quote:

Chapter II: Primary Expressions of Extremification
Article 9: The following words and actions under the influence of extremism are extremification, and are to be prohibited:

(1) Advocating or spreading extremist thinking;

(2) Interfering with others' freedom of religion by forcing others to participate in religious activities, forcing others to supply properties or labor services to religious activity sites or religious professionals;

(3) Interfering with activities such as others' weddings and funerals or inheritance;

(4) Interfering with others from having communication, exchanges, mixing with, or living together, with persons of other ethnicities or other faiths; or driving persons of other ethnicities or faiths to leave their homes

(5) Interfering with cultural and recreational activities, rejecting or refusing public goods and services such as radio and television.

(6) Generalizing the concept of Halal, to make Halal expand into areas other beyond Halal foods, and using the idea of something being not-halal to reject or interfere with others secular lives;

(7) Wearing, or compelling others to wear, burqas with face coverings, or to bear symbols of extremification;

(8) Spreading religious fanaticism through irregular beards or name selection;

(9) Failing to perform the legal formalities in marrying or divorcing by religious methods;

(10) Not allowing children to receive public education, obstructing the implementation of the national education system;

(11) Intimidating or inducing others to boycott national policies; to intentionally destroy state documents prescribed for by law, such as resident identity cards, household registration books; or to deface currency;

(12) Intentionally damaging or destroying public or private property;

(13) Publishing, printing, distributing, selling, producing, downloading, storing, reproducing, accessing, copying, or possessing articles, publications, audio or video with extremification content;

(14) Deliberately interfering with or undermining the implementation of family planning policies;

(15) Other speech and acts of extremification.

gradenko_2000 posted:

Source4Leko posted:

Literally no way Dolphin is arguing in good faith anymore go back to D&D.

Raskolnikov38 posted:

unfortunately my knowledge is only about inner mongolia but there its because the rural people are spread way the gently caress out so its just easier to have kids live in boarding schools than arrange transportation

Eugene V. Dubstep posted:

I've never seen whole threads devoted to defending Israel and Saudi Arabia against charges of genocide. If I had, I would have posted about them, too.


Okay. We agree that the US manufactured a reason to invade Iraq. At that time, Iraq had 26 million people, no nukes, and no strong economic ties to the US. In what world is the exact same playbook used to invade a nuclear-armed nation with 1.4 billion people that manufactures most of your consumer goods and has trillions of dollars of Western companies' assets inside its borders? This is exactly why I'm calling you an apologist, because you dream up this bullshit scenario ('the US is going to invade on the pretext of stopping genocide!') to argue that reports of a real, existing genocide are just like reports of nonexistent WMDs.

Eugene V. Dubstep posted:

Okay. We agree that the US manufactured a reason to invade Iraq. At that time, Iraq had 26 million people, no nukes, and no strong economic ties to the US. In what world is the exact same playbook used to invade a nuclear-armed nation with 1.4 billion people that manufactures most of your consumer goods and has trillions of dollars of Western companies' assets inside its borders? This is exactly why I'm calling you an apologist, because you dream up this bullshit scenario ('the US is going to invade on the pretext of stopping genocide!') to argue that reports of a real, existing genocide are just like reports of nonexistent WMDs.

Eugene V. Dubstep posted:

to argue that reports of a real, existing genocide are just like reports of nonexistent WMDs.

THS posted:

the US is not going to invade mainland china, the fear is a combination of cold war, sanctions, proxy wars, further militarization of the region, supporting separatists, and brinksmanship to stop China’s rise as it grows more powerful than the US. there are all kinds of ways this can get incredibly dangerous, escalate, and kill lots of people

Dolphin posted:

That's not what happened. I posted a random list of sources that I intentionally didn't read and ya'll pick and chose the ones you responded to, which happened to be the ones associated with people you didn't like. You attacked a list of alleged victims because the guy compiling the list said he didn't purport to its accuracy. There was one or two that you had logical objections to, like the study with 8 respondents.

Dolphin posted:

As far as I can tell, here is the law defining what extremism is and the justification for the "re-education" camps:

Not good, but "irregular beards" particularly stands out.

Ferrinus posted:

This is extremely misleading. You make it sound like of your giant list of sources, a few were associated with Zenz et all, and people only responded to those. But this implies a pile of legitimate, untainted sources that China defenders deliberately didn't engage with because they had no good answer to them. Where are these other sources?

Baykin posted:

Again for seemingly the hundredth time, present proof that there is an actual genocide happening, instead of heavy handed policing that is likely catching up far more innocent people than it would be if all cops weren't terrible across the world. We instead have the entirety of the US's history since WW2 as evidence that the US drumming up anti-(nation) sentiment will in turn be used in some fashion (sanctions to outright invasions) to cause far more harm than whatever they are accusing that nation of doing.

Because these are the actual sides of the issue, unless someone would instead prefer to just not comment one way or the other. You either consciously or not advance the US's line, or you try to combat against it. The west's overwhelming world stage presence and power just flat out doesn't allow a "heh, clearly they are both bad and I am super enlightened" middle ground.

Dolphin posted:

I think it's about time people started denying the genocide without mention of the United States in their arguments. It isn't a sound argument and makes you all look unreasonable, your entire argument is based on character assassination and some variation of the genetic fallacy. Like no one is arguing we have conclusive info but then to turn around and say you have conclusive proof that all the people alleging rape and other forms of abuse are lying because the United States is bad is pretty

my bony fealty posted:

I would really like to see any sources cited by the "China is doing a genocide" camp that aren't easily traced by the Zenz and/or the State Department, do these exist

Cerebral Bore posted:

as we all know, wars have never been started for irrational and self-destructive reasons. i am very smart.

Eugene V. Dubstep posted:

I agree with all this, please tell it to your friend there who keeps posting that the US is going to invade mainland China just like Iraq

Dolphin posted:

I'm working on it. Zenz is extremely prolific so it's a bit like trying to find evidence of poo poo about the cosmos without mention of Neil Degrasse Tyson.

Dolphin posted:

as we all know, since dumb things have happened in the past that's definitely what's happening now. i am very smart.

quote:

Chapter II: Primary Expressions of Extremification
Article 9: The following words and actions under the influence of extremism are extremification, and are to be prohibited:

(1) Advocating or spreading extremist thinking;

(2) Interfering with others' freedom of religion by forcing others to participate in religious activities, forcing others to supply properties or labor services to religious activity sites or religious professionals;

(3) Interfering with activities such as others' weddings and funerals or inheritance;

(4) Interfering with others from having communication, exchanges, mixing with, or living together, with persons of other ethnicities or other faiths; or driving persons of other ethnicities or faiths to leave their homes

(5) Interfering with cultural and recreational activities, rejecting or refusing public goods and services such as radio and television.

(6) Generalizing the concept of Halal, to make Halal expand into areas other beyond Halal foods, and using the idea of something being not-halal to reject or interfere with others secular lives;

(7) Wearing, or compelling others to wear, burqas with face coverings, or to bear symbols of extremification;

(8) Spreading religious fanaticism through irregular beards or name selection;

(9) Failing to perform the legal formalities in marrying or divorcing by religious methods;

(10) Not allowing children to receive public education, obstructing the implementation of the national education system;

(11) Intimidating or inducing others to boycott national policies; to intentionally destroy state documents prescribed for by law, such as resident identity cards, household registration books; or to deface currency;

(12) Intentionally damaging or destroying public or private property;

(13) Publishing, printing, distributing, selling, producing, downloading, storing, reproducing, accessing, copying, or possessing articles, publications, audio or video with extremification content;

(14) Deliberately interfering with or undermining the implementation of family planning policies;

(15) Other speech and acts of extremification.

quote:

Chapter VI: Legal Responsibility
Article 46: Where article 9 of this Regulation is violated, but the circumstances are more minor, the public security organs, together with relevant departments and units, are to order corrections and give criticisms and education or legal education; where the circumstances are more serious, but do not constitute a crime, the public security organs are to give public security administrative sanctions in accordance with the "Anti-Terrorism Law of the People's Republic of China", the "public security administrative punishments law of the People's Republic of China" as well as the "Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region implementation measures for the 'Anti-Terrorism Law of the People's Republic of China'", and confiscate any unlawful gains, and civil liability is to be borne for any harms caused to others.

Article 47: De-extremification leading groups, departments, units, or their staffs, failing to perform their duties during de-extremification work, are to be given criticism and education by the unit they are located at or by their higher-ranking competent department, and ordered to reform; where the circumstances are serious, principle responsible person, persons who are directly in charge, and directly responsible personnel are to be given administrative penalties in accordance with law.

Article 48: Other conduct that violates these Regulations and should be punished is to be given punishment in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, and where a crime is constituted, pursue criminal responsibility in accordance with law.

Dolphin posted:

I'm working on it. Zenz is extremely prolific so it's a bit like trying to find evidence of poo poo about the cosmos without mention of Neil Degrasse Tyson.

Cerebral Bore posted:

it's 1000% obvious that dolphin is a bad faith actor and if you mods are still reading the discourse goes from sensible to lovely precisely because poo poo like this is tolerated

my bony fealty posted:

perhaps you have here revealed the problem with my request

Cerebral Bore posted:

it's 1000% obvious that dolphin is a bad faith actor and if you mods are still reading the discourse goes from sensible to lovely precisely because poo poo like this is tolerated

Dolphin posted:

The problem with your request is that since Zenz is extremely prolific and is the loudest voice, he gets quoted a lot by every mainstream article on the subject. Those articles then get dismissed here by angry-posters despite having corroborating evidence from eyewitnesses.

Cerebral Bore posted:

it's 1000% obvious that dolphin is a bad faith actor and if you mods are still reading the discourse goes from sensible to lovely precisely because poo poo like this is tolerated

my bony fealty posted:

no one is forcing those mainstream articles to cite the dude

my bony fealty posted:

no one is forcing those mainstream articles to cite the dude

Dolphin posted:

The problem with your request is that since Zenz is extremely prolific and is the loudest voice, he gets quoted a lot by every mainstream article on the subject. Those articles then get dismissed here by angry-posters despite having corroborating evidence from eyewitnesses.

Dolphin posted:

More reading of this law:


Okay, so yes, wearing a beard can land you in a reeducation camp, that is established based on the word of the law. The law also implies it can land you in worse, depending on the severity of the beard.

Dolphin posted:

You're right, but he is extremely sensationalist so of course they're going to. But just using mention of his name to dismiss an article that contains other information is bad. And I still haven't heard a decent explanation why Zenz, despite being a wackjob, has to automatically be wrong 100% of the time.

Serf posted:

you don't see an issue with mainstream sources relying so heavily on a guy who thinks he is on a divine mission from god to destroy the prc? like why are they citing him at all given his clear bias and, frankly, poor mental state?

Dolphin posted:

I'm getting more into direct sources now so you'll have to bear with me on that because it's time consuming as all hell. But I think we all understand the nature of mainstream media, they're citing him because it makes the article more interesting to viewers which in turn gets more views and shares which gives more advertising money, as capitalism goes.

Dolphin posted:

I'm getting more into direct sources now so you'll have to bear with me on that because it's time consuming as all hell. But I think we all understand the nature of mainstream media, they're citing him because it makes the article more interesting to viewers which in turn gets more views and shares which gives more advertising money, as capitalism goes.