China suppression of Uighurs meets U.N. definition of genocide, report says

> SIMON: People need to be careful using the word genocide. Why do you think it's justified and important to use it now?

> ZENZ: I have long argued that the atrocity in the region is a cultural genocide, not a literal genocide. I do continue to believe that, generally speaking, the Chinese government does not intend to physically eradicate the Uighurs and Kazakhs, just to integrate, subjugate, dominate and assimilate them. However, this is coupled with a policy of ethnoracial domination, as the government has brought millions of Han Chinese settler in the regions with promises of high salaries, jobs and free housing.

> The reason why now this has changed - we do need to probably call it a genocide - is quite simply because the evidence now, for the first time, very specifically meets one of the five criteria set forth by the United Nations Convention for the Punishment and Prevention of the Crime of Genocide from 1948, which specifically says the suppression of birth.

Per capita, the US imprisons approximately 20x more of its own ethnic minorities in a similar fashion. The numbers are so huge in China because the total population is so much larger.

I think both desperately need to be addressed.

It is painful for me to think that in all three of the richest, most populous, and largest countries on Earth, approximately zero of them have a full complement of human rights for all their inhabitants. We have such a long way to go as a species.

#VICENewsTonight China’s Vanishing Muslims: Undercover In The Most Dystopian Place In The World

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7AYyUqrMuQ

It’s not like China didn’t have mandatory birth control on the ethnic majority.

Lets talk about china right now.