3 ms·

> "Leading to what a U.S. commission on China last month said is “the largest mass incarceration of a minority population in the world today.”" Oh the irony. Y

> "Leading to what a U.S. commission on China last month said is “the largest mass incarceration of a minority population in the world today.”" Oh the irony. You really need specify exactly what you're referring to, otherwise there can be no discussion and your comment is content-less snark. I'm guessing that you're referring to the high numbers of African Americans imprisoned in the US. However, the situations are clearly not comparable. These camps appear to be the result of high-level Chinese government policy that explicitly targets this ethic group. There are no contemporary parallels in the US. If you think there are, do you think Obama was in on it? The US situation is unfortunate, but it's more the result of poverty and lower-level racism, not a policy to imprison blacks. It's exceedingly frustrating that whenever there's an article about Chinese human rights abuses, there are dozens of comments that seem to just want to deflect attention from them. We never actually end up talking about China, just the US.

jonathanyc 8y ago
Not the GP but you really should avoid being deliberately obtuse. Also, I agree whataboutism is a problem, but most of us live in the US. It makes sense that we would talk about our own country. Lastly, you are wildly off the mark regarding racialized drug policies in the US. Just two references: https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-disparities-criminal-justice https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-dispar... https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich...
- Lionsion 8y ago
  > but most of us live in the US. It makes sense that we would talk about our own country. In an article about Chinese human rights abuses? At the most charitable, needing to make everything about the US is a form of political narcissism. If you want to talk about US problems, post an on-topic article and talk about them there.
  - jonathanyc 8y ago
    I’m proud to be American and proud to think about how America measures up to other countries. My belief in America’s virtues is strong enough that I’m comfortable using other countries’ problems to discuss American problems. (It’s almost like this is one reason to read world news.) Calling this “political narcissism” is thinly veiled political solipsism. I’m amazed to read that here—do you just put your thoughts about the country in which you live in a little box, separate from everything else? It’s not like you can’t ignore these threads if you’d like; most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time. It sounds to me like you have some deep-seated insecurities that I really don’t think you should have. I think you should address these before you go around whining about other people’s attempt to discuss things.
    - Lionsion 8y ago
      > It sounds to me like you have some deep-seated insecurities that I really don’t think you should have. I think you should address these before you go around whining about other people’s attempt to discuss things. How condescending. I have a deep-seated frustration that threads on this and similar topics become trainwreck full of derails and distraction. I'd be surprised if the majority of comments in this thread even discussed China or the situation there, rather than use it as a jumping off point derail to a US topic. As far as I can tell, I'm the only person to have used the term Xinjiang in this entire thread. This is in a post about Xinjiang. Just to emphasize: this thread is such a trainwreck that it dropped like a rock off the front page. That does no one any good. > It’s almost like this is one reason to read world news. A better reason to read world news is to understand and discuss the world, not to compulsively engage in domestic topics.
abiox 8y ago
> do you think Obama was in on it? i find it fascinating how to some folks, pointing at obama's ethnic background is apparently some kind of knockdown argument.
- Lionsion 8y ago
  > i find it fascinating how to some folks, pointing at obama's ethnic background is apparently some kind of knockdown argument. It's pretty close to a knockdown argument against someone whose position is US government policy is to imprison black people on account of their ethnicity. The great-grandparent comment may have been suggesting that. However, she was too vague to be sure.
  - creaghpatr 8y ago
    >against someone whose position is US government policy is to imprison black people on account of their ethnicity Can you provide a source for this wild claim?
    - Lionsion 8y ago
      > Can you provide a source for this wild claim? The commenter I responded to was so vague, that they could have been making that claim. After all, they were likely drawing parallels between the situation in the OP and the US. But who knows what they really thought; they never clarified. I called that out at the time and in every comment since.
    - Maybestring 8y ago
      That's not even a claim.
  - chickenfries 8y ago
    So I think most people would describe mass incarceration as a systemic issue, not one that any individual president or administration is wholly responsible for. The President is not an absolute monarch who can impose their will all throughout the US government... That being said, it's just plain easy to find actual incidences where US policy was explicitly racist in it's intent and effect. https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich... > "You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."
chickenfries 8y ago
> The US situation is unfortunate, but it's more the result of poverty and low-level racism, not racially tinged policy. Is this just your conclusion, or the conclusion of anyone who has studied mass incarceration in the United States?

jonathanyc 8y ago

Not the GP but you really should avoid being deliberately obtuse. Also, I agree whataboutism is a problem, but most of us live in the US. It makes sense that we would talk about our own country. Lastly, you are wildly off the mark regarding racialized drug policies in the US. Just two references: https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-disparities-criminal-justice https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-dispar... https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich...

Lionsion 8y ago
> but most of us live in the US. It makes sense that we would talk about our own country. In an article about Chinese human rights abuses? At the most charitable, needing to make everything about the US is a form of political narcissism. If you want to talk about US problems, post an on-topic article and talk about them there.
- jonathanyc 8y ago
  I’m proud to be American and proud to think about how America measures up to other countries. My belief in America’s virtues is strong enough that I’m comfortable using other countries’ problems to discuss American problems. (It’s almost like this is one reason to read world news.) Calling this “political narcissism” is thinly veiled political solipsism. I’m amazed to read that here—do you just put your thoughts about the country in which you live in a little box, separate from everything else? It’s not like you can’t ignore these threads if you’d like; most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time. It sounds to me like you have some deep-seated insecurities that I really don’t think you should have. I think you should address these before you go around whining about other people’s attempt to discuss things.
  - Lionsion 8y ago
    > It sounds to me like you have some deep-seated insecurities that I really don’t think you should have. I think you should address these before you go around whining about other people’s attempt to discuss things. How condescending. I have a deep-seated frustration that threads on this and similar topics become trainwreck full of derails and distraction. I'd be surprised if the majority of comments in this thread even discussed China or the situation there, rather than use it as a jumping off point derail to a US topic. As far as I can tell, I'm the only person to have used the term Xinjiang in this entire thread. This is in a post about Xinjiang. Just to emphasize: this thread is such a trainwreck that it dropped like a rock off the front page. That does no one any good. > It’s almost like this is one reason to read world news. A better reason to read world news is to understand and discuss the world, not to compulsively engage in domestic topics.

abiox 8y ago

> do you think Obama was in on it? i find it fascinating how to some folks, pointing at obama's ethnic background is apparently some kind of knockdown argument.

Lionsion 8y ago
> i find it fascinating how to some folks, pointing at obama's ethnic background is apparently some kind of knockdown argument. It's pretty close to a knockdown argument against someone whose position is US government policy is to imprison black people on account of their ethnicity. The great-grandparent comment may have been suggesting that. However, she was too vague to be sure.
- creaghpatr 8y ago
  >against someone whose position is US government policy is to imprison black people on account of their ethnicity Can you provide a source for this wild claim?
  - Lionsion 8y ago
    > Can you provide a source for this wild claim? The commenter I responded to was so vague, that they could have been making that claim. After all, they were likely drawing parallels between the situation in the OP and the US. But who knows what they really thought; they never clarified. I called that out at the time and in every comment since.
  - Maybestring 8y ago
    That's not even a claim.
- chickenfries 8y ago
  So I think most people would describe mass incarceration as a systemic issue, not one that any individual president or administration is wholly responsible for. The President is not an absolute monarch who can impose their will all throughout the US government... That being said, it's just plain easy to find actual incidences where US policy was explicitly racist in it's intent and effect. https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-rich... > "You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."

chickenfries 8y ago

> The US situation is unfortunate, but it's more the result of poverty and low-level racism, not racially tinged policy. Is this just your conclusion, or the conclusion of anyone who has studied mass incarceration in the United States?