4 ms·

So what if China isn't running death camps per se? The problem is that it's running something of the magnitude of Nazi Germany and getting away with it. No sane

So what if China isn't running death camps per se? The problem is that it's running something of the magnitude of Nazi Germany and getting away with it. No sane government would go 100% Nazi overnight, but if they see that being 50% Nazi is OK, then they might raise it to 75% etc. It's a game like all authoritarian politics. They're probing ground, and many other authoritarians around the world are looking at the result. This is why it's important that China gets called out for its atrocities, and called out hard.

slg 7y ago
That is quite a big "per se" there. My point is there is a huge distinction between concentration camps and death camps. The Nazis progressed from one to the other, but that is not a guarantee (this is where that US reference might come into play). There is a large difference between "let's segregate these people" to "let's kill all of them" and we shouldn't blur the lines between either the Nazi's decision to make that leap or China's decision to as of yet not. I wouldn't have felt the need to make my comment if the original comment was modified with "early Holocaust" rather equating it to the entire thing which inherently includes and is often more synonymous with the death camps. Also what China is doing is not in the magnitude of the Nazis. I am not saying any of this to defend China. I just want these things clear because this is the type of rhetoric that is often used by Holocaust deniers.
- akiselev 7y ago
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but these aren't segregation centers. There's a big difference between "let's segregate these people" and "let's re-educate these people." China seems to be well into the re-education process and while they may not have trains headed to death camps, I think it's more accurate to say that they are closer to those death camps than they are to Jim Crowe laws, having already surpassed cases like re-education boarding schools [1] which AFAIK are considered genocide by international law. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian_boarding_schools https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian_boarding_schoo...

slg 7y ago

That is quite a big "per se" there. My point is there is a huge distinction between concentration camps and death camps. The Nazis progressed from one to the other, but that is not a guarantee (this is where that US reference might come into play). There is a large difference between "let's segregate these people" to "let's kill all of them" and we shouldn't blur the lines between either the Nazi's decision to make that leap or China's decision to as of yet not. I wouldn't have felt the need to make my comment if the original comment was modified with "early Holocaust" rather equating it to the entire thing which inherently includes and is often more synonymous with the death camps. Also what China is doing is not in the magnitude of the Nazis. I am not saying any of this to defend China. I just want these things clear because this is the type of rhetoric that is often used by Holocaust deniers.

akiselev 7y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but these aren't segregation centers. There's a big difference between "let's segregate these people" and "let's re-educate these people." China seems to be well into the re-education process and while they may not have trains headed to death camps, I think it's more accurate to say that they are closer to those death camps than they are to Jim Crowe laws, having already surpassed cases like re-education boarding schools [1] which AFAIK are considered genocide by international law. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian_boarding_schools https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Indian_boarding_schoo...