szhsh

I'm making what are pretty obvious, factual claims. I don't think that any of the factual statements I'm making are even controversial. It's just the interpretation that has suddenly dramatically shifted in the US and some of its allied countries.

The UN Genocide Convention is very clear about what is and is not genocide. There's no possible way to construe a situation like this, in which the population and life expectancy of the group is increasing, as genocide. In fact, describing it as genocide sounds like propaganda.

If the Chinese government were trying to physically annihilate the Uyghurs, which is what the very serious word "genocide" means, it would be obvious. We would not be discussing whether or not the 3-child limit was being more aggressively enforced on Uyghurs. We would be discussing mass death.

I don't need the CCP to tell me that "genocide" implies mass killing and physical annihilation of a people. I'm perfectly capable of seeing that the word "genocide" is being misused in a highly manipulative way in the political discussion nowadays, and of pushing back against that.

So far, the "China Initiative" cases have not gone well for the government, though they have still done a lot of damage to innocent people who were targeted.[0]

It's also clear that ethnically Chinese people have been specifically targeted.

Anming Hu is a Canadian citizen born in China, who was a professor at the University of Tennessee. The FBI got him fired before he even went to trial by telling the University he was a spy. In the end, all the FBI actually had on him was that he hadn't reported a small speaking fee on an official form. It wasn't even obvious if reporting the fee was necessary. The whole thing turned out to be a racially motivated fishing expedition by some local FBI agent, and Hu was acquitted. But the FBI majorly screwed up his life and career and smeared him in public first.

A lot of the cases have turned out to be like this. See Gang Chen's case at MIT. That one is almost Kafkaesque, when you read the charges and then read the background.

0. https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-09-16/why-trump-...

In the first half of 2019, foreign companies won 68% of their cases in the Beijing IP court.[0] Foreign companies are much more often plaintiffs than defendants, though the balance is supposedly shifting (Chinese companies are becoming more assertive about their own IP rights).

An example: John Deere has won judgments against a bunch of Chinese companies that used similar names to it.[1]

0. https://www.ccpit-patent.com.cn/node/11255

1. https://www.kwm.com/en/cn/knowledge/insights/final-judgment-...

> According to who? The Chinese govt?

All of the sterilization / birth control claims are sourced to Chinese government data. That's the best data available.

Given the large economic investment in Xinjiang (which is part of China's attempt to decrease dissent) and the very visible improvements in living standards there, it makes sense that life expectancy is increasing.

> There is no basis for your claim that the forced sterilization/abortions of the Uyghur people occurs at similar rates within the Chinese majority

Up until a few years ago, forced sterilization / abortion was something that basically only the Han majority was subject to. The Uyghurs were exempted from the 1-child policy, just like most ethnic minorities.

Over the last few years, China has loosened the policy, so families can now have 3 children, but it has started applying it to ethnic minorities as well.

> There is no basis for your claim [...] that it is merely an enforcement of the three child policy.

No basis? There's no basis for believing otherwise. If you pay attention to the reporting, the horror stories are mostly about people who have had more children than the policy allows. You can very legitimately oppose China's 3-child policy, but calling it "genocide" is obvious hyperbole.

"Genocide" is an extremely serious accusation. It means an attempt to physically annihilate a people. It evokes images of death camps and crematoria. Yet you're now arguing about whether or not the Uyghurs might be subject to harsher enforcement of the 3-child policy or not. That's not genocide. The word should not become a cheap rhetorical tool.