|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:beep boop persecution and punitive labour are irrational therefore China's perfect government would not do them "Irrational" isn't the same as "contrary to existing incentives". There is a sense in which racism is irrational, but the US state does not uphold white supremacy because it's just so goddamn crazy. Rather, white supremacy is a critical precondition for capitalist exploitation in the US, so our police gleefully butcher members of minority groups in order to discipline the reserve army of labor, instill terror at anyone thinking of resisting, etc. If it didn't benefit us in the short to medium term, we wouldn't do it. Similarly, the Chinese state derives certain obvious material benefits from the reeducation and indoctrination of previously-marginal populations in Xinjiang, and the spate of terrorism in the region gives China an excuse to ramp up that reeducation and indoctrination from the "natural" way it was happening before (i.e. poverty drives people to learn Mandarin and get jobs in the city on their own, thereby contributing to capitalist profits and to development of the productive forces). However, no one actually benefits from Uyghurs being enslaved or murdered en masse. Furthermore, because Chinese industry is still developing, China doesn't benefit from certain slices of its population to be excluded from waged labor on racial grounds (while the US, which actually has a surplus, does), and unlike America, China didn't premise its development on racial difference in the first place.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
it disturbs me how many of you are ready to believe the same US government that brought us countless coups and the iraq war is suddenly giving you the real scoop on the country they constantly talk about having as their enemy in the future
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:01
|
|
|
MY INEVITABLE DEBT posted:and again your knee jerk reaction is based on nothing, because you boil down "china is probably not exterminating their muslim population" to "actually the genocide is not as bad as it seems" I'll admit I didn't sleep well and my brain is a bit broken today but I am absolutely confounded as to how you draw that conclusion from my response to your prompt. You asked why there is no mod thread discussing American prisons/concentration camps -> I respond because they are roundly condemned, no one is defending them in this discussion space -> therefore I boil down the premise "china is probably not exterminating their muslim population" to "actually the genocide is not as bad as it seems" I am failing to follow the flow here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:02
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:China is a geopolitical rival of the US, that's the motivation lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
Good Soldier Svejk posted:Are there cspam posters defending american prisons or the border concentration camps as necessary or not as bad as they seem? if you count “cspam posters” as people who have posted in this thread, or other cspam threads but mostly post in other forums then yes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
Here is where I fall on this issue. I agree with the following: Raskolnikov38 posted:things with broad agreement: Orange Devil posted:Unfortunately there is no way to know what is going on in Xinjiang. Ok. So. The primary goal of this thread is to determine how to go about moderating discussing this issue in C-SPAM It seems to me that “genocide denial” is, in theory, a pretty clear cut-and-dry reason to take harsh moderation actions. In theory! The main problems here as I see them are: 1) We don’t know what is happening in Xinjiang, and that makes any discussion about whether it is a genocide or not extremely heated and murky, especially when: 2) there is no consensus on the definition of genocide among posters, and that often leads to people arguing past each other. Some people think there must be extermination camps for it to be a genocide, others think that mandatory cultural re-education is enough to meet that definition. This lack of clarity and consensus on these forums regarding the definition of the word “genocide” in the phrase “genocide denial” makes it extremely difficult to moderate based around that offense. The other part, the word “denial,” is also problematic, because many of the people who are accused of denying everything actually acknowledge that there very likely human rights abuses taking place. So, in most cases, most of the times when people report a post as “genocide denial,” it’s really not clear that this is the case. And that makes it difficult to act on, from the point of view of moderation. Dustcat posted:This is why it might be helpful to just start explicitly saying "cultural genocide" from now on, to keep people from flipping out, thinking you're getting your information from zenz or whatever memes they post on Parler these days. This is getting closer to one of the roots of the problem, but once again we end up working with a poorly defined phrase. Another problem is 3) As a moderation issue, if we (the moderators) do want to enforce punishments for “genocide denial” (which we do), we need to draw the line somewhere. However, we don’t have accurate information to determine what is going on, and asking us to single-handedly come to a conclusion about an extremely ambiguous situation is a lot to ask. We are forum moderators, not the International Criminal Court. Furthermore, I agree with the following: Flavius Aetass posted:being able to post from a leftist non-liberal point of view is precisely why C-SPAM exists Joementum posted:I think a forum for arguing about politics should give a very wide latitude for people to be "wrong" in their arguments without moderators intervening. Atrocious Joe posted:Let people argue about China. The mods don't need to establish their line on Xinjiang. People don't get banned for their sentiments on Western Sahara, Tigray, or plenty of other current conflicts. Because even the nature of the entire situation is unclear, the facts are up for debate, and there is no consensus about it, therefore I think it is bad moderation to come down on people for arguing for this or that side of the discussion, and I am inclined to not take moderation actions for people expressing opinions about it - Unless those opinions are: “genocide is good,” “putting people in concentration camps is good,” or “exterminating a culture is good,” then I am going to take moderation actions about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:07
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:it's concern trolling (or deep ignorance) when the people wringing their hands about chinese oppression continue to support the genociders biden, obama, etc. and insist we arent running concentration camps in the united states who is doing that? not me had I not been probated already by the dnd mods I would have weighed in on the QCS thread about concentration camps, I was itching to
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:07
|
|
|
Good Soldier Svejk posted:I'll admit I didn't sleep well and my brain is a bit broken today but I am absolutely confounded as to how you draw that conclusion from my response to your prompt. quote:Are there cspam posters defending american prisons or the border concentration camps as necessary or not as bad as they seem? are there cspam posters defending what the chinese are doing as necessary or not as bad as it seems? pretty loaded question when the top of "as bad as it seems" is "there are gang rapes every day and muslims are force fed pork and there are mass graves"
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:21
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:it's concern trolling (or deep ignorance) when the people wringing their hands about chinese oppression continue to support the genociders biden, obama, etc. and insist we arent running concentration camps in the united states You can always expand the meaning of that magic word 'support' to justify being mad at whoever you want regardless of whether they actually like democrats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
So now that it's OK so question the state department/NTY narrative on China can we unban zeno-25?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
Source4Leko posted:So now that it's OK so question the state department/NTY narrative on China can we unban zeno-25? I guess I kind of assumed that the agreements made in this thread would ultimately mean to unban anybody banned for this stuff inside CSPAM, but confirmation of such would be nice to see.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:32
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:who is doing that? not me
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:35
|
|
|
Source4Leko posted:So now that it's OK so question the state department/NTY narrative on China can we unban zeno-25? Zeno-25 posted:Eugenics and genocide are preferable to a collapse of the planetary biosphere and industrial civilization. Zeno-25 posted:They are a useful model for the rehab process necessary for tens of millions of Americans if we ever want a cultural revolution and functional society, so yes I would prefer this poster not come back if we are vying for amnesty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:36
|
|
|
On further reflection I don't know if you could really call it genocide denial to say that you don't believe a genocide is occurring in Xinjiang because genocide denial is a tactic used by the state to hide that the genocide has occurred, as a final act of erasing a people. Behind most instances of denial you can usually find undertones or overt prejudice against the victims. Neo-nazis deny the holocaust not only because they subscribe to Nazism, but because their motivation is to actively participate in the erasure of Jews. If you don't actually believe that the Uyghur people should be erased, or have prejudice against them, or if you believe that there is profound mistreatment of them that doesn't yet meet the definition of genocide, I don't really think that can be called genocide denial. Genocide denial has a specific motivation behind it that so far I haven't seen on this board. I think there's a lot of "but I like the Chinese" and "America is really bad" to justify denying specific allegations against the CCP, but I don't think those things can be reasonably construed as genocide denial. If someone were to say "the Uyghur's are violent extremists who need to be assimilated into mainstream Chinese culture by any means necessary" I would see a problem but no one has said anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:37
|
|
|
Good Soldier Svejk posted:I would prefer this poster not come back if we are vying for amnesty. Cool pulling up old stuff look at the reasons for the recent bans. All bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:39
|
|
|
kind of like you didnt need to like saddam to dispute the wmd claims, you dont need to like xi or the chinese state to dispute these claims
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:40
|
|
|
Also funny I posted the same image he got last banned for and didn't get even a probation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:40
|
|
|
i am president xi
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:41
|
|
|
THS posted:i am president xi sir, thank you
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:42
|
|
|
how do you get out of chapel perilous
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:44
|
|
|
THS posted:i am president xi
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:45
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:can you tell me how to get to the hundred acre wood ugh gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
i'm just going to do what i should have done yesterday and post the principles of source criticism at dolphin while not reading 300+ posts The following principles are from two Scandinavian textbooks on source criticism, written by the historians Olden-Jørgensen (1998) and Thurén (1997): Human sources may be relics (e.g. a fingerprint) or narratives (e.g. a statement or a letter). Relics are more credible sources than narratives. A given source may be forged or corrupted; strong indications of the originality of the source increases its reliability. The closer a source is to the event which it purports to describe, the more one can trust it to give an accurate description of what really happened A primary source is more reliable than a secondary source, which in turn is more reliable than a tertiary source and so on. If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of the message is strongly increased. The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias. Tendencies should be minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations. If it can be demonstrated that the witness (or source) has no direct interest in creating bias, the credibility of the message is increased. Two other principles are: Knowledge of source criticism cannot substitute for subject knowledge: "Because each source teaches you more and more about your subject, you will be able to judge with ever-increasing precision the usefulness and value of any prospective source. In other words, the more you know about the subject, the more precisely you can identify what you must still find out". (Bazerman, 1995, p. 304). The reliability of a given source is relative to the questions put to it. "The empirical case study showed that most people find it difficult to assess questions of cognitive authority and media credibility in a general sense, for example, by comparing the overall credibility of newspapers and the Internet. Thus these assessments tend to be situationally sensitive. Newspapers, television and the Internet were frequently used as sources of orienting information, but their credibility varied depending on the actual topic at hand" (Savolainen, 2007). The following questions are often good ones to ask about any source according to the American Library Association (1994) and Engeldinger (1988): How was the source located? What type of source is it? Who is the author and what are the qualifications of the author in regard to the topic that is discussed? When was the information published? In which country was it published? What is the reputation of the publisher? Does the source show a particular cultural or political bias? For literary sources complementing criteria are: Does the source contain a bibliography? Has the material been reviewed by a group of peers, or has it been edited? How does the article/book compare with similar articles/books? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_criticism
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 18:50
|
|
|
I recently learned that Zenz guy friggin sucks and isnt to be taken seriously, ty cspam.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:i'm just going to do what i should have done yesterday and post the principles of source criticism at dolphin while not reading 300+ posts
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:This is fine, but isn't really applicable to what I was saying. No one is saying that we should take Zenz at his word, as a credible source, not me anyway. I'm saying that since the dude is a wackjob (which is evident), while his allegations should not be taken as gospel (which I admit many in the media, and hell, the academic community, are prone to do), that he does cite official figures and documents which can be independently evaluated for accuracy. I think a couple people did that. I haven't done it, admittedly, I don't really have a lot of time to go into it right now. My shitposting was mainly a response to what I've seen as a total dearth of academic rigor in arguments alleging that everything is fine in Xinjiang and all of this is just state department propaganda. That may be true! The US government could be fabricating the whole thing. If that's the case I think it's incumbent on several posters here to actually prove that assertion. again, no one has said that everything is fine in xinjiang. even a cursory examination of the subject would reveals that some dark poo poo is going down. the argument is whether it's death camps or a western-style forced assimilation
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
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 Dolphin posted:On further reflection I don't know if you could really call it genocide denial to say that you don't believe a genocide is occurring in Xinjiang because genocide denial is a tactic used by the state to hide that the genocide has occurred, as a final act of erasing a people. Behind most instances of denial you can usually find undertones or overt prejudice against the victims. Neo-nazis deny the holocaust not only because they subscribe to Nazism, but because their motivation is to actively participate in the erasure of Jews. If you don't actually believe that the Uyghur people should be erased, or have prejudice against them, or if you believe that there is profound mistreatment of them that doesn't yet meet the definition of genocide, I don't really think that can be called genocide denial. what a difference 2 hours makes, btw
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
This conversation feels like what happens constantly in the chapo/podcast thread where people who don't listen to the show live in a completely different reality than those who do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
Dolphin is great at building strawmen to argue with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:22
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:If that's the case I think it's incumbent on several posters here to actually prove that assertion. again, this is down to burden of proof if Jimmy the Liar says Sally stole the sheep from Freddy, should it be up to Sally to prove that she didn't steal the sheep? can you, poster Dolphin, prove that you were not a sheep thief at 11PM last night, and furthermore that you've never stolen any? at least in theory, this is why our legal system enshrines that the burden of proof is supposed to be on the accuser
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:22
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:again, this is down to burden of proof dolphin’s hang up is they insist the mainstream Xinjiang narrative is broadly accepted consensus, and compared this to someone trying to disprove gravity - the person who is saying gravity isn’t real would need to prove that in the face of such consensus this ignores that the fact that one gets the impression that the mainstream narrative is broadly accepted consensus (when it’s really not) from a cursory search of the internet - that is the core problem and the fact that all of the media outlets reporting on the issue cite the exact same questionable sources is *sniff* ideology at its finest
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:29
|
|
|
starting to think a poster who makes xi=winnie the pooh jokes doesnt have the best intentions wrt discussing this
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:31
|
|
|
Prince Myshkin posted:I see my earlier post has already been addressed. Do you think the comparable numbers in Hebei and Henan mean there is a crackdown going on there? No, because the numbers aren't so overrepresented in those provinces. Xinjiang having 1.7% of the population of China but 8.7% of all IUD insertion surgeries is a red flag. Hebei and Hunan each have ~3 times the population of Xinjiang, so it's not suspicious that they comprise about ~8% of the total IUD insertion surgeries. eta: This kind of thing, though, is why I wish I had access to the actual hygiene and population yearbooks going back decades. It'd be easy to make a time series of this and correlate the rate of Han growth in the area with birth control surgeries and compare with the rate of Uyghur growth and birth control surgeries, compare those to the rest of the country, and see if the growth rates and surgery rates changed in response to specific policies being enforced. But instead I have to rely on lovely scanned pages and warmongering scammers. No joke, if China wants to totally neuter this whole genocide thing I think the easiest thing to do would be to release their Chinese and English versions of their statistics yearbooks for the last two decades, then publish these kinds of comparisons. It would show human rights abuses, just like the US prison numbers do, but it'd be pretty hard to hide genocide. Even moreso, China could just say "and here we started ensuring the enforcement of our reproductive laws, and that's why the numbers look so scary. They are lopsided, but not so lopsided as the US rate of imprisoning black people" and it'd severely weaken the moral high ground of the US on this matter. That's a deflection that isn't related (and doesn't include coerced or forced sterilization), but it'd work. Admiral Ray has issued a correction as of 19:50 on Mar 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:37
|
|
|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:starting to think a poster who makes xi=winnie the pooh jokes doesnt have the best intentions wrt discussing this starting to mistrust that guy who owned me, feel like i should stand up for a politician about it
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:45
|
|
|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:starting to think a poster who makes xi=winnie the pooh jokes doesnt have the best intentions wrt discussing this how dare we mock politicians in cspam
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 19:50
|
|
|
the only issue with the xi = pooh bear joke is that its old hat, run into the ground by libs. its like the "trump and putin are gay for each other" thing, although that one was never funny
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 20:01
|
|
|
Serf posted:the only issue with the xi = pooh bear joke is that its old hat, run into the ground by libs. its like the "trump and putin are gay for each other" thing, although that one was never funny otoh, he gets pissed about it like trump with the tiny hand thing
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
Admiral Ray posted:No joke, if China wants to totally neuter this whole genocide thing I think the easiest thing to do would be to release their Chinese and English versions of their statistics yearbooks for the last two decades, then publish these kinds of comparisons. It would show human rights abuses, just like the US prison numbers do, but it'd be pretty hard to hide genocide. Even moreso, China could just say "and here we started ensuring the enforcement of our reproductive laws, and that's why the numbers look so scary. They are lopsided, but not so lopsided as the US rate of imprisoning black people" and it'd severely weaken the moral high ground of the US on this matter. That's a deflection that isn't related (and doesn't include coerced or forced sterilization), but it'd work. absolutely agree with this, but at the same time I'm having a real hard thing imagining all the various china watchers and think tanks not immediately claiming that it's all propaganda lies from the authoritarian regime and cannot be trusted because they obviously made up all the numbers to make themselves look good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 20:29
|
|
|
twoday posted:
What will we accept as adequate clarity? At what point are we willing to actually call it genocide? Does this ruling also apply to WWII, the Armenian genocide, the genocide of Native Americans, the genocide of aboriginal people in Australia, or literally any other context or situation? The fact that there's inadequate documentation isn't incidental, but intentional, and any statement about how many people died in any of these other situations is also the result of a lot of guesswork and estimation, but no one denies that they happened in the modern day (with the exception of the Armenian genocide, natch). If you don't establish at what point you are willing to accept that "this is actually bad enough that I don't think we can get away with saying it isn't genocide", then you have created a situation where some number of people will continue to deny that it is happening well past the point where everyone except China is acknowledging it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
is the genocide of the native americans generally recognized as such? genuinely curious, because in school i was taught that the native americans were few in number and just got lightly pushed aside by the settlers, so i reckon if i asked most people whether the native americans were the victims of genocide, they would look at me like i was crazy. to be clear, it very much was a genocide, and may be academically accepted as one, but i've just never encountered that opinion outside of leftist groups. even in my college american history course the line was that the native americans were wiped out by european diseases and any conflicts that american settlers had with them were small and inconsequential. which, even at the time seemed hosed to me
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 20:51
|
|