Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 102 posts

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#11

Post by horsemessiah »

Tomte wrote: post #2

No, it isn't. From the article: > It has forcibly sterilised some Uyghur women. But it is not slaughtering them. Not slaughtering them makes no difference to whether it's genocide. Genocide is about "intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial or religious group". Sterilizing them counts. As would snatching the children of that group and placing them in families of your own group (to give an exam…

What evidence is there of sterilization that’s not coming from Falun Gong? I don’t find those cultists to be any more of a legitimate source than Scientology. They have pretty insane and hateful believes and have been found unreliable many times.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Falun_Gong

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#12

Post by Juliate »

jjgreen wrote: post #3
Tomte wrote: post #2

No, it isn't. From the article: > It has forcibly sterilised some Uyghur women. But it is not slaughtering them. Not slaughtering them makes no difference to whether it's genocide. Genocide is about "intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial or religious group". Sterilizing them counts. As would snatching the children of that group and placing them in families of your own group (to give an exam…

Not saying that you're wrong -- would you include the US eugenics programs [1] or the Australian forced adoptions [2] in that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide#International_law quotes:

  Article II of the Convention defines genocide as:

  ... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy,
  in whole or in part,
  a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

  (a) Killing members of the group;
  (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated
      to bring  about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#13

Post by api »

Tomte wrote: post #2

No, it isn't. From the article: > It has forcibly sterilised some Uyghur women. But it is not slaughtering them. Not slaughtering them makes no difference to whether it's genocide. Genocide is about "intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial or religious group". Sterilizing them counts. As would snatching the children of that group and placing them in families of your own group (to give an exam…

[flagged]

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#14

Post by draklor40 »

By the common understanding of the word, it is not. Just as “homicide” means killing a person and “suicide” means killing yourself, “genocide” means killing a people. China’s persecution of the Uyghurs is horrific: it has locked up perhaps 1m of them in prison camps, which it naturally mislabels “vocational training centres”. It has forcibly sterilised some Uyghur women. But it is not slaughtering them.

- Yes, Guardian is so sure that no mass murders took place. How ? Cause you know, CCP says so, so must be the truth.

A sham of an article in the name of journalism and "trying to name the crime accurately".

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#16

Post by Cthulhu_ »

hd4 wrote: post #6
jjgreen wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not saying that you're wrong -- would you include the US eugenics programs [1] or the Australian forced adoptions [2] in that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations

Can you bring contemporary examples, not things that happened decades before many of the posters here were even alive?

From the wiki article itself:

> The compulsory sterilization of American men and women continues to this day. In 2013, it was reported that 148 female prisoners in two California prisons were sterilized between 2006 and 2010 in a supposedly voluntary program, but it was determined that the prisoners did not give consent to the procedures. > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-stern/sterilization-calif...

It was banned in 2014 at least. But 2013 is contemporary enough.

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#17

Post by zdragnar »

horsemessiah wrote: post #11
Tomte wrote: post #2

No, it isn't. From the article: > It has forcibly sterilised some Uyghur women. But it is not slaughtering them. Not slaughtering them makes no difference to whether it's genocide. Genocide is about "intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial or religious group". Sterilizing them counts. As would snatching the children of that group and placing them in families of your own group (to give an exam…

What evidence is there of sterilization that’s not coming from Falun Gong? I don’t find those cultists to be any more of a legitimate source than Scientology. They have pretty insane and hateful believes and have been found unreliable many times. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Falun_Gong

There have been a number of first-person interviews; fairly certain those weren't from Falun Gong members.

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#19

Post by Tomte »

jjgreen wrote: post #3
Tomte wrote: post #2

No, it isn't. From the article: > It has forcibly sterilised some Uyghur women. But it is not slaughtering them. Not slaughtering them makes no difference to whether it's genocide. Genocide is about "intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial or religious group". Sterilizing them counts. As would snatching the children of that group and placing them in families of your own group (to give an exam…

Not saying that you're wrong -- would you include the US eugenics programs [1] or the Australian forced adoptions [2] in that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations

From skimming those articles I'd tend towards yes, but I'm neither a legal professional, nor would I claim that I know enough about those situations to make a judgment myself.

Re: “Genocide” is the wrong word for the horrors of Xinjiang

#20

Post by Loughla »

jjgreen wrote: post #3
Tomte wrote: post #2

No, it isn't. From the article: > It has forcibly sterilised some Uyghur women. But it is not slaughtering them. Not slaughtering them makes no difference to whether it's genocide. Genocide is about "intent to destroy in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial or religious group". Sterilizing them counts. As would snatching the children of that group and placing them in families of your own group (to give an exam…

Not saying that you're wrong -- would you include the US eugenics programs [1] or the Australian forced adoptions [2] in that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations

Yes, obviously. But what is the point of bringing that up, honestly?
Post reply on HN