|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:probably worded it crudely since afaik theres no polling or anything, the support was from religious leaders and uyghers within the party. you could probably shut me up by bringing up black community leaders support for the crime bill lol but i honestly dont think china and the US can be compared like that. I guess so, but the differences still wouldn't even work in China's favor would they? In China, a country where dissent is done in private, for obvious reasons, where especially religious leaders would be concerned over toeing the party line out of fear of article 300 of the Chinese criminal code, why would you just take that at face value? That's then filtered through an organization that, I'm not gonna say is bad but is pretty open about their agenda. Shouldn't the conditions make you skeptical? At least skeptical enough for it to not be a 'well actually they're fine with it' without a really, huge asterisk?
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:the only evidence of that has been repeatedly posted and dunked on for using zenzs methodology just today. it was pretty funny lol 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 04:55
|
|
|
Admiral Ray posted:This isn't true. So this is a single example, but for me is one of the big reasons I simply accept that China is committing cultural genocide (the distinction between genocide and cultural genocide is quite slim): In Zenz's report "Sterilizations, IUDs, and Mandatory Birth Control" (PDF) he makes the claim that 80% of net IUD placements are taking place in Xinjiang (calculated as placements minus removals). Chinadaily attempts to rebut that claim here, but they get the claim wrong: This is a bad metric. Just eyeballing these columns you can see at least two provinces where the placements minus removals get similarly high numbers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 04:57
|
|
|
Flavius Aetass posted:I think some of the breakdown in communication is that more casual C-SPAM posters (trump thread, etc) sometimes feel like they are being talked to as if they are Rachel Maddow fans by posters in more explicitly political threads im saying they have not properly internalized that rachel maddow overtly pushes trump-endorsed fascist rightwing coups, effectively defends obama and biden genocides and concentration camps, and is similar to tucker carlson also a lot of them are russiagaters lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:01
|
|
|
Pretty funny to be old enough to see Islamists (Turkistan Islamic Party specifically) used as friendly fodder against the US's main international rival again, full circle guys
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:02
|
|
|
Baykin posted:Specifically what I think this thread is about is that posts like this:
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:09
|
|
|
Baykin posted:I'm still in the process of reading through a number of the interviews that F Stop Fitzgerald linked just up this page, and I don't deny the absolute possibility that they could all be coerced or just flat out made up entirely, but taking them at face value, there are a LOT of accounts directly refuting the claims. I won't lie that this is certainly planting me pretty firmly in the "sucks that there's not a better way to handle it, but who am I to argue with the actual people living there?" camp. i mainly wanted to bring it up because if you are in the camp saying china is doing a genocide but being completely against any kind of sanctions or intervention otherwise, then what is the other option? it is supporting the people being oppressed. maybe all these imams and uighur govt officials are just to scared to tell the truth but i suspect theres a more complicated reason
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
F Stop Fitzgerald posted:the only evidence of that has been repeatedly posted and dunked on for using zenzs methodology just today. it was pretty funny lol there are literally first hand accounts of prisoners talking about violent rape we can talk about the nuance of the word genocide but this is bordering on pretending like china is doing nothing wrong imo
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:24
|
|
|
I think the policy should be that yelling "what about genocide?" or "no genocide exists!" accomplishes nothing and should be avoided as an argument; it's lazy and brings unwanted attention. I'm not saying don't say the word ever, but if it's used as an own or to prove a point it should be an automatic probation
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:27
|
|
|
the post i quoted said "tons" so i just assumed it to mean the kind of figures that have been debunked, and if true would constitute an actual cultural genocide
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:28
|
|
|
should people be able to post "no concentration camps exists!" in regards to biden's immigration policy people should be able to discuss what words mean, be skeptics or apologists, and make fun of each other for it on these issues
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:29
|
|
|
no! concentration camps are a literal fact. You can say that about china too, those are def concentration camps. I think the sensitivity people have about the term "genocide" itself is a whole level higher than saying concentration camp
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:31
|
|
|
do you realize that the official moderation policy on a subset of this site is that you are literally not allowed to call them concentration camps lmao nevermind the wider american context of mainstream apologism for the concentration camps
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:32
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:I guess so, but the differences still wouldn't even work in China's favor would they? In China, a country where dissent is done in private, for obvious reasons, where especially religious leaders would be concerned over toeing the party line out of fear of article 300 of the Chinese criminal code, why would you just take that at face value? That's then filtered through an organization that, I'm not gonna say is bad but is pretty open about their agenda. I don't think the differences or the reasons are as "obvious" as you think they are, given the ongoing US fixation on Muslim religious doctrine in place and producing government-backed assassinations since at least Malcolm X, our rich recent history of domestic terrorism over doctrinal disputes (if you're willing to call abortion a doctrinal dispute in that context), or the ability of China to produce a nationwide window of debate that stretches from free-market liberals through revisionists and leftcoms to ML/MLM and onto unreconstructed Stalinists vis-a-vis the ability of US to produce a nationwide window of debate that stretches from free-market liberals to free-market liberals of historically disadvantaged descent. I don't believe a noticeable amount of relatively rich, interviewable, connected, bourgeois--no, let me make that clear with the plain English, town-dwelling--Uyghurs being happy that the Chinese government is taking their suspect-layabouts problem off their hands justifies categorizing an unproletarianized people as problematic suspect layabouts and subjecting them to the PRC criminal code equivalents of vagrancy, squatting, jaywalking, petty theft of bread, and so on charges. poo poo charges, poo poo for excuses to apply them better than "more toys for the bigger cities" outside of perhaps wartime and famine, bad doctrine compared to offering every Uyghur kid a scholarship and a Shanghai hukou if they want it and having only a few stay down on the farm. But I have little reason to doubt that it's a common viewpoint, because it's been an extremely common viewpoint in other societies socialist, capitalist, feudal, classical, and arguably tribal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:33
|
|
|
anyways people are going to hold mainstream ghoulish opinions but the solution is to discuss them and tell them why theyre wrong instead of banning discussion
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:34
|
|
|
like, as someone who has said genocide re: china before, I know that it's a nuanced word and it's not the same thing as like a warlord driving through villages killing a religious or ethnic minority. I will absolutely admit that the bombast factor of the word itself play into using it. Technically correct (maybe?) but it's a blatantly bombastic term
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:35
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:do you realize that the official moderation policy on a subset of this site is that you are literally not allowed to call them concentration camps lmao yes and it's loving stupid. UD Japanese internment camps were concentration camps and that's a historically uncontroversial take. The border camps are no different and perhaps much worse
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:37
|
|
|
people should be allowed to use the word genocide if they think a genocide is occuring but people should also be allowed to be skeptical if the origins of the allegations are people like adrian zenz or us imperialists
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:38
|
|
|
I don’t really know much about the situation in China right now, but I’ve read a whole lot of very well researched and informative posts on the subject in this forum. I hope that an open discussion can continue with the respect it deserves while still maintaining the healthy skepticism that any topic requires. This includes probing sources and questioning motives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:38
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:yes and it's loving stupid. UD Japanese internment camps were concentration camps and that's a historically uncontroversial take. The border camps are no different and perhaps much worse
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:42
|
|
|
Admiral Ray posted:Yeah I have to back off a bit on saying they were being deliberate in that. I don't tend to give media sources, especially state backed ones (eg, NYT to a large degree, Chinadaily), much slack on things like this since it's their entire job, but it is a bizarre metric that I can't say they were being purposeful in lying about after thinking about it for a while. I checked the numbers on the other provinces and since there's net negative removals in some provinces the "80%" is a lot more menacing than it seems. Xinjiang is still over-represented in the IUD stats, but it's not to the degree stated by Zenz. Rather, it is to the degree we might expect from a crackdown on a group that was previously allowed to flout the child policy in China. It's still horrific, and leads to cultural repression and erasure, but honestly going through Zenz's bullshit so closely makes me want to do the same to the other sources for this, because right now the nonsense he put out there makes me doubt the strength of my previous conclusion. 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?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:46
|
|
|
Mandoric posted:I don't think the differences or the reasons are as "obvious" as you think they are, given the ongoing US fixation on Muslim religious doctrine in place and producing government-backed assassinations since at least Malcolm X, our rich recent history of domestic terrorism over doctrinal disputes (if you're willing to call abortion a doctrinal dispute in that context), or the ability of China to produce a nationwide window of debate that stretches from free-market liberals through revisionists and leftcoms to ML/MLM and onto unreconstructed Stalinists vis-a-vis the ability of US to produce a nationwide window of debate that stretches from free-market liberals to free-market liberals of historically disadvantaged descent. I'm cutting off your quote halfway, because it's very long and my reply isn't going to be, not because I didn't read it. But, what does any of that have to do with how Chinese people see the relationship they have with practicing dissent in China? I don't see how anything America does impacts that, at least in a direct way. I don't think Malcolm X has anything to do with a random person in Hengyang's understanding of how they should vocalize their opinions on Chinese policy...
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:47
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:anyways im suggesting rules recognizing that a significant part of the userbase and moderation on this website is supportive of the democratic party even if those same people get angry when you tell them they are I mean I get what you're saying but look at how civil this thread has been. Using the word to get an own in is lame and, while it's not a thing I do all the time, I certainly will avoid it in the future. I'm not sure it needs an explicit rule, but those of us who are more China-skeptical should keep it in mind when concern trolls like rime drop genocide!!! turds in cspam threads
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:49
|
|
|
that cringe reddit meme that was posted warranted a punishment anyways because it was obvious "china can do no wrong" posting which is lame and dumb and incorrect
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:51
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:people should be allowed to use the word genocide if they think a genocide is occuring but people should also be allowed to be skeptical if the origins of the allegations are people like adrian zenz or us imperialists Yeah, it's absolutely not a bad or wrong word to use in the academic "cultural genocide" context of a liberal going "I hope they're not repeating our mistakes" or a Communist going "comrades, we can do better, we have done better" (or also "I hope they're not repeating our mistakes".) The minimalist view of Chinese actual actions I'm inclined to argue is something that I also consider a wrongheaded attempt to run the global "state of the art" in favor of better examples they should know. And I'd have little objection to John Brown-ing it up into a "none of you are free of sin" firestorm if "what can you do" is off the table. It's just the specific pardoning of a hundred-plus examples of the hell we put ourselves through to have PlayStations and insulin and a global series of tubes to shitpost at each other, in order to conflate one near-identical example with the against-the-wall execution of an entire generation or two of my own background, that twigs at both the bad debate nerd habits I picked up in 00s D&D and a bit of heartfelt terror that THAT fresh horror is flippantly being compared to this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:54
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:I'm cutting off your quote halfway, because it's very long and my reply isn't going to be, not because I didn't read it. I don't think it has any relation to how Chinese (which is honestly not a very useful collective term, even LESS useful the more we accept that Xinjiang is oppressed!) dissent in China. But your claim is that Chinese dissidents in China are uniquely cowed due to government interference in the practice of their religion, and I'm counterarguing that an American practitioner of that religion was famously extrajudicially executed in the somewhat recent past in order to promote a more moderate strain and thus the cowing is not unique. e: Or Anwar al-Awlaki (and both his children!) to name a more recent example. "Public statements by Chinese religious dissidents are suspect because of the greater threat of force against their speakers": this is a statement you can only make if you believe that the Chinese government is threatening some greater force than murder of one's entire family, and that's so absurd on its face that it leaves me suspecting that the person who made it is taking a position first and then accepting what must be true if it's valid rather than assembling facts and building them into their position. Mandoric has issued a correction as of 06:10 on Mar 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 05:59
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I am wildly unaware of any concentration of islamic extremists in xinjiang that would, even if scaled up by a couple orders of magnitude, justify anything close to the scale of imprisonment they've faced. While I've seen uighur names turn up in various records from jihadi groups in the middle east, that concerns maybe dozens of names and the names are disproportionately more common there because they keep floating around because China has resisted ever taking them back going back at least two decades now You make a really good point, and you are probably right. But how do you know that is not in spite of or because of Chinese policy? The Chinese are not blind, and they have witnessed the rise of the mujahideen (who both United States AND China!!! actually helped during the sino-soviet split), Al-qaeda, and ISIS literally on their borders. Islamic extremism has been used countless times as Proxy warfare against antagonists groups/nations. I'm sure they're spooked that xinjiang will be the next proxy battlefield - which almost always leads to complete immiserating and destruction. How do you respond to it? I'm sure there's a way to thread the needle. Give the Uyghurs the resources and autonomy so that they are empowered to retain their culture AND fight against extremism.... But that is not what happened. We are seeing a knee-jerk response and a heavy handed approach. I'm sure there was a better way to approach the extremism and integration of the Xinjiang population into the world economy, and I'm sure there were a lot worse approaches....
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:05
|
|
|
Admiral Ray posted:The issue with the IUD's is that one of the common claims by women is that they are tricked into or otherwise forced to get an IUD, so this kind of extreme overrepresentation of IUD's in a province that doesn't have that many people lends credence to there being a sterilization program and backs up their claims. iuds arent actually overrepresented in xinjiang unless youre going by the extremely bullshit statistic of net iud placement as opposed to just regular iud placement ferrinus pointed out some obvious reasons why this is stupid and im going to point out another which is that any province where iuds were only just recently introduced is of course going to have a much higher net iud placement rate compared to other provinces because there arent as many of them to be removed you also call the statistic crystal clear but it most definitely is not none of the articles that cite this particular paper clarify what the term net iud placement actually means and randos almost universally interpret the phrase to just mean regular iud placement which is the entire reason why china daily wrote that rebuttal article in the first place saying that zens is technically correct on this is the worst kind of pedantic bullshit because it requires you to pull a dolphin and not pay attention to how this research is actually used just concluding that the quantity of genocide accusations is more important than what the content of the genocide accusations actually says
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:07
|
|
|
most people on these forums screaming genocide at china and genocide denial are acting in good faith based on the narratives they find themselves ensconced in if you start with the assumption that qadaffi is about to butcher a bunch of civilians, iraq is bayoneting incubater babies, serbia disappeared hundreds of thousands of civilians, or that morales is a horrible fascist dictator, then yeah it makes sense to denounce those opposing those claims and to support intervention and stricter moderation rules yah the institutions conflating the allegations against china with the holocaust and specifically using the term genocide and invoking the specter of mass deaths are doing so in bad faith, but that's not the world the credulous consumers of these narratives live in
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:10
|
|
|
Mandoric posted:I don't think it has any relation to how Chinese (which is honestly not a very useful collective term, even LESS useful the more we accept that Xinjiang is oppressed!) dissent in China. But your claim is that Chinese dissidents in China are uniquely cowed due to government interference in the practice of their religion, and I'm counterarguing that an American practitioner of that religion was famously extrajudicially executed in the somewhat recent past in order to promote a more moderate strain and thus the cowing is not unique. Yeah I.... Didn't claim that. And I really didn't even mention America either. It's irrelevant. Dissent is kept private in China for fear of getting an invitation by the police to discuss spreading rumors. It's not even about religion, though the language of article 300, in specific (which is widely known about in China, by anyone who has a Chinese education, as there are mandatory anti-superstition classes country wide) would affect speech on religious issues even more. That's just Chinese law, it's nothing especially shocking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:10
|
|
|
I had no idea that 100% of the data on fertility was from one guy but yeah after reading through the news articles it's clearly the case. Him being an insane christian chud certainly doesn't help I don't think the detention numbers or the numerous first hand accounts should be hand waved away but it's clear that this is more similar to what the US is doing to central and south american immigrants for anyone's comfort. So they have to call it genocide and pretend it's somehow an exponentially more evil operation than what we have going on in the states. I think another thing to acknowledge is that the uyghur population is a lot more consecrated and at risk of getting wiped out, something that's not really possible for the us with the demographics they're targeting
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:18
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:most people on these forums screaming genocide at china and genocide denial are acting in good faith based on the narratives they find themselves ensconced in I mean, saddam was doing a genocide on the kurds but that was a post facto justification for doing an imperialism for the oil
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:20
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:Yeah I.... Didn't claim that. And I really didn't even mention America either. It's irrelevant. Who are you making the comparison to, then? You're arguing that Chinese public comment is less reliable because of a culture of repression, in the context of specifically repressed cultures estimating their own plight; UNreliable in any case would make internal sense (but would also be pretty monstrous), but LESS reliable is an extremely long bridge. e: And again, there's the general historical plausibility of them being in wholehearted agreement. City mice have always become extremely mad at country mice the second they get two coins to rub together and think they could have three with another direct report, whether the coins have been kopeks, pennies, sou, or denarii. Mandoric has issued a correction as of 06:30 on Mar 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:21
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:I had no idea that 100% of the data on fertility was from one guy but yeah after reading through the news articles it's clearly the case. Not quite true. Per-province birthrate data is from the Chinese gov't: Eugene V. Dubstep posted:You can verify it yourself starting here and working backward to 2010. The relevant section is '2-8 Total Population by Urban and Rural Residence, Birth Rate, Death Rate, Natural Growth Rate and by Region (2019)': http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/ndsj/2020/indexeh.htm
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:23
|
|
|
gonna repost the chart again to better explain why using it the way zens is using it is dumb and bad try looking at all the other provinces according to second column of additions and the fourth one of removals you might notice that on a province per province basis the relative percentages are all over the place with several provinces having very similar rates to xinjiang this is fairly obviously a function of iuds only having been introduced into these provinces relatively unless youre going to argue that the populations of all the other provinces with similar rates are also being genocided another point of interest is that several provinces actually have negative iud placement rates which completely fucks up the use of net iud placement as a reasonable statistic because when you say xinjiang account for eighty percent of net placements what youre actually doing is comparing it to other rural provinces where iuds were only recently introduced most of which have a smaller population than xinjiang the result being that xinjiang when it comes to this particular statistic is literally being blown out of proportion
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:28
|
|
|
Mandoric posted:Who are you making the comparison to, then? You're arguing that Chinese public comment is less reliable because of a culture of repression, in the context of specifically repressed cultures estimating their own plight; UNreliable in any case would make internal sense (but would also be pretty monstrous), but LESS reliable is an extremely long bridge. It isn't a comparison. There is nothing that it is compared to. It is an observation about how dissent is communicated in China. You are misreading so much, and apparently reading things that aren't there. Are you going to say that Chinese people do not self censor their dissent in public? (I didn't say a 'culture of repression' but, I guess in a roundabout way, sure) Or that this would not have an impact on what positions a figure, who is a representative of one group, would say publicly in relation to Chinese government policy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:32
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:another point of interest is that several provinces actually have negative iud placement rates which completely fucks up the use of net iud placement as a reasonable statistic because when you say xinjiang account for eighty percent of net placements what youre actually doing is comparing it to other rural provinces where iuds were only recently introduced most of which have a smaller population than xinjiang the result being that xinjiang when it comes to this particular statistic is literally being blown out of proportion This smells like horseshit to me. Only three rural provinces or province-level autonomous regions have lower populations than Xinjiang: Tibet, Qinghai, and Ningxia. Which of these are skewing the data?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:38
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:It isn't a comparison. There is nothing that it is compared to. It is an observation about how dissent is communicated in China. You are misreading so much, and apparently reading things that aren't there. When you say "in China", you are specifying a comparison. When you bring it up in order to specifically discredit the statements of people you claim to be defending, you are either arguing that no direct testimony has value (in which case, why the hell do we have this debate to begin with) or you are implicitly making a comparison. Meanwhile, I am saying that there's not much reason to believe Chinese people self-censor more than a comparable group who's been through hits like "my 7-year-old daughter was tied up and shot in the face for being my daughter" and "I did 'industrial design is my passion' on my alarm clock, now I am in solitary confinement". Nor, again, much reason to not assume that we're getting the honest, unfiltered opinions of the comprador class.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:40
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:This smells like horseshit to me. Only three rural provinces or province-level autonomous regions have lower populations than Xinjiang: Tibet, Qinghai, and Ningxia. Which of these are skewing the data? the datas skewed less by other rural provinces as it is by the fact that negative rates for urban provinces are loving up the overall math in such a way that you cant even interpret the 80% as being relative to a hundred for a sense of perspective running the (328475 - 89018)/(3774318 - 3474467) = 239457/299851 = 80% calculation for the third province from the top results in that province making up 61% of all the net iud placements in china this is obviously impossible if xinjiang accounts for 80% until you remember that many high population provinces on this chart have negative rates which means they also have negative percentages also note that the overall net iud placement rate is only three hundred thousand short of requiring the calculation to involve a negative number for every individual rate so in short trying to go full pedant on the chart only makes it that much more obvious that zens is a laughable hack and china daily actually did him a favor in fact checking the way hes interpreted rather than on the actual strictly defined strength of his frankly ridiculous claim
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
Mandoric posted:When you say "in China", you are specifying a comparison. When you bring it up in order to specifically discredit the statements of people you claim to be defending, you are either arguing that no direct testimony has value (in which case, why the hell do we have this debate to begin with) or you are implicitly making a comparison. I say 'In China' because I can't even start to speak about anywhere besides China, because China is where I see this. Maybe 'In Germany' or 'in Burkina Faso' too but, I'm not in either of those. The reason to believe Chinese people self censor is because they do... It's not a secret, you can just ask some people. It's like youre wildly misinterpreting everything as some sort rhetorical device while intentionally missing the actual point. BrainDance has issued a correction as of 06:50 on Mar 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2021 06:47
|
|