for a genocide is taking children to camps. And this was written this way so that some of the countries involved wouldn't be held accountable for taking adults to camps.

Just keep that liberal bias in mind when playing armchair genocide-decider

deleted by creator

Camps exist (apparently no longer in use as all students supposedly graduated a year ago).

De-radicalization education and vocational training are good ways of dealing with a very serious terrorism issue the region was dealing with.

At worst, profiling, surveillance, and using assessment criteria that gets false positives are bad but nowhere near genocide.

We don't know the exact conditions of the camps, how many students attended, or the percentage of those who were forced to go vs those who attended voluntarily.

All the claims wrt forced labour, forced sterilizations, cultural erasure, and terrible conditions that I've seen are based on sketchy witness testimonies or speculation being passed off as fact by sketchy organizations (ties to FLG, US State, and/or military industrial complex) with Adrian Zenz and ASPI being two of the more prominent sources. Speaking of which this is a good article that goes into detail on what the Canadian Parliament based their decision on: https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/subcommittee-report-declaring-uighur-genocide-dominated-by-researchers-and-groups-funded-by-cia-cut-out-national-endowment-for-democracy

At the end of the day, they're now calling for bans on imports from Xinjiang https://twitter.com/stevenchase/status/1363985734496100356 which does absolutely nothing except to make things worse for the working class citizens of the province.

The Canadian journalist and communist party member Q Anthony has spent the past few days talking about this on his twitter where he addresses a lot of the common talking points on this issue: https://twitter.com/andraydomise

deleted by creator

There were munitions in Iraq, just no WMD

It seems like the situation is that the US, through the CIA, began the dissolving process of the Uyghur culture by capitalizing on the waning separatist sentiment, training terrorists, and beginning to destabilize the area, sending it on a downward trajectory of tension. And China, in an act of self-preservation, formed re-education camps and forced a small minority of the Uygur population into them, with the aim of restabilizing the area and rehabilitating radicalized terrorists. Is that right?

deleted by creator