3 ms·
In the 1990s I might have been sympathetic to insisting on the name "East Turkestan" and being idealistic about an end to the Chinese presence there. However, a
by Mediterraneo10 8y ago
In the 1990s I might have been sympathetic to insisting on the name "East Turkestan" and being idealistic about an end to the Chinese presence there. However, as I have seen personally from traveling in the region, China simply moved too many Han people into it already. That’s that, it’s over. The situation would nearly be like insisting that Kaliningrad is rightfully German after the Soviet Union managed to change its population demographics overwhelmingly and obscure so much of its pre-Soviet history.
- yummypaint 8y agoIf that's the case, then the discussion should be about reparations
- CharlesColeman 8y agoPerhaps not yet. If the colonization is mostly post-1990s (like the GP suggests), then it seems reasonable to insist that the colonists themselves leave. They're not innocent. It's only when you get to later generations, children and grandchildren that didn't choose to be born where they were, that it gets complicated to the point that there are no good solutions.
- thratchnee 8y ago>They're not innocent of what exactly? Being alive? How enlightened of you, to stop one genocide by committing another.