4 ms·

Once again, context matters. The context of the sentence: >"You can't judge China by the same standards as modern, highly educated western democracies" was on

Once again, context matters. The context of the sentence: >"You can't judge China by the same standards as modern, highly educated western democracies" was one of mass surveillance and the social media crackdown and absolutely does not pertain to any camps of any kind. You are once again not responding to the strongest plausible interpretation of what I have said, instead choosing to argue against a straw-man and then repeating your point about how Andrew Jackson carried out genocide. Do you see the problem?

learc83 7y ago
My apologies. Since that was your final paragraph I took it as your overall conclusion. I didn't realize that the quoted paragraph was exclusively referring to your point about surveillance. So to be clear you unambiguously condemn the Chinese government for their role in operating ethnic internment camps, and while you disagree with the specifics, you agree that they are operating ethnic internment camps? Also you don't think it's wrong to judge the Chinese government for doing this?
- tepidandroid 7y ago
  > So to be clear you unambiguously condemn the Chinese government for their role in operating ethnic internment camps, and while you disagree with the specifics, you agree that they are operating ethnic internment camps? No. I don't unambiguously condemn the Chinese government for their role in operating ethnic internment camps because it is not at all unambiguous that this is what they are doing. Why should I? What they are doing and what they are trying to accomplish is operating extremist "re-education" camps due to the many terrorist incidents in the region [1] including the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of Han Chinese (which, by the way, is never mentioned anywhere to contextualize the CCP's actions, nor is it condemned). I don't dispute that many people put there are indeed of ethnic Uighur in origin but their ideology is of primary concern, not their ethnicity. I do believe there is such a thing as "wrong-think" when it comes to extremist ideology. I don't dispute that many of them are likely innocent of harbouring extremist ideology and placed there against their will -I will always condemn the detainment of innocents. >Also you don't think it's wrong to judge the Chinese government for doing this? Before rushing to grab the pitchforks, let's pause for a second to consider two facts: 1. There were numerous religion-fuelled [2] terrorist incidents in the region (machete attacks, car bombs, plane hijackings, etc). 2. There were episodes of ethnic cleansing resulting in mass civilian casualties in the region, carried out by thousands of anonymous, unidentifiable ethnic minorities against Han Chinese (we know this because all the casualties were Han Chinese). Only a tiny fraction of those involved were ever held responsible for their actions and prosecuted. What would be the appropriate way to handle the situation to prevent further loss of life and regional destabilization? Would you invite international condemnation and sanctions by placing millions of ethnic minorities into concentration camps, tearing them from their families in order to torture or work them to death? If it's obvious to any layman that this would only incite more international scrutiny, more terrorism, and more destabilization, don't you think it would be obvious to the policy planners in charge as well? Contrary to common knowledge, China has dozens of culturally diverse, minority ethnic groups. Their cultures are often promoted and showcased as a matter of national pride. Almost none of them clash with the CCP, and tourism is in fact encouraged in those poorer, rural areas to help subsidize the locals' incomes. What could the CCP possibly hope to achieve by specifically targeting and crushing Uighur culture for the sole purpose of doing so? The CCP, pragmatic as only an authoritarian, technocracy can be, opted for forceful "re-education" and augmented surveillance in order to prevent further terrorist events and to stamp out religious extremism. Is that really so hard to believe? You may condemn the inevitable abuses carried out by individuals with authority within these camps, which occurs not as a matter of official policy but as a matter of human nature. You may condemn the CCP for being hard-handed in their response to domestic terrorism. You may condemn the inevitable but incidental detention of innocents which will result from such actions. You may not condemn the CCP based on unsubstantiated, editorialized headlines designed by the mainstream media to advance a political narrative. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China#Chronology_of_major_events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China#Chronology_... [2] "We have to conquer our own country and purify it of all infidels. Then, we should conquer the infidels' countries and spread Islam. The infidels who are usurping our countries have announced war against Islam and Muslims, forcing Muslims to abandon Islam and change their beliefs." – Abdullah Mansour, current leader of the Uyghur separatist movement Turkistan Islamic Party (East Turkestan Islamic Movement), from "The Duty of Faith and Support," Voice of Islam/al-Fajr Media Center, August 26, 2009.
  - learc83 7y ago
    You acknowledged that the Chinese government is operating ideological internment camps that happen to contain almost exclusively Uighur people who were taken there against their will and held without trial. You refuse to condemn this, and you've provided justification for why they are necessary. My original interpretation of your comment that was therefore correct with that caveat that you take issue with the term "concentration camp". >You may condemn the inevitable abuses carried out by individuals with authority within these camps, which occurs not as a matter of official policy but as a matter of human nature When there are systemic injustices it is appropriate to condemn the system. The vast majority of racial injustice in the US isn't a matter of official policy either, yet it's absurd that you would refuse to condemn the Justice system for the end result. >editorialized headlines designed by the mainstream media to advance a political narrative. Many non media groups have made similar allegations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, The Government of Turkey, and The US State Department. This isn't a media conspiracy theory. Amnesty international interviewed over a hundred people who claim that their relatives are missing. They interviewed people who claimed to have been tortured in the camps. To me, that alone is enough evidence for the world to demand answers.
    - tepidandroid 7y ago
      >You acknowledged that the Chinese government is operating ideological internment camps that happen to contain almost exclusively Uighur people who were taken there against their will and held without trial. >You refuse to condemn this, and you've provided justification for why they are necessary. My original interpretation of your comment that was therefore correct with that caveat that you take issue with the term "concentration camp". First of all, why is my personal condemnation so important to you? I will not be coerced into making statements for the satisfaction of others, as I think it’s a disingenuous form of argument. It would be like me asking you to condemn the ethnic cleansing of Han Chinese by Uighers during the Urumqi riots -why should I need that condemnation from you and why should you need to vindicate yourself for me? I have already stated that I will always condemn the detainment of innocents. There should be enough information there for you to extrapolate what I do and do not condemn. Secondly, in all of my comments, I have never denied that the Chinese government is operating ideological re-education camps. I have disputed accusations that they are primarily operate as ethnic concentration camps. I have also disputed the purpose, the scale, and the characterization of the camps. There is zero evidence that they “happen to contain almost exclusively Uighur people”, though I personally believe that many of them are, given the nature of the terrorist incidents in the region. > My original interpretation of your comment that was therefore correct with that caveat that you take issue with the term "concentration camp". This is your original interpretation of my comment: >The strongest possible interpretation of "You can't judge China by the same standards as modern, highly educated western democracies" is that it's wrong to judge China for locking up more than a million people of a specific ethnicity in concentration camps. Your original interpretation of my comment is still completely incorrect because I have never made the statement “it's wrong to judge China for locking up more than a million people of a specific ethnicity in concentration camps”. You keep trying to make it seem as though I’ve said this, but you can’t, because I didn’t. >When there are systemic injustices it is appropriate to condemn the system. Where is your proof that there are systematic injustices? Provide proof that three million Uigher Muslims have been put into concentration camps because of their ethnicity as an official policy of the CCP. Provide proof that they are being tortured and forced into hard labour as an official policy of the CCP. We’re not talking about the kind of proof that arises from “journalists” who have never set foot in the region. We’re not talking about the kind of proof that arises from satellite images either (not sure if you still remember all the satellite images of Saddam’s WMD facilities). If you believe that putting several thousand people into “re-education” camps against their will because of possible extremist ideology is an injustice, then you are free to condemn that if you wish. > The vast majority of racial injustice in the US isn't a matter of official policy either, yet it's absurd that you would refuse to condemn the Justice system for the end result. Why on earth would that be absurd? This argument makes no sense to me. If the US justice system worked 100% correctly the way it was intended to work, there would not be any racial injustices, correct? So why would it make sense to blame the US justice system for abuses that arose organically, despite what is written in law? Arresting someone because of their skin colour is illegal according to US law. By your logic, the fact that individual police officers choose to racially profile people anyway should be blamed on the law? That’s simply not logical. Why would it be absurd to refuse to condemn the justice system for abuses arising from individual police officers’ racial prejudices, when the justice system specifically makes this type of discrimination illegal? Interested in reading your explanation. > Many non media groups have made similar allegations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, The Government of Turkey, and The US State Department. This isn't a media conspiracy theory. Amnesty international interviewed over a hundred people who claim that their relatives are missing. They interviewed people who claimed to have been tortured in the camps. To me, that alone is enough evidence for the world to demand answers. If a 100 interviews from people with missing relatives is enough to convince you that three million Uighers are being systematically detained and tortured because of their ethnicity, then your standard for what constitutes evidence is much lower than mine. Without adequate proof, these allegations are no different and no better than a politically motivated conspiracy theory. It's enough evidence for the world to demand answers but it's not enough evidence for the wholesale indictment that's going on right now.

learc83 7y ago

My apologies. Since that was your final paragraph I took it as your overall conclusion. I didn't realize that the quoted paragraph was exclusively referring to your point about surveillance. So to be clear you unambiguously condemn the Chinese government for their role in operating ethnic internment camps, and while you disagree with the specifics, you agree that they are operating ethnic internment camps? Also you don't think it's wrong to judge the Chinese government for doing this?

tepidandroid 7y ago
> So to be clear you unambiguously condemn the Chinese government for their role in operating ethnic internment camps, and while you disagree with the specifics, you agree that they are operating ethnic internment camps? No. I don't unambiguously condemn the Chinese government for their role in operating ethnic internment camps because it is not at all unambiguous that this is what they are doing. Why should I? What they are doing and what they are trying to accomplish is operating extremist "re-education" camps due to the many terrorist incidents in the region [1] including the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of Han Chinese (which, by the way, is never mentioned anywhere to contextualize the CCP's actions, nor is it condemned). I don't dispute that many people put there are indeed of ethnic Uighur in origin but their ideology is of primary concern, not their ethnicity. I do believe there is such a thing as "wrong-think" when it comes to extremist ideology. I don't dispute that many of them are likely innocent of harbouring extremist ideology and placed there against their will -I will always condemn the detainment of innocents. >Also you don't think it's wrong to judge the Chinese government for doing this? Before rushing to grab the pitchforks, let's pause for a second to consider two facts: 1. There were numerous religion-fuelled [2] terrorist incidents in the region (machete attacks, car bombs, plane hijackings, etc). 2. There were episodes of ethnic cleansing resulting in mass civilian casualties in the region, carried out by thousands of anonymous, unidentifiable ethnic minorities against Han Chinese (we know this because all the casualties were Han Chinese). Only a tiny fraction of those involved were ever held responsible for their actions and prosecuted. What would be the appropriate way to handle the situation to prevent further loss of life and regional destabilization? Would you invite international condemnation and sanctions by placing millions of ethnic minorities into concentration camps, tearing them from their families in order to torture or work them to death? If it's obvious to any layman that this would only incite more international scrutiny, more terrorism, and more destabilization, don't you think it would be obvious to the policy planners in charge as well? Contrary to common knowledge, China has dozens of culturally diverse, minority ethnic groups. Their cultures are often promoted and showcased as a matter of national pride. Almost none of them clash with the CCP, and tourism is in fact encouraged in those poorer, rural areas to help subsidize the locals' incomes. What could the CCP possibly hope to achieve by specifically targeting and crushing Uighur culture for the sole purpose of doing so? The CCP, pragmatic as only an authoritarian, technocracy can be, opted for forceful "re-education" and augmented surveillance in order to prevent further terrorist events and to stamp out religious extremism. Is that really so hard to believe? You may condemn the inevitable abuses carried out by individuals with authority within these camps, which occurs not as a matter of official policy but as a matter of human nature. You may condemn the CCP for being hard-handed in their response to domestic terrorism. You may condemn the inevitable but incidental detention of innocents which will result from such actions. You may not condemn the CCP based on unsubstantiated, editorialized headlines designed by the mainstream media to advance a political narrative. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China#Chronology_of_major_events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China#Chronology_... [2] "We have to conquer our own country and purify it of all infidels. Then, we should conquer the infidels' countries and spread Islam. The infidels who are usurping our countries have announced war against Islam and Muslims, forcing Muslims to abandon Islam and change their beliefs." – Abdullah Mansour, current leader of the Uyghur separatist movement Turkistan Islamic Party (East Turkestan Islamic Movement), from "The Duty of Faith and Support," Voice of Islam/al-Fajr Media Center, August 26, 2009.
- learc83 7y ago
  You acknowledged that the Chinese government is operating ideological internment camps that happen to contain almost exclusively Uighur people who were taken there against their will and held without trial. You refuse to condemn this, and you've provided justification for why they are necessary. My original interpretation of your comment that was therefore correct with that caveat that you take issue with the term "concentration camp". >You may condemn the inevitable abuses carried out by individuals with authority within these camps, which occurs not as a matter of official policy but as a matter of human nature When there are systemic injustices it is appropriate to condemn the system. The vast majority of racial injustice in the US isn't a matter of official policy either, yet it's absurd that you would refuse to condemn the Justice system for the end result. >editorialized headlines designed by the mainstream media to advance a political narrative. Many non media groups have made similar allegations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, The Government of Turkey, and The US State Department. This isn't a media conspiracy theory. Amnesty international interviewed over a hundred people who claim that their relatives are missing. They interviewed people who claimed to have been tortured in the camps. To me, that alone is enough evidence for the world to demand answers.
  - tepidandroid 7y ago
    >You acknowledged that the Chinese government is operating ideological internment camps that happen to contain almost exclusively Uighur people who were taken there against their will and held without trial. >You refuse to condemn this, and you've provided justification for why they are necessary. My original interpretation of your comment that was therefore correct with that caveat that you take issue with the term "concentration camp". First of all, why is my personal condemnation so important to you? I will not be coerced into making statements for the satisfaction of others, as I think it’s a disingenuous form of argument. It would be like me asking you to condemn the ethnic cleansing of Han Chinese by Uighers during the Urumqi riots -why should I need that condemnation from you and why should you need to vindicate yourself for me? I have already stated that I will always condemn the detainment of innocents. There should be enough information there for you to extrapolate what I do and do not condemn. Secondly, in all of my comments, I have never denied that the Chinese government is operating ideological re-education camps. I have disputed accusations that they are primarily operate as ethnic concentration camps. I have also disputed the purpose, the scale, and the characterization of the camps. There is zero evidence that they “happen to contain almost exclusively Uighur people”, though I personally believe that many of them are, given the nature of the terrorist incidents in the region. > My original interpretation of your comment that was therefore correct with that caveat that you take issue with the term "concentration camp". This is your original interpretation of my comment: >The strongest possible interpretation of "You can't judge China by the same standards as modern, highly educated western democracies" is that it's wrong to judge China for locking up more than a million people of a specific ethnicity in concentration camps. Your original interpretation of my comment is still completely incorrect because I have never made the statement “it's wrong to judge China for locking up more than a million people of a specific ethnicity in concentration camps”. You keep trying to make it seem as though I’ve said this, but you can’t, because I didn’t. >When there are systemic injustices it is appropriate to condemn the system. Where is your proof that there are systematic injustices? Provide proof that three million Uigher Muslims have been put into concentration camps because of their ethnicity as an official policy of the CCP. Provide proof that they are being tortured and forced into hard labour as an official policy of the CCP. We’re not talking about the kind of proof that arises from “journalists” who have never set foot in the region. We’re not talking about the kind of proof that arises from satellite images either (not sure if you still remember all the satellite images of Saddam’s WMD facilities). If you believe that putting several thousand people into “re-education” camps against their will because of possible extremist ideology is an injustice, then you are free to condemn that if you wish. > The vast majority of racial injustice in the US isn't a matter of official policy either, yet it's absurd that you would refuse to condemn the Justice system for the end result. Why on earth would that be absurd? This argument makes no sense to me. If the US justice system worked 100% correctly the way it was intended to work, there would not be any racial injustices, correct? So why would it make sense to blame the US justice system for abuses that arose organically, despite what is written in law? Arresting someone because of their skin colour is illegal according to US law. By your logic, the fact that individual police officers choose to racially profile people anyway should be blamed on the law? That’s simply not logical. Why would it be absurd to refuse to condemn the justice system for abuses arising from individual police officers’ racial prejudices, when the justice system specifically makes this type of discrimination illegal? Interested in reading your explanation. > Many non media groups have made similar allegations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, The Government of Turkey, and The US State Department. This isn't a media conspiracy theory. Amnesty international interviewed over a hundred people who claim that their relatives are missing. They interviewed people who claimed to have been tortured in the camps. To me, that alone is enough evidence for the world to demand answers. If a 100 interviews from people with missing relatives is enough to convince you that three million Uighers are being systematically detained and tortured because of their ethnicity, then your standard for what constitutes evidence is much lower than mine. Without adequate proof, these allegations are no different and no better than a politically motivated conspiracy theory. It's enough evidence for the world to demand answers but it's not enough evidence for the wholesale indictment that's going on right now.