watch this b4 commenting https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PGjSv3x0fuk

  • gayhobbes [he/him]
    3·
    4 years ago

    But why? This wasn’t part of the discussion.

    You can open the scope of a discussion, that is totally allowed.

    They are euphemistic because the language used is trying to downplay the gravity of it.

    This is still an assumption on your part.

    They don’t have to be western attempts. Even if they would be, how they are doing and justifying it is still very problematic.

    Yet they are, and what do you know of what they're doing and justifying it beyond sources from an anti-communist evangelical?

    Please stop trying to force a discussion about some western narrative into it, as if this would add anything to the topic.

    Where do you get your sources on China? Are you in China? Are you of Chinese descent? Do you live among the Uyghurs? How do you know what's happening?

    • Corbyn [none/use name]
      6·
      4 years ago

      You can open the scope of a discussion, that is totally allowed.

      You don't open the scope of a discussion by shifting the focus to topics that are completely irrelevant to the discussion.

      This is still an assumption on your part.

      I am "assuming" that the language used does not do separating families and forcing a large ethnic group to go into re-education camps justice? I don't see how you can deny the gravity of what this means to the people affected by it.

      Yet they are, and what do you know of what they’re doing and justifying it beyond sources from an anti-communist evangelical?

      Why do you keep bringing someone in the discussion who has not been part or even influence of anything I have said?

      Where do you get your sources on China? Are you in China? Are you of Chinese descent? Do you live among the Uyghurs? How do you know what’s happening?

      I have been arguing based on what we know for sure. Even the government has confirmed it. I would love to have more to go by, but it doesn't really exist.

      • gayhobbes [he/him]
        1·
        4 years ago

        I have been arguing based on what we know for sure.

        I do not think you've been doing this at all. Take a look at this thread and tell me what you're still assuming after all that.

        • Corbyn [none/use name]
          7·
          4 years ago

          And once again you are trying to change the topic to incorrect reporting about the situation. I give up.

          • gayhobbes [he/him]
            ·
            4 years ago

            I'm not trying to change the topic. I'm trying to address the inaccuracies of your argument.