Usually in relation to Uighur camps, the argument is "since you're in America you can't change whether they're concentration camps or education facilities, so you should just concentrate on the concentration camps within your own borders instead."
Like, motherfucker, I can have an opinion on the actions in another country and still work on changing things I can change.
I guess my question is, is this concentrate on what you can change part of some theory or strategy I haven't read or is it just bad and lazy?
In particular for China it's essentially conceding to the people who thinks there are millions of Uighurs being murdered, rather than attempt to engage and show that there is no evidence of that, and just what abouting.
So then I guess the question is should we ignore other countries' responses to american-driven activities and focus only on American actions that americans (maybe) can have an effect on changing, or is it important to stay aware of and having opinions on understanding what's happening internationally?
I don't think that comrade was saying ignore it. What they seemed to be saying, and what I personally believe, is to keep the focus not on the symptom (this being china's policy towards Uiyghurs) and keep the focus on the disease (US foreign policy, specifically using Uiyghurs as tools of destabilization). It is absolutely possible to say that the Uiyghurs are under the thumb of the CCP, regardless of whether that is just deradicalization, or concentration camps, and push that the best way for this to be resolved is to quit the US from intervening in chinese politics via state sponsored terrorism
Thanks for putting into words what i couldnt comrade!
Yes, I see. I agree that America should be critiqued for their interventions, I disagree that we should critique China for actions that there is no evidence of.