My taxes have frequently paid for US Gov led torture. If we ever hold China accountable in a meaningful way, it won't be due to authentic moral outrage.
Interestingly your premise is a form of forever torture that forever punishes and condemns entire nations of people even if they weren't directly (or even indirectly) responsible for the actions of a small group of people.
Every American is denied the ability to have authentic moral outrage because of what a very small number of people did eg at Abu Ghraib? I disagree. That's an absurd premise and it means a nation can never change its behavior or move beyond past mistakes. In fact, your premise encourages a nation to never change, because you're forever condemned no matter what you do.
It's a collectivist punishment system. The kind of thing that has been used to apply inherited or associative morality based on nation, group or race for thousands of years. It's straight out of the old testament.
Let's examine that however. So because of things that happened in the past, or things outside of your direct control, a person or government decades or centuries later can never hold a position of "authentic moral outrage." How about people that were disgusted by acts of US torture and voted their conscience accordingly (electing Obama instead of the war hawk McCain, for example), do they get to have authentic moral outrage? Can you clarify how your all-powerful god-like moral ruling works in practice?
The French can never have authentic moral outrage because Napoleon murdered millions of people and the French did horrible things in Vietnam? Is there an expiration timer on any of this?
The Russians can never have authentic moral outrage because of what happened under the USSR and because of what Putin is doing currently?
The people of Belgium are forever condemned to never possess authentic moral outrage because of King Leopold II?
The people of Cambodia can possess no authentic moral outrage, regardless of their involvement in the genocide and that condemnation shall last an eternity.
The Germans....
Shall I continue? These are all intentionally extreme examples to make a very obvious point.
The world found out about Abu Ghraib, and the US was shamed, humiliated, and Obama issued an executive order specifically banning the CIA's torture techniques in 2009 in response. The NDAA of 2016 also further restricted abusive interrogations. The people of the US were widely disgusted. It was very public as a matter, it was broadcast to the American people 24/7 for months. Culturally we had a large, very public debate over it as a nation. That was for a few dozen cases of torture. The world's superpower - which needed to have zero concern for the world's opinion - was very clearly humiliated by it and took action to prevent torture in the future (and yes, one can be reasonably skeptical of that being successful; as time goes on the US should be judged by its actions and not words on the matter).
Why should a nation of people or its large government/s be comprehensively denied "authentic moral outrage" because of the actions of an exceptionally small part of the population? A plainly absurd position to take on how morality should work.
The only reason we got mad about Vietnam, Cuba, South America is not because of "Communism" as an abstract concept. It's because the government seized or threatened to seize assets. See also Pinochet. We had no problem with him.
The reason why this is relevant to China is that China has made a lot of people a lot of money. So they commit a genocide every so often. As long as it doesn't cost American capital money, we'll ignore it.
Why were people so up in arms about Cuba, but not Ethiopia? Well, Cuba is much closer, true. But the real issue was that people owned stuff in Cuba. There was no significant interest in Ethiopia.
Ok, then convince your side to submit to the UN-appointed war crimes tribunal in The Hague. As long as the The Hague Invasion Act is still in force, that claim is hollow.
This goes back to the debate between Augustine, a former good vs evil Manichean, and Pelagius. One believed that "everyone is bad" and warned against excessive hubris, while the other believed that those who choose to do evil do so out of their own free will.
In the pre-9/11 world, there was the idea that torture was a relic of the past, and we had made moral progress beyond such barbarities. But it was the leading liberal democracy in the world, rather than some third world dictatorship, that reintroduced the practice.
The United States trained the guerillas that eventually became the Vietcong in Vietnam, and the country went to war under the Gulf of Tonkin false flag. Similarly, the United States invaded Iraq under the WMD charade. In Afghanistan, it promoted the Islamist fundamentalism of the mujahideen, in order to fight the USSR friendly government that the Afghans themselves elected. The mujahideen became the Taliban, and a similar story of is true of ISIS and al-qaeda (US trained them to do their dirty work then lost control of them)
I don't think the United States is the root of all evil. But it's important to realise that the Chinese don't think of their country as an evil dictatorship, the same way that you don't view your country as "the bad guys". Rather, as St Augustine put it in his doctrine of original sin, we are all "the bad guys" and we need to reflect on the worse demons of our nature.
We have forgotten the Augustinian lessons, indulging in excessive pride and hubris, and failing to reflect on the same pattern that has been occurring cyclically for millennia.
I don't support China either - I don't believe in the "good vs evil" narrative that was alien to the Ancient Romans and Greek pagans. The idea that there's historical moral progress culminating in the values of the United States is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. In Hegel's philosophy of right, which was fashionable in Germany, he believed that history culminated in the values of the Prussian constitutional monarchy.
It's unlikely that China will become a superpower. The United States, in the next few years, will no longer hold world wide hegemony, as it seems to be distancing itself from Europe among other countries. It's also unlikely that we'll return to a bipolar world, similarly to the period of the Cold War. It's more likely that we're moving towards a multi-polar world.
The US certainly doesn't have a stellar Human Rights record in wars or other; but it's mostly because of incompetence and not as an agenda to keep one race only.
I am curious what would happen should you face those countless victims of "incompetence" and explain it to them.
They are the ones who turned a blind eye to Rwanda and gave the guy who sold the guns a top job, aren't they?
> You're black. You're not even a nier. You're an African.
On 11 January 1994, General Roméo Dallaire, commander of UNAMIR, sent his "Genocide Fax" to UN Headquarters.[108] The fax stated that Dallaire was in contact with "a top level trainer in the cadre of Interhamwe-armed [sic] militia of MRND." The informant—now known to be Mathieu Ngirumpatse's chauffeur, Kassim Turatsinze,[109] a.k.a. "Jean-Pierre"—claimed to have been ordered to register all Tutsi in Kigali. According to the memo, Turatsinze suspected that a genocide against the Tutsis was being planned, and he said that "in 20 minutes his personnel could kill up to 1000 Tutsis".[110] Dallaire's request to protect the informant and his family and to raid the weapons caches he revealed was denied.[110]
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/parliamentary-committee-uig...
My kingdom for a little perspective.
Which might be your goal.
Also China has gone to war with and enslaved as many people as they had the capacity for. Pretending otherwise is weird.
I have no goals. I am on HN just to exchange opinions when I need a 5 min rest from a programming.
>"Also China has gone to war with and enslaved as many people as they had the capacity for. Pretending otherwise is weird."
Oh. I am sure thy did. But the end result is what counts. They sure treated their own citizens like crap. But in business of f..g up other countries I think they're bit behind comparatively. Might change in a future so we will see / or not.
It should be obvious to you that something that effects millions of people is much worse than the CIA thing that only effected a couple hundred.
I'm unclear why you or anyone else might be creating analogies in your heads. It's even less clear why you want me to have made them.
Intervening in another's country internal affairs leads to a war. UN is a nice idea, though it doesn't work in reality. To apply for an asylum, you need to leave the country. Low likelyhood of happening.
I explain why its wrong to my kids. What then?
As sad as it is, we can't do much if anything.
This isn't a problem that will just go away by wishful thinking or by being ignored.
Not necessarily. Anti apartheid campaigns for South Africa kinda worked for example.
1/ « Keep an eye on » is different than « Intervene ». We have to have satellites out there mapping this stuff in excruciating detail, and spies tracking who is responsible for what, and special forces hit them if they step out in a zone where they can be hit. The people who perpetrate this must live in fear.
2/ The UN is full of problems, but if a resolution grants universal asylum to Uighurs anywhere in the world, then at least those people will know there is somewhere they can escape to. That’s something.
3/ Your kids might one day be in a position to do something about it. Telling them why this is wrong, and why they should care, might just be the most important thing you do in your life.
I don’t want to start a big argument. I just want to say that we can all do little things that do matter collectively.
Check out the history of Brown Moses, and Bellingcat:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliot_Higgins
"Higgins' analyses of Syrian weapons, which began as a hobby out of his home in his spare time, are frequently cited by the press and human rights groups and have led to parliamentary discussion."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellingcat
"Bellingcat (stylized as bell¿ngcat) is an investigative journalism website that specializes in fact-checking and open-source intelligence (OSINT). It was founded by British journalist and former blogger Eliot Higgins in July 2014. Bellingcat publishes the findings of both professional and citizen journalist investigations into war zones, human rights abuses, and the criminal underworld. The site's contributors also publish guides to their techniques, as well as case studies."
Check out some of the work being done peering into North Korea as well for ideas e.g.: "North Korea’s Yongbyon Nuclear Center: Flood Damage Repairs Underway" https://www.38north.org/2020/10/yongbyon201022/
There is probably a lot to be learned from constructing various elements of an open-source intelligence pipeline that uses software to aggregate information from dissidents, analyze satellite imagery to identify concentration camps, provide encryption, translation, etc.
The ironic and actually instructive part of this is that his work was used to rationalize the Syrian war for the west, which has left an absolutely devastating trail of misery for countless millions of Syrian people.
Even more instructive is that the people responsibly for that misery all still pretend to be the good guys.
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use HN as intended, we'd appreciate it. The intended use is this: primarily for intellectual curiosity, only secondarily for politics, and then only in the form of curious and thoughtful conversation—not smiting enemies.
I don't think the pieces of Syria fit quite so neatly together.
> I mean this seriously but as a lowly computer programmer is there any way we can help these poor people other than offer our sympathy?
You are not a lowly computer programmer, but a person near the top of income vertical for as long as salaried people go.
The two most potent political instruments ever are the money, and firearms. You may not have the second, but certainly have first.
Saying this, people have to ask a question not who are the bigger enemies to the civilised mankind, but who are the biggest threat. Are they are the people who perpetrate genocides in parts of the world where the light doesn't shine, or the people who cover for them in the West, while living a comfy life, and enjoying all benefits of life in a civil state.
Without any hesitation I will say that while Xis, Putins, and Sisis are the biggest enemies of the civilised mankind, but the biggest threat to civil state as we know it comes from people in the West who made their ascension to power possible.
I believe the majority opinion of WW2 historians is that the war was very well preventable, or it was possible to nip it at the bud if the West wasn't stalled in its tracks by internal political sabotage by people who were not much dissimilar to those Western politicians who now flirt with rouge regimes, and sometimes directly facilitating them.
A very good reason to think to all of HN readers who were fortunate to be born in the free world.
From my lifelong misfortune with politics, I can affirm the saying that it's much, much, much more hard to "create" new power, than it is to take, or receive existing power from somebody else.
My advise, join all major political parties, and fight, fight, fight, until you can do something real, and the money you have can help you in this a lot.
> Contact your Senators to urge them to co-sponsor the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act [0]
> Endorse the global campaign for fashion brands to end complicity in Uyghur forced labour [1]
And several other things including signing petitions you can find on their website: https://uhrp.org/what-you-can-do
[0] https://wilberforce.salsalabs.org/preventforcedlabor/index.h... [1] https://enduyghurforcedlabour.org/
I'm surprised at your surprise.
Aren't there stories about improper arrest and torture quite often?
Heck, a friend of mine was improperly arrested recently (the cops lied about what he was doing) and I actually met a guy who had been tortured (soon before I met him) by a state secret police.
I also knew a Holocaust survivor. I can't be the only person who thinks states behaving badly is more the norm than the exception?
Interestingly, you didn't mention Pakistan, Saudi Arabia etc. where minorities are actually being killed, raped or converted.
A separate country to 300 million SC/ST is the solution to Untouchability in South Asia https://chng.it/kJphRWWBRr #HathrasCase
Lots of things made me angry when I was in my teens and 20s that I look back on now in my 50s and understand much better (eg, I was furious at the lack of US intervention in Bosnia. I now understand much better the reasons driving non-interventionism, and I'm able to see the compassion driving it, even if I don't always agree.).
Edit: And BTW, it wasn't I who flagged your response, despite the ad hominem. But those things rarely play well on HN, as I'm sure you know.
This normalizes decorum over inconvenient truths.
@dang shadowbanned me for accurately discussing the propaganda warfare happening in US vs China relations, and the way current neo-Marxist riots tie into a long history of subversive movements.
How would one go about that?
By all accounts they appear to be justified in doing so.
> The Muslim community has a very us vs them mentality which is not healthy for national unity that china CCP desires.
Perhaps the CCP should find a model for national unity that Uighurs would overwhelmingly give their enthusiastic consent to.
> China has a 5000 year old culture and a majority of people experienced significant hardships and starvation in the last century.
>This Uigher generation is suffering so the future uigher can fit into the society better.
What relevance does the historical suffering of the Han? population have to do with the current, actively manufactured suffering of the Uighurs, beyond bitter vindictiveness?
> They emphasize national unity (vs individalism) in a way western people cannot even begin to understand, but belonging to such a group is not entirely bad. This Uigher generation is suffering so the future uigher can fit into the society better.
"Prepare to be assimilated; resistance is futile" "Surrender or die."
There's a reason the Borg were considered villains.
Seriously, this is some black-mirror take on how society should function. Fascism doesn't even begin to cut it:
Fit in, or die. Be the same as everyone else or die. No originality allowed or die. Sounds like a lovely world you envision living in.
The chinese actions are atrocious but an accusation of saying that holocaust level genocide is getting advocated here is a huge difference.
You can tell him he's wrong because you believe that the chinese are conducting genocide. You do not start a witch hunt by accusing him of advocating genocide which he obviously is not doing.
What we do know is this... we have people on the inside of Hong Kong and we know that in Hong Kong China is not conducting mass genocide or opening up re-education camps in Hong Kong. This is different from what's happening with the Uighurs... we need to know what prompted China to react much more heavily against the Uighurs (as opposed to Hong Kong) and we also need to confirm whether the alleged "genocide" is real.
The post that was called disgusting is indeed a valid alternative viewpoint quite possibly from someone closer to the situation than your average white guy.
Also keep the outrage in check. Even a modern western country in 2020 is capable of this crap. The US has their own detention camps open today. It exists using a technique called extraordinary rendition to get around American laws. The camp is called gitmo and there are some real pictures about some really horrible shit that went down at gitmo.
"We don't know what's going on" is a lie. We know. Some people chose to ignore / justify. You are sadly in good company when it comes to the history of denying genocide.
I'm not lying, but I could be mistaken. I'm not mistaken about the rape of nanking or the holocaust. There are pictures of mass slaughter, graves and even severed heads on the pikes of japanese soldiers to confirm the depravity and existence of these events. My own grandfather witnessed the events and tells me first hand accounts of the rivers of blood in nanking. The japanese denial is sickening, and you accusing me, a descendent of victims of such slaughter, as someone who denies genocide displays incredible immaturity.
I am not denying genocide, I am simply saying extreme accusations need extreme evidence. So your next task is clear:
Show me pictures of the same slaughter that you claim the chinese are doing right now. I promise you I will do a full 180 if you show me some actual pictures of the massacre that you claim is happening right at this very moment. Show me some dead bodies, executions... etc.. etc.
You are the one setting the bar at "mass slaughter". Sorry, that wasn't and isn't what is being discussed. Mass interment, violence, rape, retaliation against one's family for political crimes, forced sterilization, etc. The evidence for that is legion, you have access to the same information I do. Look it up yourself (if you care).
These are your words:
>You are sadly in good company when it comes to the history of denying genocide.
So now you're claiming we aren't even talking about genocide? That there is no mass slaughter? Seems to me ur changing the subject.
https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20...
Look, mass sterilization is bad. But genocide? Under that logic anyone who ever got an abortion is a killer. Or maybe anyone who wanted to have a baby but changed their mind...
Colloquially when people use the word genocide they use it in place of mass slaughter, that is the intuition behind the word and that's how people use it. If you use the word genocide in place of mass sterilization, you and the organization who decides to use/define the word in that way are manipulating the perspective of the situation because Everyone is well aware of the intuitive meaning of the word "genocide". When people hear "genocide" they hear "slaughter" and "killing"... mass sterilization is the last thing they think about.
Here's a thought. Rather than use the word "genocide" why don't you just say "mass sterilization." Don't throw down a word that can be mistaken for slaughter for your own manipulative gain. You could have easily, very easily clarified your intent earlier, but you didn't because you are manipulative, or you don't know common colloquial English.
I vote that you're just being manipulative. The rest of your English grammar seems fine, you just want to start something rather than be level headed.
You're massively out of line with "Someone doesn't know an english word and is misusing it all over the place." and "I vote that you're just being manipulative. The rest of your English grammar seems fine, you just want to start something rather than be level headed."
In addition to this the technical terms are all different so it's not like I've been proven wrong. My oxford definition actually incorporates the word "killing" so we can argue about technicalities till forever or we can not be stupid and admit that when people hear or use the word "genocide" they think about "killings" "murder" and mass "slaughter"
Under the other definitions basically an abortion clinic becomes a genocide clinic. We don't associate abortion clinics with genocide... nothing is out of line here At all.
You guys can cite the UN definition of genocide but nobody uses that definition in the english language, it's really too big a of an essay for someone to hold in their head. Realistically when you see the word in an article or uttered by a person it's using the oxford definition which is the exact context we're in right now.
No, we don't, and the Merriam-Webster definition [0] captures this fact: “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group”.
As does the Britannica [1] definition: “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people because of their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race.”
While killing the individual members of a group is a common mechanism of genocide, the killing the “-cide” in the term refers to is the killing or destruction of the group as a group, not the killing of the individuals who constitute the group.
Yes, it's exactly genocide. Preventing a people from reproducing is quite an effective way of wiping them out as a people.
I'm done here.
I am going off first hand accounts and confirmed facts. What are you doing?
>The chinese actions are atrocious but
"concentration camps are bad but.." No but. There's no but there.
> holocaust level genocide
No one said that. This is the logical fallacy you are committing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
> you believe that the chinese are conducting genocide.
Reducing this to a "two sides" issue is shameless deflection. What part of the dozens of reporting done on Xinjiang do you think is false, and what facts are you basing that on?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/24/china-has-buil...
Genocide is a very serious accusation. The word is thrown around in this thread in a trivial way as if you can accuse anyone of advocating it. Let me spell it out for you: Pretty much no one advocates this. You're coming at him saying "I never said it was at holocaust levels" as if that makes a huge difference. This is mass human slaughter we're talking about.
He described it with the word "Holocaust" for two reasons. To detrivialize the usage of the word and because I've seen numbers being thrown around as if millions of people were exterminated.
>"concentration camps are bad but.." No but. There's no but there.
There is indeed a but. The US put the japanese in concentration camps in the past. This does not raise them to the same position as Hitler gassing the jews.
>I am going off first hand accounts and confirmed facts. What are you doing?
Confirmed facts of genocide? Show me some pictures. Show some proof. The seriousness of the accusation demands serious evidence.
>Reducing this to a "two sides" issue is shameless deflection. What part of the dozens of reporting done on Xinjiang do you think is false, and what facts are you basing that on?
He's reducing the issue to an "all sides" issue. Insulting an alternative view point is reducing it to a "one side" issue.
Let's keep things utterly clear here. It is completely wrong to build internment camps. Completely. But it is also completely and utterly wrong to silence another view point and accuse someone of genocide.
You don't solve an issue by attacking the people who created the internment camps without understanding the situation which caused them deploy such drastic procedures in the first place.
Oh I'm well aware (almost) no one will come out explicitly and endorse concentration camps. What they do is almost more insidious, they justify them. They rationalize them. They spin them as something they are not.
I'd rather someone be an open Nazi than to perform their mental gymnastics in public to avoid challenging their world view on something as simple as "mass interment camps are bad." "Well you see they aren't interment camps...they were criminals anyways...how dare you compare a work camp to a death camp?"
It's sickening, all of it. Your spin of "it's not the same as the holocaust" (no one said it is) and "yeah but whatabout the US!" is sadly par for the course.
There is a huge difference here. When you say genocide, it is equivalent to holocaust. When you say concentration camp it's equivalent to gitmo at worst or the japanese concentration camps. Both could be happening but one is drastically worse than the other and genocide needs confirmation.
> The US put japanese people in in concentration camps and most US citizens supported it.
Amazing, your lack of self-awareness. Your deflection and whataboutism can't even let up for a second. In case you need yet another reminder, this thread is about Chinese camps.
> There is a huge difference here. When you say genocide, it is equivalent to holocaust
You are saying this. You. You are pushing the argument to the extreme ("everything is a holocaust") to discredit what is actually being said ("these are mass interment camps with systemic violence and arbitrary punishment"). It's an argumentation technique that doesn't work when the other person knows what's happening.
Genocide is mass killings, not mass sterilizations. If you get very technical you can call a sterilization a killing but that's just a deliberate misuse of the term.
When someone hears the word genocide they hear slaughter. They don't hear oh that population was sterilized. Let's not be stupid about this.
We as americans vehemently disagree, but a chinese citizen, after witnessing several terrorist attacks by the Uighur which slaughtered hundreds of chinese people, will obviously have a different perspective. This isn't a one time isolated incident... these were multiple attacks occurring with no end in sight.
Rather than not minding insults to opinions you disagree with, why don't you have an open mind and post why you disagree rather then insult the person you disagree with?
You sound like a Han Chinese. Imagine yourself in their shoes. There's lots of Chinese diaspora in other countries. What if one of the countries decided to do that with the Han Chinese? Would you still side with the host country?
Imagine yourself in the shoes of the person who was killed by a bombing. Imagine yourself knowing family members or your kids getting slaughtered by these terrorist attacks.
Let me put it to you clearly. The situation is complex, no side is right, but to bury the action of one side and justify the actions of another because it's convenient for some stupid US-China rivalry is the wrong way to view it.
I'm not saying either side was right. I'm saying it's wrong to comment on how this is disgusting. It is a valid opposing perspective, just like how your perspective is valid.
What isn't valid is insults and a mass mob mentality.
I am not saying that jihadist extremism is not to blame. But I don't think an entire Uighur culture is to blame either and especially not Uighur people who are being victimised.
>I'm not saying either side was right. I'm saying it's wrong to comment on how this is disgusting.
It's not wrong at all to comment on this. What the Chinese govt is doing is plain disgusting and they should be held accountable just like anybody who is supporting them. We hold extremist groups who carry out attacks responsible, so why not a racist, genocidal govt who instigated the whole thing anyway?
When someone bombs your family you take the time to find out why they were bombed and try to understand the otherside before shutting down the otherside.
But when someone voices their own opinion. You just call their opinion disgusting and accuse them of genocide.
The man is obviously not supporting genocide. If the chinese are supporting genocide than the man obviously doesn't know but an accusation of genocide needs extreme proof and right now there's only rumors.
Maybe what's really going on is you're selectively applying your empathy to whatever suits your preconceived viewpoint.
I didn't say I would try to understand the side that bombed my family. Those would be the terrorists. I said I would get to the bottom of what happened and why it happened. I would not condemn an entire people or a culture (unless of course every single one of them believed the same thing as the terrorists) to seek some sort of sick justice. Please don't invent things I didn't say.
>The man is obviously not supporting genocide. If the chinese are supporting genocide than the man obviously doesn't know but an accusation of genocide needs extreme proof and right now there's only rumors.
It's not rumours. There is genuine proof. My own government declared it as genocide after investigation (Canada).
>But when someone voices their own opinion. You just call their opinion disgusting and accuse them of genocide.
My comment was directed at the Chinese govt and whoever supports them (obviously knowingly). I didn't call his opinion disgusting. Please learn to comprehend at a level above that of the sixth grade.
>Maybe what's really going on is you're selectively applying your empathy to whatever suits your preconceived viewpoint.
Yeah and you are selectively applying your generosity in trying to understand those you disagree with to whatever suits your needs.
I didn't invent anything you said. I'm telling you what you should do.
>It's not rumours. There is genuine proof. My own government declared it as genocide after investigation (Canada).
Alright. Show me the pictures of the mass killings and the slaughter that's occurring in China. I want to see pictures of the executions and the graves. We have pictures that corroborate the events of Nanking and the holocaust show me the pictures of the genocide that's occurring in China.
>My comment was directed at the Chinese govt and whoever supports them (obviously knowingly). I didn't call his opinion disgusting. Please learn to comprehend at a level above that of the sixth grade.
This whole topic is about a comment calling the original topic disgusting. My comment is defending the original comment. You attacking me is agreeing with the premise. Stay on topic.
>Yeah and you are selectively applying your generosity in trying to understand those you disagree with to whatever suits your needs.
I'm not. Show me the pictures and proof of the "genocide" and I'll do a 180. I'll believe you.
>Alright. Show me the pictures of the mass killings and the slaughter that's occurring in China. I want to see pictures of the executions and the graves.
Again you've shown yourself to be no more mature than a sixth grader. First, educate yourself about definition of a genocide. It's not all "mass killings and graves" that you are lusting after. A genocide can be a systematic destruction of a people through incarceration, torture, humiliation, destruction of language, cultural practices etc. simply based on their race, culture, or religion. Same thing that's happening to Uighurs. Vox did an expose a couple months ago using satellite imagery to find hundreds of mass detention and slave labor facilities corroborated by statements from victims.
You really do should do some reading with empathy. Maybe you can learn something: https://www.vox.com/2020/7/28/21333345/uighurs-china-internm...
A genocide is systematic destruction of people through killing. That is the oxford official definition and that is the colloquial meaning of the term. When people hear the word they don't think torture, they don't think cultural assimilation, they don't think birth control.
They think slaughter.
Using the word genocide in the way you define it.... makes gitmo become a genocide camp. You're own civilized neighbor the US of A is also basically conducting genocide of middle easterners under your highly convenient definition.
But I don't need to tell you this. You know this already. You throw down that word with the full knowledge that whenever you use that word people will think mass killings. You only fall back on a convenient definition when someone calls you out on the technicality. This is what the articles you read do to manipulate the sentiment, and you accept it because you enjoy calling China a country that is conducting mass genocide. You enjoy perpetuating China with a reputation that is an extreme version of the truth. This is what's going on.
I would tell you to educate yourself but the mind is not only limited by what it is capable of learning but also by genetics. Your limitations are of the latter kind, there is nothing for you to learn because you are already aware of what you're doing.
There's nothing left to argue on the main topic because we both never disagreed that detention camps exist. We can argue about the definition of the word "genocide" and about how your misguided brain works though, I'm sure there's still a disagreement on those two areas.
With regards to Gitmo, you are again purposefully lying. There are plenty of arabs and muslims living in USA with no problems. We have comedians (Hasan Minaj) making fun of Trump. Which Chinese, let along uighur, can make fun of Xi in China?
Now since we both agreed that the detention camps exist, and also the women of that group are being sterilized against their will, it meets criteria b, and d of the Genocide under the UN charter.
As for my genes, they're full capable of learning and not limited by brainwashing as you have been subjected to. Sorry for you and the rest of the CCP shills.
It's abhorrent, on the level of holocaust denial.
You're telling me that a holocaust level genocide is happening in China right now? Serious accusations require serious evidence. Prove it. Something like pictures of mass graves like the ones you've seen in the holocaust or the rape of nanking is sufficient for me to do a complete 180.
What's going on here is mob mentality and you're part of it.
I find it quite hard to believe that there is not any degree of distinct Islamic culture that has developed in France (both in the sense of present France and the broader sense of historical French territory) under the influence on broader French culture.
And by “hard to believe”, I mean entirely implausible.
This is also the literal mantra of ISIS. "Muslims will always be the 'other' in Europe, and we need to make sure they aren't even integrated."
In that way the far right and militant islam are on the same page. Neither wants a successful integration.
An observation which tangentially reminds me of: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/24/malcolm-x-...
Where in this article do you read anything that points to a genocide?
Home made bombs dropped in markets, driving trucks in to crowds of people, random knife attacks. Doesn't sound unfamiliar here in Europe. They're all reading from the same book.
What China is doing is pretty horrible but it's not like Xi woke up one day and decided he didn't like Uighurs.
Hundreds of camps have been spotted, plenty of interviews given by ex-detainees. No doubt Uighurs are being detained en masse but I wonder how many don't ever make it out.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/07/15/uighur-genocide-xinjian...
"The specific intent element defines the purpose of committing the acts: "to destroy in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such". The specific intent is a core factor distinguishing genocide from other international crimes, such as war crimes or crimes against humanity.
In 2007, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) noted in its judgement on Jorgic v. Germany case that, in 1992, the majority of legal scholars took the narrow view that "intent to destroy" in the CPPCG meant the intended physical-biological destruction of the protected group, and that this was still the majority opinion. But the ECHR also noted that a minority took a broader view, and did not consider biological-physical destruction to be necessary, as the intent to destroy a national, racial, religious or ethnic group was enough to qualify as genocide.[29]"
I mean this seriously but as a lowly computer programmer is there any way we can help these poor people other than offer our sympathy?