>>But on what basis does the West have any moral authority to judge China's emulation of Western colonialism.

Our great-great grandfathers beat their wives, thus no one should be able to judge me for doing the same today. Is this your argument?

It was profoundly more than beating wives. The entire foundation of the West is based on genocides and mass theft that make the Uyghur crisis seem small. My argument is more along the lines of: our emotional reaction to Chinese colonial projects is a subconscious projection of our own unresolved acknowledgement of the price we paid for modernity.

I'd agree here for sure. I'm not sure how we even go about dealing with it as every converstation seems to spiral into madness

> on what basis does the West have any moral authority to judge China's emulation of Western colonialism

This is a counsel of despair and it is pure tribalism. No one in the West can condemn the actions of China the nation because the West has done analogous things in the past. So everyone in the West is guilty for everything anyone in the West has ever done. By this logic there is no basis for moral judgment ever and every group is free to dominate any other group. Might makes right. It's lovely in this scenario to claim membership in a powerful group that can take everyone else's marbles.

No one believes this about their own group. "I can't judge my neighbor for murder because we're both white. His crime is my crime." People frequently believe this about other groups. "My Chinese neighbor is a horrible person because they are Han and the Han-dominated government in China is doing horrible things to Uighurs." This is obvious nonsense. Wrong is wrong whoever the judge. It isn't the West judging China but individual Westerners. Also individual Han Chinese. Maybe even individual Han Chinese responsible for abusing the Uighurs.

> So everyone in the West is guilty for everything anyone in the West has ever done

Of course that's nonsensical and I agree with it. But I wonder what you think when it's positively framed?

So everyone in the west can _benefit_ from everything anyone in the West has ever done?

That statement seems much closer to being universally accepted. Our rights to benefit from the fruits of Western "progress"; medicine, civil rights, social security, peace, etc. Yet these things are fundamentally dependent on the historical and contemporary colonial and neo-colonial "heist" upon the rest of the world. How can we simultaneously distance ourselves from the crimes of the West and benefit from it? Actions have consequences. Yes, neither I nor my immediate ancestors (and I'm as British as can be) took part in any colonial crimes, but I sure as hell take advantage of my Western privileges. If I don't have any personal responsibility for my culture's crimes then how do I justify personally benefiting from those crimes?

Yes, I thought about that. "My neighbor of the same religion and complexion won a Nobel! I'm so smart!" Everyone is happy to put a finger on the scale for their own benefit. But this is different from everyone in the West benefitting from the telephone or whatever. They do! So does everyone in Japan. As for compound interest on historical plunder, that's another matter. I'm as American as can be (and as British in ancestry as you, I am sure). I do not believe I am responsible for the original crime. I am responsible for not acknowledging it or giving it back. But to a large extent that egg cannot be unscrambled.

> But to a large extent that egg cannot be unscrambled

Well yes, that's exactly it! If we can't unscramble our eggs how can we can unscramble China's eggs?

We don't need to unscramble China's eggs. We need to get them to stop scrambling. The people are still alive, most of them, that are being wronged. We're not talking about 1492.