The state-sponsored organ theft is speculative, both in extent and purpose.

But the concentration camps for Uyghers are well-documented, and they really can't be grouped with the organ donation claims. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_re-education_camps .

> For example. the protesters in HK was not even put into prison for some of their violent actions, and if that's not enough I really can't say more.

I'm neither educated nor motivated enough to argue with most of this. But preventing China from punishing HK people according to China's laws is the _entire point_ of the protests, is it not?

It might be legitimate for a western people e.g. you may be used to get different laws in different levels of government, but it's utterly unthinkable for the Chinese. The fact that HK even keeps foreign judges and officials pretty much surprised a lot of Chinese.

You know Taiwan and Korea are successful democracies right? Why do you think people choosing their leaders is a western attribute? The PRC itself is even ostensibly run by the people (it obviously isn't).

If Hong Kongers really are Chinese then, on the contrary, it's thinkable.

I didn't ask for your opinion about the protests, because you've already made it quite obvious. It is complete bullshit to use them as an example to say that the freedom of speech of the average Chinese citizen isn't restricted.

I am not going to engage with concentration camps and organ harvesting, but I would have enough links and even official reports on the validity. It is - as you said - not even a thing the CCP even denies in the first place (and the path from denial to admitting their existence is telling). The other measures targeting Muslims are official policy, so we don't need to argue about those either. So we can disagree on the interpretation of all these measures and how impactful they are - and honestly, this is a discussion for another forum.

I would also argue that China has been strongarming other countries in excess to any other nation except for the USA in recent decades. China is the only country that uses face and "people's feelings" as distinct political instruments. But this is also not my main point and also not the point of the OP.

For the other things, let me make two points. First, your assertion that this also happens in other countries does not make it okay. This is a fallacy often used. What I am saying is that the rate and fashion to how these things are reporting on, protested against, and dealt with in other countries, is much different than in China. It is a fact that many bad things happen in Western countries right this moment. But the people arrested or disappearing for pointing these things out is pretty much zero. I was just on business in the US, and watching MSNBC and Fox News at the same time, it's clear that there is a huge range for opinions on literally all political and economic actions and actors - and they are strongly voiced. Indeed the US has a strong culture of government distrust and conspiracy theorists that simply would not exist in China. In (most of) the EU, measures done by the CCP could never even be implemented at all, as neither the political force. executive capabilities, nor the acceptance in the population exists in such a way. But even if these things would be implemented, you could always find a country that does things better, treats people better and is more humane. So I think this framing is really useless, whether we argue about China, the USA or Sweden.

Second, why are people afraid of China? We are afraid because we do not want the Chinese model to succeed. As much as it helped pull people from poverty, it has created and cemented an incredibly wealthy and powerful upper class, and we are rightfully worried that our own elites take some hints. We are not scared of Chinese soldiers marching into our country, but if China would develop similar cultural hegemony as the US has currently, our world would be be much worse (at least for me, as I am a minority). China violates very basic tenets of human rights that we believe enable us to live freely. China also implements the mechanisms necessary to push strongly the will of the majority on the minority - or to be more precise, the will of someone on anyone. Again, I only need to mention the very real plight of Muslims in China - "uniformize or perish" - for you to hopefully see this point. This very same thing could happen easily elsewhere, and indeed we have seen it happen in the past. You may, for example, want to google the term "Stasi" if you have the time.

Its a tiresome trope, but people valuing a free society will always be deadly afraid that living with a boot on their necks is an actual viable political and economic model, because if it is, what's keeping history from swinging exactly that way? Free and tolerant societies are the exception in history and we - especially minorities in any sense - would like that to change! Is it a pipe dream? Maybe - but that's exactly where this fear comes from. It is probably difficult to understand this point if you belong to both a local and (eventually) globally dominant grouping.

Finally, as to your first sentence: I think it is ALSO easy to propose many actionable and easy measures to make things better in China, for example, stop doing the things we agree are "bad". And many countries or governments are not doing these things. So I ask again, why can you not imagine anything better? And furthermore, where would we be if we can not imagine anything better?