This is the only time I’ve pinged you to my knowledge. I pinged you because, to my memory, you were anti-Uyghur genocide, and showed up in that thread.
Oh right. Goat had done the same, and I just assumed you were trying to goad me into arguing. Sorry about that.
In any case, I do disagree with them here, people can oppose both at once. The Gaza one is more urgent and severe though.
I believe the Uyghurs are oppressed by the CCP, but there is a lack of evidence that it’s a genocide specifically. Even the USA doesn’t say it’s a genocide anymore. Of course, this could just be because it doesn’t meet the definition of genocide, while still being a genocide. At the very least, there’s cultural erasure, which iirc would have been a part of the original definition of genocide if the USA and other countries didn’t veto that, to avoid being guilty of genocide themselves. The Xinjiang Police Files were leaked by Adrian Zenz, which is a questionable source at best (he’s a weird anti-communist). If any new evidence does come, I’ll change my opinions accordingly.
Only slightly related, but seeing the word tankie being misused is getting a bit annoying, by the very definition of it, an Anarchist can’t be a tankie. Having a crap opinion on something like tankies doesn’t make someone one.
I believe the Uyghurs are oppressed by the CCP, but there is a lack of evidence that it’s a genocide specifically.
From your own linked wiki article:
In addition to mass detention, government policies have included forced labor and factory work,[6][7] suppression of Uyghur religious practices,[8] political indoctrination,[9] forced sterilization,[10] forced contraception,[11][12] and forced abortion.[13][14] An estimated 16,000 mosques have been razed or damaged,[3] and hundreds of thousands of children have been forcibly separated from their parents and sent to boarding schools.[15][16] Chinese government statistics reported that from 2015 to 2018, birth rates in the mostly Uyghur regions of Hotan and Kashgar fell by more than 60%.[10] In the same period, the birth rate of the whole country decreased by 9.7%
… what more evidence of genocide is needed? A written and signed statement by Xi Jinping himself that the purpose of this is the erasure of the Uyghur ethnicity and culture as a major demographic in the region?
The Xinjiang Police Files were leaked by Adrian Zenz, which is a questionable source at best (he’s a weird anti-communist).
Focusing on Adrian Zenz is a common tankie talking point to attempt to muddle the waters, as Zenz is not a reliable source. The Uyghur genocide is much more widely documented than that despite PRC controls on investigation, including interfering with the attempts of a UN investigator to the region to gather evidence.
If any new evidence does come, I’ll change my opinions accordingly.
What ‘new evidence’ is needed?
Having a crap opinion on something like tankies doesn’t make someone one.
Playing apologist for tankies is not really all that much better than being one. Saying that simping for red fascist regimes as the ‘lesser evil’ doesn’t make one a tankie, as Unruffled said, denying the Uyghur genocide, and leaving Holodomor denialism up in a comm where other genocide denialism is removed is all very much tankie apologism.
I don’t think that Unruffled is, themselves, a tankie. But when you reach the point of denying and downplaying genocides, you’ve gone far beyond bias, and into outright apologism - in this case, tankie apologism.
You used to regard the Uyghur genocide as a genocide. That you’ve changed your mind on the matter is extremely troubling.
Outlined in these sources are mass sterilization, mass deportation, sending Uyghur children with living Uyghur parents to Han Chinese guardians for ‘correction’, forced labor, torture, and cultural erasure - all of which rely on far more witnesses and evidence than Adrian Zenz, who was a loud and early voice, but is far from the only or even most important source for the genocide that tankies claim he is.
This one says it’s an opinion formed by a legal group (doesn’t specify the legal group). It also doesn’t provide any proof that the forced sterilisations are happening, besides saying they are.
This is long, and I don’t have the time to go through it all right now, but skimming it shows cultural erasure, which I believe is happening. It only mentions genocide once, when it says that cultural erasure is a part of China’s genocide.
I’m not trying to do genocide apologia here, but the evidence is inconclusive imo. It’s clear that they face Human Rights violations though.
Scrolling through this, it doesn’t provide any sources bar “NGOs” (it doesn’t bother to name any) and vague estimates.
Citing both Chinese government policy and eyewitnesses isn’t enough, huh?
This isn’t loading for me at all.
I’ll post it in a comment, but after reading your other objections, I’m not hopeful that you’ll glean anything from it.
This one says it’s an opinion formed by a legal group (doesn’t specify the legal group).
Literally in the article:
The 100-page document - written by senior barristers at Essex Court Chambers in London, including Alison Macdonald QC - is understood to be the first formal legal assessment in the UK of China’s activities in Xinjiang.
It also doesn’t provide any proof that the forced sterilisations are happening, besides saying they are.
So now we’re denying the forced sterilizations, not just questioning whether it counts as a genocide?
This cites Zenz and an APnews article, which in turn cites Zenz.
This is really not sounding like it’s in good fucking faith.
This mentions the UN report saying china is guilty of Human rights abuses (which I believe it is), but it doesn’t mention genocide at all.
You jump back and forth between demanding evidence for the individual assertions, and evidence for the overall scenario being classified as a genocide - in this very comment responding to the links provided, you have repeatedly balked that it’s not called a genocide in links which provide evidence of the abuses; and then balked that evidence of the abuses is not provided in the links which call it a genocide.
This is long, and I don’t have the time to go through it all right now, but skimming it shows cultural erasure, which I believe is happening. It only mentions genocide once, when it says that cultural erasure is a part of China’s genocide.
“It only calls it genocide once when documenting one specific aspect of the genocide”
Are you being fucking serious right now?
I’m not trying to do genocide apologia here,
That’s curious, because it’s pretty indistinguishable from genocide apologia.
@irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Why do you guys keep pinging me?
Removed by mod
Got my first antiyank reply 🎊🎉🎉
This is the only time I’ve pinged you to my knowledge. I pinged you because, to my memory, you were anti-Uyghur genocide, and showed up in that thread.
Oh right. Goat had done the same, and I just assumed you were trying to goad me into arguing. Sorry about that.
In any case, I do disagree with them here, people can oppose both at once. The Gaza one is more urgent and severe though.
I believe the Uyghurs are oppressed by the CCP, but there is a lack of evidence that it’s a genocide specifically. Even the USA doesn’t say it’s a genocide anymore. Of course, this could just be because it doesn’t meet the definition of genocide, while still being a genocide. At the very least, there’s cultural erasure, which iirc would have been a part of the original definition of genocide if the USA and other countries didn’t veto that, to avoid being guilty of genocide themselves. The Xinjiang Police Files were leaked by Adrian Zenz, which is a questionable source at best (he’s a weird anti-communist). If any new evidence does come, I’ll change my opinions accordingly.
Reading this: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/gaza_genocide compared to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China.
Only slightly related, but seeing the word tankie being misused is getting a bit annoying, by the very definition of it, an Anarchist can’t be a tankie. Having a crap opinion on something like tankies doesn’t make someone one.
I agree with this.
From your own linked wiki article:
… what more evidence of genocide is needed? A written and signed statement by Xi Jinping himself that the purpose of this is the erasure of the Uyghur ethnicity and culture as a major demographic in the region?
US department of state in 2024 disagrees
Focusing on Adrian Zenz is a common tankie talking point to attempt to muddle the waters, as Zenz is not a reliable source. The Uyghur genocide is much more widely documented than that despite PRC controls on investigation, including interfering with the attempts of a UN investigator to the region to gather evidence.
What ‘new evidence’ is needed?
Playing apologist for tankies is not really all that much better than being one. Saying that simping for red fascist regimes as the ‘lesser evil’ doesn’t make one a tankie, as Unruffled said, denying the Uyghur genocide, and leaving Holodomor denialism up in a comm where other genocide denialism is removed is all very much tankie apologism.
I don’t think that Unruffled is, themselves, a tankie. But when you reach the point of denying and downplaying genocides, you’ve gone far beyond bias, and into outright apologism - in this case, tankie apologism.
You used to regard the Uyghur genocide as a genocide. That you’ve changed your mind on the matter is extremely troubling.
What stuff do you have that’s not related to zenz? I’m genuinely interested.
By the wiki article you linked alone:
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/NIC-Unclassified-Report-Uyghur-Genocide-Concentrated-Reeducation-Camps-China-Oct2024.pdf
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/04/12/surviving-the-crackdown-in-xinjiang
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-55973215
https://theconversation.com/legal-expert-forced-birth-control-of-uighur-women-is-genocide-can-china-be-put-on-trial-142414
https://web.archive.org/web/20220902020755/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/world/asia/china-xinjiang-uyghurs.html
https://docs.uhrp.org/pdf/UHRP_report_Demolishing_Faith.pdf
Outlined in these sources are mass sterilization, mass deportation, sending Uyghur children with living Uyghur parents to Han Chinese guardians for ‘correction’, forced labor, torture, and cultural erasure - all of which rely on far more witnesses and evidence than Adrian Zenz, who was a loud and early voice, but is far from the only or even most important source for the genocide that tankies claim he is.
Scrolling through this, it doesn’t provide any sources bar “NGOs” (it doesn’t bother to name any) and vague estimates.
This isn’t loading for me at all.
This one says it’s an opinion formed by a legal group (doesn’t specify the legal group). It also doesn’t provide any proof that the forced sterilisations are happening, besides saying they are.
This cites Zenz and an APnews article, which in turn cites Zenz.
This mentions the UN report saying china is guilty of Human rights abuses (which I believe it is), but it doesn’t mention genocide at all.
This is long, and I don’t have the time to go through it all right now, but skimming it shows cultural erasure, which I believe is happening. It only mentions genocide once, when it says that cultural erasure is a part of China’s genocide.
I’m not trying to do genocide apologia here, but the evidence is inconclusive imo. It’s clear that they face Human Rights violations though.
Citing both Chinese government policy and eyewitnesses isn’t enough, huh?
I’ll post it in a comment, but after reading your other objections, I’m not hopeful that you’ll glean anything from it.
Literally in the article:
So now we’re denying the forced sterilizations, not just questioning whether it counts as a genocide?
It doesn’t just cite Zenz, the AP news article cites and quotes eyewitnesses, Chinese government documents, and their own journalism, amongst numerous others. The original article, furthermore, cites the BBC and eyewitnesses.
This is really not sounding like it’s in good fucking faith.
You jump back and forth between demanding evidence for the individual assertions, and evidence for the overall scenario being classified as a genocide - in this very comment responding to the links provided, you have repeatedly balked that it’s not called a genocide in links which provide evidence of the abuses; and then balked that evidence of the abuses is not provided in the links which call it a genocide.
“It only calls it genocide once when documenting one specific aspect of the genocide”
Are you being fucking serious right now?
That’s curious, because it’s pretty indistinguishable from genocide apologia.
Search up “BBC Chinese reeducation camps” on YouTube. It’s hands on footage.