11 ms·

It's insane how this situation was allowed to exist for so long. Do other world powers not have the power to stop the genocide and concentration camps or do the

• gottorf 3y ago
  Geopolitics is a cruel master, I suppose.
• WhereIsTheTruth 3y ago
  Look at what the West is allowing Israel to do in Palestine Now you have your answer Remember when China introduced the 1 child policy? China allowed Uyghurs to have more to not impact their minority Now you understand how geopolitics affect your view on countries, don't let the propaganda stop you from being a critical thinker Think more and make your own research
  • localplume 3y ago
    [dead]
  • gpvos 3y ago
    If it would really come down to it, the West (i.e., basically the USA) would be able to stop Israel oppressing the Palestinians. So that is political. They can't do that in China (without triggering a nuclear war). I don't know about the 1-child policy exception; apparently China's internal calculus was different then from now. It would be nice if you were more explicit about why you're mentioning this instead of conspiracy-theory-like urging readers to "do their own research".
    • boondoggle16 3y ago
      That's right. The US is unable to stop the torture in China. They don't want to stop the torture in Palestine. The people running our government have vested interests. Every politician ever must bow to AIPAC, and many politicians don't need to bow, as they have their own interest in Israel (they are Israeli citizens and can go there any time).
• localplume 3y ago
  [dead]
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• bitsinthesky 3y ago
  No real power to. State sovereignty is the foundation of geopolitics and globalized enforcement of morality is maybe at its infancy, if it will even get anywhere.
  • ip26 3y ago
    Also, if you accept the maxim that government gets its power and legitimacy from the consent of the governed (whether voluntary or under threat of violence) it should quickly become apparent how difficult it is to force the matter.
  • morkalork 3y ago
    What a terrifying phrase, globalized enforcement of morality, it stirs images of the crusades and colonization of the americas in my mind.
    • lyu07282 3y ago
      It's just the typical liberal self perception of US and western foreign policy. But it's definitely a particularly extreme example, I don't know what you would even really respond to such a statement: > "State sovereignty is the foundation of geopolitics and globalized enforcement of morality is maybe at its infancy" I don't really even know where to begin, it could be satire?
      • morkalork 3y ago
        Maybe it's a very sci-fi long term view where we have been living through the violent and misguided infancy of global enforcement of morality for centuries.
  • yieldcrv 3y ago
    and it will stop as soon as random countries start flying weaponized drones over America over causes that we would be completely blindsided by and would never reach consensus on changing
    • deleted 3y ago
• protoc 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • selimthegrim 3y ago
    I find it even weirder that “iron brother” Pakistan seems fine with it.
    • lotsofpulp 3y ago
      It’s not weird. Tribal alliances are mostly based on economic needs or wants, especially at a nation state level.
    • xp84 3y ago
      Despite having a bomb or two, Pakistan certainly has nothing to gain by provoking China. They already have India on the opposite side of them just itching for a reason to destroy them.
  • justrealist 3y ago
    I do actually believe there's a difference between failed and incompetent state-building, and the methodical and systematic genocide of a culture. And I don't think I'm alone. Hitler's methodical and organized genocide gets more attention and disdain than Mao's Great Leap Forward, even though the latter killed more people. Is that right? I dunno, but it's how people think. Accidents and mistakes are granted more leeway than pure malice.
  • throwaway1777 3y ago
    What a huge exaggeration. People were rightly angry after 9/11, but most Americans didn’t want to “kill all Muslims”. And having competition with china is not the same as hating them. China abused the US trade relation for a long time, but it’s hardly hate to play hardball back.
    • Dah00n 3y ago
      No, the average American didn't but the war on terror have caused over 900.000 direct deaths, millions indirect deaths and displaced 46 million people. Most were and are completely innocent Muslims. I too wonder why those lives were okay to end or destroy or if those caring about what happens in China did something to stop what they could actually do something about? Call it whataboutism if you want but I fail to see how any American can claim a moral high ground and why they would want their government to do something about this above what they themselves are a part of. Unless of course they didn't want the war on terror either but I very much doubt that the average American cares as much about the Muslims killed after 9/11 as they do about the Chinese Muslims. It smells of repeating propaganda to me. Sure this should be stopped, but it is not as high up the list as what the US does to anyone who actually care about the people and not just the politics - after all the amount hurt is extremely loopsidede.
• ConfusedDog 3y ago
  What do you suggest? Go to war? More tariff? People only do things in their own interest as always. Besides PRC is not torturing Uyghurs for being Uyghurs, they are torturing them for not being compliant with PRC rule - in Xinjiang region, they happen to be Uyghurs.
  • lyu07282 3y ago
    as the native people they wanted Xinjiang independence for a long time. Which led to separatist violence and bombings by Uyghur groups. There are definitely reasons other than just racism, its just a big taboo in the west to mention that.
• inconceivable 3y ago
  why should someone else do it? you could pick up a rifle and head over to go kill some chinese people to teach them a lesson. btw, this is the guy who provided all of the evidence of concentration camps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Zenz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Zenz
  • 136804797 3y ago
    I mean, not "all the evidence." For one thing, China doesn't deny that the camps exist--they just claim that they're for "reeducation" or "work training." For another, other people have reported on the issue, and shown that the camps are real. Unfortunately, while I can present sources to rebut you, your claim isn't falsifiable, since you'll just assert that any source that I present is "US counter-intelligence / the thinktank blob," because it rebuts your claim.
    • inconceivable 3y ago
      yeah, sorry, the media and the blob feeds us bullshit 24/7, on pretty much every topic. i have no reason to believe they're being truthful on this one particular thing, especially about america's biggest geopolitical foe. i mean wow, how convenient. china is run by literal NAZIS? you don't say! they bank on the fact that people have the memory span of a hamster and will forget the 75 years of complete horseshit that was fed to us before the current thing they're trying to sell.
      • 136804797 3y ago
        > i have no reason to believe they're being truthful on this one particular thing The problem is that your claim is unfalsifiable. Any evidence that I present, you'll claim is wrong, because it opposes your view. There are independent groups that went to China to investigate--you'll claim they're just CIA-funded. There are groups from inside China that have investigated this--you'll claim they're also CIA-funded. And the "evidence" that you present to back your claim is that they must be CIA-funded, see what it is they're supporting! I'm not claiming that the media tells the truth. What I'm claiming is that your position is not based on evidence.
• NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
  I do not know of any war or conflict where one of the primary or secondary goals was to liberate anyone from concentration/death camps (possible exceptions for POW camps though). There are no scenarios where anyone manages to talk China or North Korea out of these peacefully. And while there probably are many where we win in a shooting war against either or both of those, none of those scenarios conclude with the world economy intact. What consumer goods can you name that your country makes domestically? We don't even make clothing domestically anymore. I suppose most are self-sufficient food-wise, so there'd only be a slight uptick in famines... Hell, there's an entire younger generation that can't even bring themselves to condemn Maoism. But you want to sacrifice tens or hundreds of thousands of lives driving tank columns into Beijing?
  • mrguyorama 3y ago
    >Hell, there's an entire younger generation that can't even bring themselves to condemn Maoism That's an absurd take
    • NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
      You misspelled "ongoing observation".
  • xp84 3y ago
    Agree completely, but wanted to point out, on the food part you mentioned, I think China is a big food (rice) importer, so “we” have that going for us. Not that the CCP would bat an eye if half its population starved to death, they’d gladly “sacrifice” that to avoid losing power.
• csomar 3y ago
  The insane is that you are expecting the world powers to do something, when most people are not even doing the little things. One of them is boycotting Chinese-made products. This will inconvenience their life a little bit and make it more expensive (though maybe boost the local or friendly countries economies). Yet most people will not do that.
  • carapace 3y ago
    > boycotting Chinese-made products. It's really challenging. Even if you try to just buy things made in the USA (or wherever, not China) very often some (or all) of the parts are made in China. And some sellers just lie about it: you order a product advertised as "Made in the USA" and when it arrives there's a "Made in China" label on it.
• 136804797 3y ago
  Unfortunately, no. There are evil things that happen all over the world, and the world powers are powerless to fix it. If <insert world power here> mobilizes its military to topple a government doing evil things--now what? People will be (rightfully) mad that the world power literally installed a new government, so the government will be unstable and illegitimate--and this will likely only cause even more strife.
  • xp84 3y ago
    You sound like someone who’s heard of Iraq!
• zdragnar 3y ago
  What would be the greater loss of life and harm to innocents- allowing China to continue, or world war 3? Because war with China will definitely devolve into a global conflict. We couldn't even get India or Brazil on board with sanctions against Russia for invading Ukraine, and nothing short of military invasion will stop the CCP from doing what it does. Devout religious faith is entirely antithetical to the CCP rule- both in the idea of a higher power from the state, but also China's history wrt. the boxer rebellion and other movements.
  • realist2023 3y ago
    >> Because war with China will definitely devolve into a global conflict. We're risking global conflict with Russia now to save Ukraine. People are willing to engage in global conflicts as long as the victims look like us. But when they dont look at us, we dont care. People will say it outright https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/17/chamath-palihapitiya-says-nobody-cares-about-uyghur-genocide-in-china.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/17/chamath-palihapitiya-says-no... CNBC: Billionaire investor Chamath Palihapitiya says ‘nobody cares’ about Uyghur genocide in China PUBLISHED MON, JAN 17 20226:00 PM ESTUPDATED WED, JAN 19 202210:02 AM EST thumbnail Amanda Macias
    • warning26 3y ago
      Ukraine amounts to giving military aid to a sovereign country. Potentially controversial, but not exactly "instantly cause WW3" material. Your proposal is, what exactly? Airdropping crates of machine guns over western China? I'm sure that'll go over great.
      • ashwagary 3y ago
        >Your proposal is, what exactly? Airdropping crates of machine guns over western China? I'm sure that'll go over great. The CIA is already dropping weapons in Western China for the locals to carry out terrorist acts. Its the primary reason Uyghur extremists groups were being isolated from Chinese society. Knowing the US population, they will stick to willful denial of this particular fact for about 2-3 decades while the ruling class continues starting fires around world that send these poor people right into a hellish reality. Uyghurs, meet the Syrians, Iraqis, Yemenis, Afghans, Palestinians, Libyans...etc that had this western template run on them.
• realist2023 3y ago
  >> It's insane how this situation was allowed to exist for so long. Do other world powers not have the power to stop the genocide and concentration camps or do they just not care? In the US we say "Never Again" w/r/t genocide and concentration camps, but ultimately we turn a blind eye to (or worse, fund/arm perpetrators.) A great example would be turning a blind eye to the Bosnian genocide and arming Saudi Arabia with US weapons as they wipe out large parts of Yemen. The reality is that we only intervene in narrow circumstances: 1. When there is money. The example would be Kuwait in 1991, when we went "to save the people" but in reality we went to try an capture Iraqi oil 2. When the people look like us. Both left and right leaning publications couldnt care less about reporting on genocide unless the victims look like us. Ukraine is an example, they look like us, and thus they have massive help.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • ROTMetro 3y ago
    Right, it's not like the USA has funded containment of Russia/Soviets to the tune of 100 billions dollars in explicit defense budget allocation every year since the 1950s. Nope, it's that they look like us.
    • xp84 3y ago
      And don’t Russians look like us, too?
• jfghi 3y ago
  Even worse, attempts to even discuss the issue get aggressively hushed.
  • Symbiote 3y ago
    "Hushed" meaning only a couple of articles a month in major newspapers, or something else? https://www.theguardian.com/world/uyghurs https://www.theguardian.com/world/uyghurs https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/cpz1y9ney3mt https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/cpz1y9ney3mt (Can't find a free American newspaper with tags/categories.)
• quickthrowman 3y ago
  > Do other world powers not have the power to stop the genocide and concentration camps or do they just not care? China has nuclear weapons. Would you prefer a total nuclear exchange instead of the current (bad) status quo of Uyghur genocide? I’m assuming that a total nuclear exchange between the US and China would lead to more suffering than not invading China and letting them continue their current Uyghur policy.
• dirtyid 3y ago
  >Do other world powers not have the power to stop the genocide and concentration camps or do they just not care? The realist answer: most leaders are eager to see the PRC securitization model work. Even if they don’t have the state capacity or ethnic mix to replicate. Most developing countries who still haven’t figured out their post colonial shitshow ethnic rivalries want what PRC is selling - turnkey safe/smart city solutions that can bring domestic serenity via technologic repression. Majority of world powers simply did not eat the genocide/concentration camp propaganda. Plurality UN position still supports PRC actions in XJ as counterterrorism / deradicalization, which it is. From hundreds of terrorism attacks to 0. Obama got the Nobel Peace prize for worse. Second group = (mostly western led) block who characterize as crimes against humanity, which bluntly doesn't mean shit and isn't actionable. Finally the # of govs that formally characterize XJ as genocide has around flat earth level of support, augmented by flood of useful idiots who ate the propaganda who thinks not believing literal lying Pompeo initiated genocide propaganda narrative is insane. Reality is PRC securitization of XJ, i.e. engineered mass cultural change (read: cultural genocide, which UN has no formal definition on) within one generation is something MANY still fractured countries are eager to see succeed because they are experiencing same issues with minority unrest on restive regions. Harsher reality is, forceful integration is essential 101 to building long term state capacity. Most countries would love to have US meltingpot or Canadian multiculturalism where state reap benefits from actual prior genocide by not harbouring potential existential internecine factionalism, while state does token effort to reconcile with apologia to minorities who can’t remember their culture let alone meaningfully coordinate. PRC is delivering / showing model that does that in one generation. "So long" is less than decade from 2014 "strike hard" campaign that kick started securitization, PRC is zerg rushing western colonization in a fraction of time with fraction of suffering, and likely will integrate minorities long term. XJ mass internment phase has been over year+, small % of "problematic" individuals transferred to long term prison, this isn't a perennial US prison industrial complex that interns comparable % of minorities - 1/12 according to retarded Zenz estimates which is about lifetime chance for US blacks. Let that sink in. Most of XJ is just a heavy surveillance state now, and following trend in Tibet, most of Uyghurs will be relatively nationalized/secularized/adopt PRC islam in a couple generations. It's not nice, but it's nicer than actual genocide.