The Genocide of the Uighurs

[Rightonrighton]

Economic sanctions can work, but they need to be clearly about the treatment of Uighurs. Applying them in the middle of a US-China trade war and the Chinese are, probably rightly, going to think they are just another front in the trade war.

And they need to be part of a Uighur-led revolutionary movement as with the ANC and their fight for sanctions on S. Africa.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

Terrorist organizations such as the Turkistan Islamic Party are worsening the process. China must understand the problems of the Uyghur people

[Rojava Free State]

China: "your police shoot black people and you're oppressive."

Also China: *literally genocide*

[Novus America]

If someone is poor because they are a slave, it is not their fault for being a slave.
The poor are not always at fault for their plight you know. Always blame the victim is a bad policy. Sometimes poor people do make their own lives worse, but sometimes a government makes it hard to impossible to improve their lot too.

And you have it quite the opposite “neocolonialism” is based on the “free trade” moral relativism and realpolitik you espouse.
Why would you be against buying control of another countries resources to benefit big businesses?

Absent pure isolationism, mutually exclusive value systems will conflict.
But note I am hardly calling for a crusade here, simply that we stop exploiting and subsidizing such abuses to drive up wealth inequality and in the name of “cheap” imports.

Trade restrictions on countries engaging in behavior we would not tolerate in our own economic systems is quite different than saying we must launch a military crusade.

It is simply saying if they want to trade with us, they have to play by our rules to some degree.

Which is only fair. If a company in the US is not allowed to benefit from forced labor of ethnic minorities (because we banned that in 1865) why should that same company be able to use slaves again via outsourcing? If something is illegal here, it should be illegal or at least very restricted to use it to outsource.

What we find important to prioritize in our domestic economic regulations and civil rights, we should also apply to trade, to prevent encouraging the behaviors we claim are unacceptable.

And it is our sovereign right to restrict trade with us for any reason whatsoever.
If they argue sovereignty means they can treat their own people in this manner, fine, but we do not have to economically support it. Our sovereignty means we can refuse to buy what they are selling and restrict their government from propagandizing it here.

You know the U.S. has prison slavery with its world-record, largely Black prison population, right?

Whataboutism is whataboutism. Besides the fact products made by UNICOR are not generally permitted to be exported to foreign buyers, and we have due process and trials, juries and guaranteed legal representation (things the Uighurs do not get) if you wish to sanction the US over that, that is absolutely your right to do.

Sanction us if you wish.

[Salus Maior]

China: "your police shoot black people and you're oppressive."

Also China: *literally genocide*

Also China: Is incredibly racist towards black people.

[Novus America]

China: "your police shoot black people and you're oppressive."

Also China: *literally genocide*

Also China: Is incredibly racist towards black people.

Also PRC using soldiers to mow down thousands of protesters is good.
Also PRC, uses slavery (not just prison labor, although this is more problematic there given the total lack of due process and lack of real trials) but also straight slavery based on ethnicity or simply because you were poor and unfortunate.

[Gormwood]

China: "your police shoot black people and you're oppressive."

Also China: *literally genocide*

Basically "But Your Police Lynch Negroes".

[Vetalia]

Basically "But Your Police Lynch Negroes".

Good old whataboutism...seems like the CCP still can't shake the old Soviet approach.

[Rusozak]

Basically "But Your Police Lynch Negroes".

Good old whataboutism...seems like the CCP still can't shake the old Soviet approach.

I thought the Soviet approach was to deny, deny, deny, edit photos and records to redact the existence of an offender, ship said offender to gulag.

[Federal Republic Of America And The Cari]

On the one hand, I've always thought it a false equivalence to conflate forced sterilization with "genocide."

On the other hand, people who fly off the handle at California for forcibly sterilizing people convicted of actual crimes seem not to give a damn about China doing it to people just for being Muslim. (There is also the context to consider; this wouldn't be the first time China resorted to drastic measures against things that most of the world would regard as being within one's rights.)

Sort of like how we hate it when US soldiers gun down a few students in cold blood but don't do anything about China gunning down thousands of students in cold blood. Or how we hate it when US companies improperly store chemicals that explode killing a few people but don't do anything about China improperly storing chemicals that explode killing a few hundred. Why haven't we issued an embargo on all goods from this creepy fascist dictatorship already? We did it to Cuba for less than this.

[Gormwood]

Good old whataboutism...seems like the CCP still can't shake the old Soviet approach.

I thought the Soviet approach was to deny, deny, deny, edit photos and records to redact the existence of an offender, ship said offender to gulag.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you ... ng_Negroes

[Novus America]

Good old whataboutism...seems like the CCP still can't shake the old Soviet approach.

I thought the Soviet approach was to deny, deny, deny, edit photos and records to redact the existence of an offender, ship said offender to gulag.

That and scream whatabout.

Notably the PRC does all of the above.

[Vetalia]

I thought the Soviet approach was to deny, deny, deny, edit photos and records to redact the existence of an offender, ship said offender to gulag.

That was the Stalin approach, after he shit the bed things changed to be more ideological:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_a ... ng_Negroes

[Atheris]

I thought the Soviet approach was to deny, deny, deny, edit photos and records to redact the existence of an offender, ship said offender to gulag.

That was the Stalin approach, after he shit the bed things changed to be more ideological:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_a ... ng_Negroes

"After he shit the bed". Actually crying.

[Shamhnan Insir]

The calls for a boycott have rung out for quite a time now, and since Corona has hit the world the perfect time to begin that boycott is now. Time to strap on the big boots and hit them where it hurts financially.

It's a horribly unsustainable system if a third of the planet suckles at the teat of a country as gluttonous as this and only serves to keep them in the position where they can abuse with impunity.

[Alcala-Cordel]

China: "your police shoot black people and you're oppressive."

Also China: *literally genocide*

Basically "But Your Police Lynch Negroes".

It's pretty common for nationalists in any country to use this fallacy to excuse the atrocities of their countries, but the truth is all the superpowers are oppressive monoliths.

BTW, to anyone thinking about boycotting: if you are going to buy things, do your best to buy local and check to see where things are made. It might be a pain, but at least you don't end up with items made using sweatshops. If these people can spend the entirety of their lives working long hours to do tedious tasks, you can take a minute to check where an item came from.

[Vetalia]

"After he shit the bed". Actually crying.

I think American English has the richest set of idioms referring to death and/or failure, particularly in mocking or embarrassing ways, of the entire Anglosphere and I am proud to have it as my native tongue. Ironically, based on how Stalin died he may very well have literally shat the bed.

[Atheris]

"After he shit the bed". Actually crying.

I think American English has the richest set of idioms referring to death and/or failure, particularly in mocking or embarrassing ways, of the entire Anglosphere and I am proud to have it as my native tongue. Ironically, based on how Stalin died he may very well have literally shat the bed.

God, I love American English. I'm proud to have it as my native tongue as well.

[Mtwara]

Last time I was in Guangdong, I was told the cap on the number of children people had was about to be lifted. I personally find it hard to track what goes on in China because there are so many different rules for countryside, city, different cities and parts of the countryside, so on and so on...

The Uyghurs are definitely subject to racism, torture and ethic cleansing. Cultural and ethnic homogeneity is another way of protecting the CCP's, especially when growth starts to slow. Most of inland China will never develop to the standard of, or share the wealth of the coastal regions. The way things are going now, don't be surprised if this turns into a full blown genocide as more middle-class Han question the government and get angry during recessions.

The question is - is that our problem? Are we happy to continue to do business with a state that does what it will with people inside its borders, that has started a programme to spread that ideology across the developing world?

I personally think China does exactly what many right-wingers in Britain think we should do because it's "common sense".

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Really we should either 1) legalize slavery, eliminate the minimum wages and all environmental protections because we clearly give zero fucks about those things as we exploit them with almost everything we buy or 2) actually hold trade partners accountable for when they fail to abide by minimum standard on those things.

Yeah, it's got to be (2). But it has to learn from (1).

Terribly low wages are better than no wages (peasantry) and the worldwide trend of urbanization affirms this.

In the last half-century, billions of people have given up subsistence (or family farming, not much better) to get on the wage ladder of international capitalism. We can't argue with them, particularly if we're just like them taking the best paying job we can get. Poverty with aspirations beats poverty with none.

Capitalism has lifted a billion people out of poverty. In the process it has widened the gap between rich and poor, in the countries that were already rich (the Western countries, plus Japan and a few others). "They took our jobs" is true: they did take the jobs we could have used to keep full employment and to keep the lowest wage high. That money went to create far more jobs in the developing countries, with lower wages true, but those lower wages mean the difference between uneducated, malnourished, no-options poverty and the working poverty which allows a phone in hand, and perhaps some money sent home to parents in the countryside.

Globalization has been a great work of global socialism, ironically enabled by global capitalists. Or did they serve us? Does it even matter? Capitalists see markets untapped and labor available, and the only limit governments should put on them is how big a profit margin they can take, how much tax should be taken from them, and that the tax money should go the victims in whatever country they live. Capitalists operate globally, and in the regulation of capitalists, governments must operate globally too.

Which brings us to (2). It is unreasonable to expect all of China, or all of India, to apply and enforce minimum labor standards, or environmental standards. This idea that "it comes from x country therefore it has y standards and should attract z tariffs" is utterly inadequate. Across the board tariffs on all low-value commodities from a certain country, yeah, but that's not going to make trade fair, and just raising the tariff higher and higher until the country "complies" is just applying the fallacy of sanctions.

International trade needs to be governed by a body that actually knows what's going on. Imports and exports need to be regulated (sometimes with tariffs, sometimes with bans, and sometimes with bilateral government prosecution) by examining the company exporting and the company importing, and delving into where the product or service came from before the exporter put it on the market, also who the importer sells it on to.

I'm talking an international tax office. With powers of investigation in each country. And countries that don't co-operate get a big tariff wall. Fair trade needs a cop, and a judge, and it needs punishments like fines and imprisonment for companies that break the fair trade law.

Punishing whole countries for not being free traders, is like punishing a whole city block because the number of criminals there just exceeded 15. Collective punishment is unfair, but more to the point it is not effective.

[Rojava Free State]

Also China: Is incredibly racist towards black people.

Also PRC using soldiers to mow down thousands of protesters is good.
Also PRC, uses slavery (not just prison labor, although this is more problematic there given the total lack of due process and lack of real trials) but also straight slavery based on ethnicity or simply because you were poor and unfortunate.

Also PRC: great leap forward

[Rojava Free State]

The calls for a boycott have rung out for quite a time now, and since Corona has hit the world the perfect time to begin that boycott is now. Time to strap on the big boots and hit them where it hurts financially.

It's a horribly unsustainable system if a third of the planet suckles at the teat of a country as gluttonous as this and only serves to keep them in the position where they can abuse with impunity.

China needs to be punished.

[Purpelia]

Out of curiosity how is restricting people to 3 children, 1 above the replacement minimum a genocide? If it were 1 I could see the argument since that leads to population decline. 2... sort of but not since the population stays static. But you can like make the argument that not everyone is going to have that many. But 3 is literally saying to them: You can breed and multiply.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Also PRC using soldiers to mow down thousands of protesters is good.
Also PRC, uses slavery (not just prison labor, although this is more problematic there given the total lack of due process and lack of real trials) but also straight slavery based on ethnicity or simply because you were poor and unfortunate.

Also PRC: great leap forward

Excuse me. That was a great mistake early in Chinese Communism. I am sure it is embarrassing to all Chinese.

I will guarantee you, many more Chinese read this forum than post here.

To understand how impolite your comment is, suppose the post before was about protests and riots against the police, and the violence that police have committed against protesters. Then you say:

"Also USA: slavery."

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Out of curiosity how is restricting people to 3 children, 1 above the replacement minimum a genocide? If it were 1 I could see the argument since that leads to population decline. 2... sort of but not since the population stays static. But you can like make the argument that not everyone is going to have that many. But 3 is literally saying to them: You can breed and multiply.

If that's the actual policy China is enforcing, it's not genocidal.

It's not even racist. 3 children is the allowed number for any rural Chinese.

In the article are accusations that the policy isn't actually applied fairly. And honestly, back on page one I should have demanded more source. There is a huge difference between Uighurs being restricted to 3 children per couple, and Uighurs being denied any children at all, as was implied by the article.