Excessive hyperbole, aka crying wolf, does make it less likely that if horror happens, it will be taken seriously. But this is not that. China has jailed over a million people from a single targeted ethnic group. Rapes, forced sterilizations, disappearances, etc have been happening and have been documented.

It is genocide according to the UN definition, which the Economist writer mentions and ignores blissfully, because of course they would know better. History repeats itself, and good people will continue to discuss semantics while others are tortured and killed.

So as long as it's just sterilisations and imprisonment and forced labor camps and just a few murders for organs it's hyperbole to call it a genocide?

I don't get the point. Yes, they haven't reached the point of murdering by the millions yet. But its still a very worrying development.

We know from history what happens when people are accused of being asocial and are sent to work camps. It's happened before, and people didn't believe it, and it took decades for people to fully realise what was going on.

I always wondered why nobody did anything against the concentration camps, the doctors who killed patients, the mass murders.

I think people were either choosing to not believe it, or they were watching in terror, helplessly, relieved that they were not yet victims themselves.