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

Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 322 posts

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#281

Post by totalZero »

marksbrown wrote: post #232
dependsontheq wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no right way and ethical way to do things in the Middle East - there is just the weird unsolvable status quo and weird things the US or anyone else can do - which might not actually have an effect on anything. I understand the criticism but I never read a book that showed a path forward.

Nobody dragged the US into the middle East. Why is there anything to do beyond acting as honest broker diplomatically?

> Nobody dragged the US into the middle East.

Not sure that's a true statement.

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#282

Post by Viliam1234 »

jariel wrote: post #59
mosseater wrote: post #6

[flagged]

We know for a fact most of what is going on, it's not well hidden. The CCP will give guided tours of their concentration camps to try to prove they are not concentration camps. Pulling out prisoners, in jail against their will, who say on camera: "I am here for my own good, I am happy". It's bizarre and frightening.

The bizarre thing is that Western intellectuals will no doubt believe it.

Just like they believed during Soviet Union that gulags were enlightened humanitarian institutions full of happy people.

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#283

Post by Viliam1234 »

cambalache wrote: post #135
tourist_ wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am also not Chinese, American or European, but I will say that prejudice is totally warranted against authoritarian regimes. Free press simply refers to an ability to present an opposing view point, which authoritarian governments despise.

Where is the opposite point the western "free press" saying, maybe China is not committing Genocide? Because reading publications like The Economist, The New York Times or The Guardian you will never find it.Where is the opposite point in the mainstream press asking for GW Bush to be trialed as a war criminal (which he is)?

> Where is the opposite point the western "free press" saying, maybe China is not committing Genocide?

For example, you are saing it here, on English-speaking website located in USA. And you are not scared of possible consequences for you and your family.

I am pretty sure there are many better examples, but this one is here and now, and hard to deny.

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#284

Post by hh3k0 »

aaron695 wrote: post #212
hh3k0 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, China is not committing genocide. Yes, they are: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_stages_of_genocide > Why do we have to jump to genocide. Because that is the term for what they do. The refusal to call it genocide is like putting lipstick on a pig; in the end it's still a pig.

You are denying Pol Pot killing 1 million Cambodians was "genocide". You are correct, it wasn't a legal pig. That is why the trials had to loophole it around killing the Cham and other minorities. Points for being technical. As I said even by your legal definition the Chinese are not committing genocide against the Uyghurs. The report FYI, which I'm not clear why we care what the lawyers at Essex Court Chambers readi…

> You are denying Pol Pot killing 1 million Cambodians was "genocide".

No.

> As I said even by your legal definition the Chinese are not committing genocide against the Uyghurs.

Counterpoint: They absolutely are.

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/04/887239225/china-suppression-o...

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#285

Post by jariel »

Viliam1234 wrote: post #282
jariel wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We know for a fact most of what is going on, it's not well hidden. The CCP will give guided tours of their concentration camps to try to prove they are not concentration camps. Pulling out prisoners, in jail against their will, who say on camera: "I am here for my own good, I am happy". It's bizarre and frightening.

The bizarre thing is that Western intellectuals will no doubt believe it. Just like they believed during Soviet Union that gulags were enlightened humanitarian institutions full of happy people.

Western academics and proles are upset by it. It's the realpolitik wings i.e. business and politics that are less directly concerned because it hurts them, or, it's hard for them to do anything about.

Western Academics loved Stalin, even as millions were dying in the Ukraine because:

1) He was a Communist - and the leader of the glorious revolution.

2) The direct news of 'how bad it was' wasn't clear. We didn't have TV to project images and experiences. And maybe there was a snippet or two in the NYT about it, so it was easy to dismiss, fantasize.

3) We didn't really understand these mass control regimes yet. This was a new phenom. This massive, centralized control for the proletariat, the grand experiment wasn't up yet. Communism wasn't truly a dirt word until after the 1950's and 1960's when it was also associated with the Cold War.

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#286

Post by _-david-_ »

fileyfood500 wrote: post #83
_-david-_ wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people did not know about the Holocaust until after WW2 started.

FDR/senior government and military officials in the US army knew. They made choices to focus on American interests at multiple points, even as they closed on victory on the European front, they prioritized strategic targets over concentration camps. The USSR ended up being the one to free most of the camps, and conquer most of Germany. Strategic targets are definitely important for protecting soldiers, but really the…

Are you suggesting that in 1939 (when WW2 started) the US knew about concentration camps? I would very interested in seeing some sources for that.

Regardless, even if they did, I said most people did not know. The president, some higher ups and some people in the military wouldn't account for most people.

Even if the general population knew, not focusing on the camps does not mean they did not care. It means ending the war (which would end the camps) was a more important goal than liberating the camps. Why focus on one thing when you can kill two birds with one stone?

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#287

Post by joe433343 »

crashdelta wrote: post #31
yumraj wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do the Muslim countries care, No!

That's the interesting part TBH... why is nobody sticking up for them?

Because its impossible to say fuck allah in front of a muslim Eduated or not they are way too conformance to religion. I can the same to a christian or any other religion friends and joke about it and does not have to fear.

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#288

Post by dumb1224 »

archibaldJ wrote: post #279
dumb1224 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the feeling of my follows, they are hot-blood emotional beings.... What I could summarise more abstractly is this: they are not discrediting the news sources abroad, but instead, because chinese society / us people are well connected (in real person). It's almost impossible to hide any major events in China, even with large scale blockage. Everyone talks to everyone. Hence the reaction from a lot of peop…

> because chinese society / us people are well connected (in real person) Most Uyghurs don't even speak your language. That generalization of well-connectivity doesn't apply at all. Unless you speak Äynu, you are likely talking mostly with Han Chinese in Xinjiang (or Uyghurs who had undergone severe Sinicization). > It's almost impossible to hide any major events in China, even with large scale blockage It is impossi…

I appreciate your comment but I didn't imply that the connection was seamless between ethnic groups. Your thinking assumes that there is a huge segregation between the two populations and anyone who cross-over would be 'Sinicization' / radicalisation. But reality is more complex than that. If you been or watched any videos from Xinjiang (unfortunately most not in English) you would see alot of locals (ethnic minorities) supporting the current way of life or even the law enforcement themselves (which I don't want to argue about its right or wrong here).

I don't see how the journalist story relates to this. I know exactly the kind of profile he has. Most people in/out of China know the limit of political freedom and the sensitivity changes according to political tides. It'll be quite strange that he pretends he didn't know the severity. But that's exactly my point: these events muddle the water and hide the real serious issues.

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#289

Post by dirtyid »

danShumway wrote: post #168
dirtyid wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Basically everyone Plurality of countries, including majority Islamic countries, have stated positions that still support Chinese actions in XJ as counter insurgency. CCP has and maintained the dominant narrative. >semantic point Semantics is the only context that matters if the goal is to trigger legal consequences. Cultural genocide doesn't legally exist, it's a more apt label but one that does not have any diplom…

[flagged]

> It would be unambiguously good if the international community (including the US) held itself to a higher standard on human rights.

Sure, then prosecute XJ for what it is, not what it's not. Use XJ as opportunity to formalize conventions and punishments for crimes against humanity and cultural genocide. The genocide strategy is not designed to do that, it's a reach designed to undermine China while explicitly not setting the standards higher for everyone else. More cynically, it's partisan domestic politics (from several countries) because curtailing is not realistic. It's feasible to pursue a credible human rights strategy, but this isn't it. It's exaggerations and propaganda for theatre. If international community wanted accountability they'd start sanctioning Canada for self professed cultural genocide. They can do that right now. Then move to XJ, a system smaller on relative terms, on absolute terms smaller than US prison complex. It affects less than 0.5% of Chinese population. It's not a small issue, but also not a huge one.

> I have a black friend

This is not token "I have a black friend" say so but lopsided "almost everyone in the black community" say so. XJ is counter-insurgency the same way US overreaction to 911 was in the middle east. Except ME countries identify with terrorism from religious extremism, hence their endorsement of Chinese narrative _and_ observes China's effort at systematic solution. That can't be handwaved away into China is genociding for lulz, nor dismissing the plurality opinion as not in good faith. Domestic security trumps human rights, always. Pompeo calling XJ genocide while removing ETIM from terror watch lists at the same time pretty much says it all. There's no credibility to human right lectures from wealthy, safe countries that atrocitied their way to wealth and secure borders. The reason why current human rights frameworks are DOA is because they can't reconcile between sins and security.

Re: Uighurs: 'Credible case' China carrying out genocide

#290

Post by arminiusreturns »

esja wrote: post #199
arminiusreturns wrote: post #122

"After the end of the second world war, the British view was grim. It was that the balance of power in the pacific had been totally shattered in favor of the United States. One response by London, was to support Mao Tse-tung's communist insurrection, against the pro-American, Kuomintang government of generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek in China. FDR's personal representative in China, general Patrick J. Hurley, saw as a po…

Where does this quote come from?

A talk given by historian Webster Tarpley.
Post reply on HN