9 ms·

Counternarrative about US-funded "World Uyghur Congress" separatists instigating this: https://journal-neo.org/2019/01/30/is-china-building-a-police-state-or-co

by mrobot 7y ago

Counternarrative about US-funded "World Uyghur Congress" separatists instigating this: https://journal-neo.org/2019/01/30/is-china-building-a-police-state-or-countering-western-sponsored-terrorism/ https://journal-neo.org/2019/01/30/is-china-building-a-polic...

heraclius 7y ago
Politico says that this website is part of a Russian government institution.⁰ Perhaps that’s bunkum, but both sides fund propaganda about the other; most of the time, they will fund propaganda about things that are true—I remember Xinhua writing something entirely true about police brutality in the US for example—because true things are more credible. The article, moreover, contains something of a non sequitur. The terrorist attacks it cites are from before the terror attacks. So at the very least the approach the CCP used between that time and the concentration camps was sufficient, and the recent escalation insufficient. It is also worth asking why the Uyghurs became violent in the first place. China was one of the powers that opposed the Soviets in Afghanistan; this, of course, involved the creation of a violent Islam to oppose their rule. The Strike Hard campaign was not obviously born of necessity; the 90s were not a time of substantial strife. Terrorism is something of a weasel word; the use of violence is fairly common and oughtn’t to render an entire people pariahs. Moreover the CCP response is grossly disproportionate—the detention of millions in response to terrorist attacks on the scale of, at most, thousands, is entirely unjustified. As for the use of “separatism” as code for “a priori bad”, this usage is entirely unjustified. It is quite plausible that the Americans are not acting benevolently. That is not an excuse to ignore the plight of the Uyghurs, documented by others.¹ 0. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/12/how-russia-targets-the-us-military-215247 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/12/how-russi... 1. https://jamestown.org/program/xinjiangs-re-education-and-securitization-campaign-evidence-from-domestic-security-budgets/ https://jamestown.org/program/xinjiangs-re-education-and-sec... — on the nature of the campaign; https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/05/01/chinas-algorithms-repression/reverse-engineering-xinjiang-police-mass-surveillance https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/05/01/chinas-algorithms-repr... — on mass surveillance.

by mrobot 7y ago

heraclius 7y ago

Politico says that this website is part of a Russian government institution.⁰ Perhaps that’s bunkum, but both sides fund propaganda about the other; most of the time, they will fund propaganda about things that are true—I remember Xinhua writing something entirely true about police brutality in the US for example—because true things are more credible. The article, moreover, contains something of a non sequitur. The terrorist attacks it cites are from before the terror attacks. So at the very least the approach the CCP used between that time and the concentration camps was sufficient, and the recent escalation insufficient. It is also worth asking why the Uyghurs became violent in the first place. China was one of the powers that opposed the Soviets in Afghanistan; this, of course, involved the creation of a violent Islam to oppose their rule. The Strike Hard campaign was not obviously born of necessity; the 90s were not a time of substantial strife. Terrorism is something of a weasel word; the use of violence is fairly common and oughtn’t to render an entire people pariahs. Moreover the CCP response is grossly disproportionate—the detention of millions in response to terrorist attacks on the scale of, at most, thousands, is entirely unjustified. As for the use of “separatism” as code for “a priori bad”, this usage is entirely unjustified. It is quite plausible that the Americans are not acting benevolently. That is not an excuse to ignore the plight of the Uyghurs, documented by others.¹ 0. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/12/how-russia-targets-the-us-military-215247 https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/12/how-russi... 1. https://jamestown.org/program/xinjiangs-re-education-and-securitization-campaign-evidence-from-domestic-security-budgets/ https://jamestown.org/program/xinjiangs-re-education-and-sec... — on the nature of the campaign; https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/05/01/chinas-algorithms-repression/reverse-engineering-xinjiang-police-mass-surveillance https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/05/01/chinas-algorithms-repr... — on mass surveillance.