7 ms·

Wonderful article, but I reject the conclusion that the mass internments and violence were inevitable on principle. Ultimately, the decisions that lead to these

Wonderful article, but I reject the conclusion that the mass internments and violence were inevitable on principle. Ultimately, the decisions that lead to these outcomes are made by people, people who should be able to say "we've seen this script before, and I don't like where it is going." If we should have learned anything from the first half of the 20th century is that simply accepting the systematic subjegation of minorty groups can lead to horrific outcomes. For a while in the late 20th century, it felt like these sorts of actions were beyond realpolitik and there would be true international condemnation and shame. I wish those days were still with us.

chibg10 8y ago
> For a while in the late 20th century, it felt like these sorts of actions were beyond realpolitik and there would be true international condemnation and shame. I wish those days were still with us. It's personally been very eye-opening for me over the past decade to see just how much the size of a country's economy can wielded as club to silence international opposition and how easily the international community goes along with it. I was always aware intellectually that the world revolves around economics/business/trade interests, but seeing so many otherwise liberal/progressive countries remain conspicuously silent in so many areas where retaliation from Beijing is virtually assured has really been both disappointing and sort of amazing to watch at the same time.
- realusername 8y ago
  > It's personally been very eye-opening for me over the past decade to see just how much the size of a country's economy can wielded as club to silence international opposition and how easily the international community goes along with it That's the big shift occurring since the end of WWII. Countries lost power and influence to businesses & companies, every decade it's been more and more visible until the situation of today.
  - Sniffnoy 8y ago
    But it's not Chinese companies that go around making these threats -- it's the Chinese government with their ability to control those companies or cut off access to them. Same old monopoly on violence that's doing this, just wielded against your trading partners rather than you directly.
    - realusername 8y ago
      > But it's not Chinese companies that go around making these threats -- it's the Chinese government with their ability to control those companies or cut off access to them In China, there's not much difference between the big companies and the government anyway.
      - Sniffnoy 8y ago
        The point is that refusing to trade with someone because they said something you don't like is not a good way to make money, and as such, one way or another, companies wouldn't take such measures were it not for the government's influence, regardless of the precise means of operation of that influence. If it were like you say, we'd see the influence of the companies undoing such government policies so that they can be unrestricted in their trade and make more money. That's not what we see. (Or likely we see it in other areas, but it's clear which way the influence runs in this one.)
- yourbandsucks 8y ago
  Just the last decade? Are you American?
- profalseidol 8y ago
  Try /r/LateStageCapitalism/
- leoc 8y ago
  Just as with decisions in China, nothing is truly inevitable here either.
- analyst74 8y ago
  International politics has always been like this though, powerful countries get to do what they want. Maybe the main reason it's eye-opening for you is because now it's done by a government you do not approve of?
- ionised 8y ago
  > It's personally been very eye-opening for me over the past decade to see just how much the size of a country's economy can wielded as club to silence international opposition and how easily the international community goes along with it. Just the last decade? The United States has been doing this to other countries for the last century or more. The British Empire did it for hunreds of years before that.
paulorlando 8y ago
It is right to reject that conclusion I drew. I struggled with that part (even whether I should call it "more likely" rather than "inevitable") when I wrote the piece. And after all, it is by rejecting the conclusion real progress can be made. I was just more pessimistic and thought that things were unfolding rather than being decided, perhaps. I'm glad you liked the post.
- rlue 8y ago
  I also really enjoyed your post. However, I'm completely uninformed about the mass internment of Uyghurs in China, and think that it would have been well-served by a link to some sort of summary of the issue. If I am understanding your argument correctly, it is that the wave of highly publicized acts of terrorism in the early 2000s, combined with cultural isolation between Han Chinese and Uyghurs, led to the mass internment program? A short article I read on the issue[0] quotes David Kaplan as saying, “The repression of the Turkic Uyghur Muslim community in western China…is a key part of Beijing’s new imperial policy,” and that the Belt and Road Initiative “requires the complete subjugation of the Uyghur population”. (Sadly, I don't know what the Belt and Road Initiative is, either.) Is this also consistent with your views? [0]: https://www.uyghurcongress.org/en/?p=37293 https://www.uyghurcongress.org/en/?p=37293
  - yorwba 8y ago
    The Belt and Road Initiative is a massive infrastructure project to expand trade routes. One of the planned routes stretches through Xinjiang all the way to Europe. If you buy into the view that all Uyghurs are potential terrorists, then having an important trade route go directly through their territory would certainly make it into a juicy target for terrorist attacks. That said, even then there's no need to depopulate the entire province, which is almost as large as Alaska (though much of it is desert). Security corridors a few kilometers wide should be enough for even the most paranoid. I don't think there's a fully rational explanation of the treatment that Uyghurs receive in terms of some kind of objective the Chinese government wants to achieve. My personal best guess is that someone high up in the hierarchy is on a power trip and the rest of the leadership doesn't care enough to stop them.
clouddrover 8y ago
> people who should be able to say "we've seen this script before, and I don't like where it is going." But that presupposes they have seen it before. Many things are censored in China. For example the 4th of June, 1989 is censored because that's when the Tiananmen Square protest and subsequent massacre occurred: https://www.businessinsider.com/china-tiananmen-square-2014-5?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/china-tiananmen-square-2014-... You can't learn from history if you don't have the opportunity to learn the history in the first place.
- dontbenebby 8y ago
  Is Nazi Germany, the gold standard for bad ideas, censored? Anyone who's read "The rise and fall of the 3rd Reich" should see the danger signs.
  - chillacy 8y ago
    I would imagine that Chinese students study Japanese imperialism a lot more than a far away war they didn't materially participate in. But I don't know for sure. In America we study both because the US was involved in both theaters.
    - uranusjr 8y ago
      Unfortunately the Imperial Japanese history has been heavily used as a propaganda instrument. Students don’t have much chance to learn the “real” history. What little taught also subjects to double standards, e.g. the Japanese were evil to propose the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, but China projecting power to the South Sea is totally fine and can never go wrong.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - yorwba 8y ago
      As a German, I was surprised to find out that my Chinese friends learned a lot of German history in school. Not just about the Third Reich, but also 19th-century historical figures like Marx (obviously due to his ideological importance) and Bismarck, the Weimar Republic and some things I don't recall right now. It's certainly more than I was taught about China in turn. I don't think even the German colonial presence in Qingdao was ever mentioned.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

chibg10 8y ago

> For a while in the late 20th century, it felt like these sorts of actions were beyond realpolitik and there would be true international condemnation and shame. I wish those days were still with us. It's personally been very eye-opening for me over the past decade to see just how much the size of a country's economy can wielded as club to silence international opposition and how easily the international community goes along with it. I was always aware intellectually that the world revolves around economics/business/trade interests, but seeing so many otherwise liberal/progressive countries remain conspicuously silent in so many areas where retaliation from Beijing is virtually assured has really been both disappointing and sort of amazing to watch at the same time.

realusername 8y ago
> It's personally been very eye-opening for me over the past decade to see just how much the size of a country's economy can wielded as club to silence international opposition and how easily the international community goes along with it That's the big shift occurring since the end of WWII. Countries lost power and influence to businesses & companies, every decade it's been more and more visible until the situation of today.
- Sniffnoy 8y ago
  But it's not Chinese companies that go around making these threats -- it's the Chinese government with their ability to control those companies or cut off access to them. Same old monopoly on violence that's doing this, just wielded against your trading partners rather than you directly.
  - realusername 8y ago
    > But it's not Chinese companies that go around making these threats -- it's the Chinese government with their ability to control those companies or cut off access to them In China, there's not much difference between the big companies and the government anyway.
    - Sniffnoy 8y ago
      The point is that refusing to trade with someone because they said something you don't like is not a good way to make money, and as such, one way or another, companies wouldn't take such measures were it not for the government's influence, regardless of the precise means of operation of that influence. If it were like you say, we'd see the influence of the companies undoing such government policies so that they can be unrestricted in their trade and make more money. That's not what we see. (Or likely we see it in other areas, but it's clear which way the influence runs in this one.)
yourbandsucks 8y ago
Just the last decade? Are you American?
profalseidol 8y ago
Try /r/LateStageCapitalism/
leoc 8y ago
Just as with decisions in China, nothing is truly inevitable here either.
analyst74 8y ago
International politics has always been like this though, powerful countries get to do what they want. Maybe the main reason it's eye-opening for you is because now it's done by a government you do not approve of?
ionised 8y ago
> It's personally been very eye-opening for me over the past decade to see just how much the size of a country's economy can wielded as club to silence international opposition and how easily the international community goes along with it. Just the last decade? The United States has been doing this to other countries for the last century or more. The British Empire did it for hunreds of years before that.

paulorlando 8y ago

It is right to reject that conclusion I drew. I struggled with that part (even whether I should call it "more likely" rather than "inevitable") when I wrote the piece. And after all, it is by rejecting the conclusion real progress can be made. I was just more pessimistic and thought that things were unfolding rather than being decided, perhaps. I'm glad you liked the post.

rlue 8y ago
I also really enjoyed your post. However, I'm completely uninformed about the mass internment of Uyghurs in China, and think that it would have been well-served by a link to some sort of summary of the issue. If I am understanding your argument correctly, it is that the wave of highly publicized acts of terrorism in the early 2000s, combined with cultural isolation between Han Chinese and Uyghurs, led to the mass internment program? A short article I read on the issue[0] quotes David Kaplan as saying, “The repression of the Turkic Uyghur Muslim community in western China…is a key part of Beijing’s new imperial policy,” and that the Belt and Road Initiative “requires the complete subjugation of the Uyghur population”. (Sadly, I don't know what the Belt and Road Initiative is, either.) Is this also consistent with your views? [0]: https://www.uyghurcongress.org/en/?p=37293 https://www.uyghurcongress.org/en/?p=37293
- yorwba 8y ago
  The Belt and Road Initiative is a massive infrastructure project to expand trade routes. One of the planned routes stretches through Xinjiang all the way to Europe. If you buy into the view that all Uyghurs are potential terrorists, then having an important trade route go directly through their territory would certainly make it into a juicy target for terrorist attacks. That said, even then there's no need to depopulate the entire province, which is almost as large as Alaska (though much of it is desert). Security corridors a few kilometers wide should be enough for even the most paranoid. I don't think there's a fully rational explanation of the treatment that Uyghurs receive in terms of some kind of objective the Chinese government wants to achieve. My personal best guess is that someone high up in the hierarchy is on a power trip and the rest of the leadership doesn't care enough to stop them.

clouddrover 8y ago

> people who should be able to say "we've seen this script before, and I don't like where it is going." But that presupposes they have seen it before. Many things are censored in China. For example the 4th of June, 1989 is censored because that's when the Tiananmen Square protest and subsequent massacre occurred: https://www.businessinsider.com/china-tiananmen-square-2014-5?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/china-tiananmen-square-2014-... You can't learn from history if you don't have the opportunity to learn the history in the first place.

dontbenebby 8y ago
Is Nazi Germany, the gold standard for bad ideas, censored? Anyone who's read "The rise and fall of the 3rd Reich" should see the danger signs.
- chillacy 8y ago
  I would imagine that Chinese students study Japanese imperialism a lot more than a far away war they didn't materially participate in. But I don't know for sure. In America we study both because the US was involved in both theaters.
  - uranusjr 8y ago
    Unfortunately the Imperial Japanese history has been heavily used as a propaganda instrument. Students don’t have much chance to learn the “real” history. What little taught also subjects to double standards, e.g. the Japanese were evil to propose the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, but China projecting power to the South Sea is totally fine and can never go wrong.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - yorwba 8y ago
    As a German, I was surprised to find out that my Chinese friends learned a lot of German history in school. Not just about the Third Reich, but also 19th-century historical figures like Marx (obviously due to his ideological importance) and Bismarck, the Weimar Republic and some things I don't recall right now. It's certainly more than I was taught about China in turn. I don't think even the German colonial presence in Qingdao was ever mentioned.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]