PDF of the legal opinion https://14ee1ae3-14ee-4012-91cf-a6a3b7dc3d8b.usrfiles.com/ug... from https://www.glanlaw.org/single-post/legal-opinion-concludes-... This is the single most dodgy looking url I've ever shared.
"Despite the Trump administration’s declaration of a genocide in Xinjiang, upheld by the Biden administration, some legal experts suspect China’s behavior may fall short of actual genocide."
This opinion by those legal experts with their nitpicky definitions of 'actual genocide' is probably related to the absolute lack of any mass casualties. Not that such technical concerns should stand in the way of nationalist rhetoric.
You cannot trust anything reported out of China, absolutely nothing. I do not doubt that there are people being slaughtered and massacred as I write, but anything reported out of China must be taken deeply suspicious, especially if it comes from the government. The Chinese government is the single greatest threat to freedom, and human rights this world has ever seen.
The... single greatest? Not the great empire builders? Not the USSR? Modern China, really? Not even, y'know, the ancient chinese empires who subjugated most of asia? The PRC? I mean, just objectively modern chinese citizens, while they certainly don't live under western-level protection for expression, are (owing just to technology and nothing less) vastly more able to share their opinions widely and securely than...…
Not going to fully defend the OP but the problem is things like the USSR were, in retrospect, unsustainable. The CCP, on the other hand, may have created just the right blend between totalitarianism, communism, and capitalism that is both sustainable and has global reach. We should not want to end up all-consumed by this form of government given how oppressive it is, and only time will tell just how all-consuming it can become.
Yes - we know this. We've known this for a long time. The question is what now? Western nations have shown no political will to stand up to China.
When the Holocaust was happening, no one cared. The holocaust was stopped because it aligned with a different interest: to stop nazi Germany. The holocaust was only to make the nazi look bad. Otherwise no one cared about Jews either.
Even soldiers who liberated concentration camps at the end of the were shocked at what they found; many people simply didn't know the extent of what happened until after the war.
> The fact that China has been pretty open about investigators coming to see whats going on Could you substantiate this? How many international journalist teams were allowed into China?
The press is literally invited to see much of what is happening. [1] It just scratches the surface. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmId2ZP3h0c
Do you think that video makes the camps look good?
You cannot trust anything reported out of China, absolutely nothing. I do not doubt that there are people being slaughtered and massacred as I write, but anything reported out of China must be taken deeply suspicious, especially if it comes from the government. The Chinese government is the single greatest threat to freedom, and human rights this world has ever seen.
The... single greatest? Not the great empire builders? Not the USSR? Modern China, really? Not even, y'know, the ancient chinese empires who subjugated most of asia? The PRC? I mean, just objectively modern chinese citizens, while they certainly don't live under western-level protection for expression, are (owing just to technology and nothing less) vastly more able to share their opinions widely and securely than...…
"... vastly more able to share their opinions widely and securely than..."
CORRECTION - They are able to share their "approved" opinions.
If you’re referring to comments like mine challenging the idea that private websites banning anyone for any reason has anything to do with free speech, you’re wildly mischaracterizing your US audience.
"Private websites" are the contemporary public square, especially so when half the world is locked at home and forced to communicate remotely.
Okay so what’s the “free speech” principle that demands sending in the government to force those websites to publish against their will?
PDF of the legal opinion https://14ee1ae3-14ee-4012-91cf-a6a3b7dc3d8b.usrfiles.com/ug... from https://www.glanlaw.org/single-post/legal-opinion-concludes-... This is the single most dodgy looking url I've ever shared.
Funny, at the non-dodgy URL, the opinion is the opposite: https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-... "Despite the Trump administration’s declaration of a genocide in Xinjiang, upheld by the Biden administration, some legal experts suspect China’s behavior may fall short of actual genocide." This opinion by those legal experts with their nitpicky definitions of 'actual genocide' is probably relate…
I don't believe there is sufficient evidence for mass casualties, but the OP is arguing a different tack: they're saying that we have evidence for forced sterilization and targeted oppression of the Uyghur culture, which by their sources can be construed as genocide.
You cannot trust anything reported out of China, absolutely nothing. I do not doubt that there are people being slaughtered and massacred as I write, but anything reported out of China must be taken deeply suspicious, especially if it comes from the government. The Chinese government is the single greatest threat to freedom, and human rights this world has ever seen.
The... single greatest? Not the great empire builders? Not the USSR? Modern China, really? Not even, y'know, the ancient chinese empires who subjugated most of asia? The PRC? I mean, just objectively modern chinese citizens, while they certainly don't live under western-level protection for expression, are (owing just to technology and nothing less) vastly more able to share their opinions widely and securely than...…
While I agree, there are plenty of poor sources getting too much uncritical attention in the press, even by China's own accounts there are a large network of education facilities, trying to hammer in a strong sense of national identity. It is hard not to interpret this as a direct assault on the culture of Uighur people. It shouls also be viewed in it's geopolitical context - China is desparate to have secure land ro…
> by their calculations that security requires (forcefully) integrating the Uighur people into Chinese culture and nationalism
Of course this won't work. People prefer the freedom to work on what they want, and they contribute more to GDP when given that freedom.
If you’re referring to comments like mine challenging the idea that private websites banning anyone for any reason has anything to do with free speech, you’re wildly mischaracterizing your US audience.
> private websites banning anyone for any reason has anything to do with free speech, you’re wildly mischaracterizing your US audience. If US citizens already have a hard time discerning this imagine someone from China. It’s amateur capital driven censorship. It’s inefficient, confusing, and divides a nation. Yes it would be viewed as suboptimal from someone familiar with nationalism and censorship in China.
Nonsense. In the US you have to just click another link to find viewpoints not represented on the website you’re currently at. In China you have to use a VPN to view blocked content. As an American I’m ashamed of my fellow Americans who don’t understand this.