5 ms·

From a moral perspective, that's maybe one thing. From a legal it might be another - you might be construed as discriminating against them or harassing them bas

From a moral perspective, that's maybe one thing. From a legal it might be another - you might be construed as discriminating against them or harassing them based on their ethnicity, which is in fact valid; if they weren't chinese you wouldn't be discussing it with them. So in that sense I really would think carefully. In fact, don't. If they bring it up themselves, for or against that slightly changes things but frankly if they're supportive of the oppression then doing anything other than telling them "keep that opinion to yourself" is a minefield. Taking them on will most likely blow up in your face. (edit: no 'most likely' about it. It will). If they are against it and wish to discuss it with you and what to do, it's still a danger (I can't say why, more a feeling) and I'd advise them to contact/join an external group, or their MP/representative etc. and leave it at that. Shit like this discussed at work is bad news, I don't see how doing it can make things better. Anyone who disagrees and can make a better suggestion, I'm very willing to learn from. Edit: to those downvoters, I'm NOT saying don't discuss it, I'm saying don't do so at work. It is deeply unlikely anything helpful will come of for anyone, but it is very likely to damage your reputation or even lose you your job. Speak up! Sure, but in the right place and to those whose job it is to make a difference.

cycomanic 6y ago
These are some of the thoughts I've been having as well. On the other hand I'm actually generally interested in how this situation is communicated in China? How much and what do they know about it (note that they left China some years ago). I have to say I also find it chilling to say we can't discuss topics which have political implications for fear of it being construed of harassment. I have been frequently asked about political events/situations in Germany (where I come from), without it feeling like harassment at all.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  > I have been frequently asked about political events/situations in Germany Do those involve anything as awful as what's happening in China? If they were and you were asked to comment, how would it make you feel? > I have to say I also find it chilling to say we can't discuss topics which have political implications Sure you can! Just not at work. Mate, don't do it. Take it from someone who can't keep his mouth shut.
  - katbyte 6y ago
    The “don’t talk politics” at work thing has always confused me, isn’t standing by silent while injustices occur sorta what led to the nazis?
    - refurb 6y ago
      Pro-life/anti-abortion people believe that they are fighting for human rights. Let’s say they start talking to people at work about it. If the conversation stays civilized, no big deal. But they don’t want to limit it to talking. This is about human rights how can you just sit there and do nothing? You’re complicit! Now people are avoiding that person. Team cohesion suffers. People are calling in sick to avoid the stress of it all. Management is dealing with shit from both sides. What would you do if you were running the company? If you want to let people talk politics at work, you can’t just limit it to the politics you agree with.
  - mattigames 6y ago
    "Just not at work" always sounds strange to me, a lot of people know all their friends and acquaintance exclusively from work, so when people is recommended to avoid talking about those issues with coworkers many times the result is for all practical purposes they are being told to avoid talking about the issue at all. I'm not sure what the solution is but "just not at work" doesn't seem to be it.
    - 082349872349872 6y ago
      > a lot of people know all their friends and acquaintance exclusively from work What country is such a workers' paradise? De Tocqueville wrote that the US was a nation whose social life was composed of overlapping circles of voluntary associations, which sounds much more like the situation here than that (to my eyes) dystopic description (of a world where one's only relations are not only by a single path, but that path is tied to the economic), so I'm assuming you're living elsewhere.
    - metrokoi 6y ago
      Work is for talking about work, not anything else. A few cordial off-topic comments here and there are fine, but if I have time to discuss politics at work that's time that I could have spent doing my job, and likely and subsequently more of my free time will be taken finishing up projects. Talking politics == my free time, and I don't want to exchange my leisure hours for talking politics with my co-workers. The entire rest of your life can be talking about politics with your friends, your life shouldn't just be work. It seems the real problem is too much of people's lives is work and so they think they have no time to talk politics.
- dirtyid 6y ago
  XJ is interpreted as a counter-terrorism / COIN operation in China - aka War on Terror. Go look up Uyghur terrorism attacks in China on Global Terrorism DB, there's 100+ that stopped abruptly after XJ security architecture / Strike Hard campaign. Spreading to interior provinces including TianAnMen. Western MSM will report 2009 minority riots and probably stop there, but it was ongoing for until 2017s. Generally, you won't find much mainstream sympathy because Uyghurs were already getting massive affirmative action privileges, and the ones outside of XJ has reputation (right or wrongly) of being Chinese gypsies. You'll find more sympathy from Han in XJ, because they have to deal with apartheid, but even this sympathy is declining due to increased nationalism and domestic propaganda. Overall, average Chinese will find re-education strategy much more humane and western forever wars. And really like... 1-2 million is ~0.1% of the Chinese population. Statistically it's hard to convince them it's a big deal compared to US prison industrial complex. Sure it's whataboutism, but it's also math. The average Chinese is focused on covid recovery, and before that pork prices. XJ/Tibet is just not something on the radar, and there's enough domestic propaganda to counter western propaganda. The bigger unsaid issue is US/Pompeo/China hawks has zero moral credibility in China. For Chinese, the XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly is seen both as a "fairer" minority policy and more effective COIN model. As long as the west jails minorities disproportionately, and dropping bombs on weddings, there's no argument or propaganda to convince Chinese they're not making the better moral choice. E: The even bigger unsaid issue, which every expert musing about the global implication of surveillance authoritarianism but won't publicly entertain is: what if XJ works? There's a reason China has 2X support of the XJ program than US can gather against, from majority Islamic countries no less. It's not just lol-debt trap. There are many parties interested in XJ model working. 80% of the world are flawed democracies or worse, and the overall trajectory is illiberal decline and increased geopolitical instability. There are more rulers who is invested in XJ working than not. The even larger issue than that? West doesn't have a alternative model, we've been flirting with incremental improvements over decade scales whenever our own "contradictions" force our hands, i.e. BLM. That's just not good enough.
  - MagnumOpus 6y ago
    > 1-2 million is ~0.1% of the Chinese population Amazing hot take. Ethnically cleansing millions of people is A-OK as long as your country's population is large enough. That is prime wumaodang logic. > XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly The Chinese model of "ethnocide" -- eradicating the religion, culture and written language of successive minority groups from Manchu to Tibetan, Uighur, Hlai, Zhuang, Oirat Mongols and hundreds of other groups -- is successful in creating a monolithic mass of resource and people subservient to the CCP, to better enrich the CCP Beijing princelings. So understandably it is heavily pushed by media domestically and by the wumao abroad. Nonetheless ethnocide is frowned upon as a crime against humanity these days in the rest of the world (and before you go whatabout on me, yes lots of other countries did it hundreds of years ago). > [Muslim country support for Uighur genocide is] not just lol-debt trap It's also lol-sanctions, lol-trade-war and lol-UN-veto-power, not to speak of the CCP siccing their asymmetric warfare units on you. Muslim countries don't mind pissing off EU or US because those don't bother to get into a pissing match these days (unlike in the cold war era). Mainland Chinese politicians however, are incredibly insecure, thin skinned and obsessed with "face", so any perceived insult and they fund some rival warlord or prince to coup you off the throne...
- throwr432345 6y ago
  The closest analogy I can think of is Conservatives and BLM. Those that support the camps genuinely see them as de-radicalization centres.
labster 6y ago
What does it have to do with ethnicity? He said "mainland Chinese", which is a form of citizenship. I think that all sides would agree that a good fraction of people from Taiwan are ethnically Chinese. As far as I know, citizenship is not a protected class (outside of certain treaties). As for it being a good idea... nope. I wouldn't put myself in a situation where the Chinese government calls my employer and politely asks them to reassign me to the Antarctic branch. It's not a democracy, normal citizens have no power, and expecting your coworkers to do so is putting them and yourself in danger.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  It's still construable as an ethnicity, even in in fact it's just citizenship (but nice distinction). It doesn't have to be what is, only what can be construed in an unfriendly tribunal or court situation.
- triceratops 6y ago
  > As far as I know, citizenship is not a protected class Wouldn't citizenship fall under "national origin"?

cycomanic 6y ago

These are some of the thoughts I've been having as well. On the other hand I'm actually generally interested in how this situation is communicated in China? How much and what do they know about it (note that they left China some years ago). I have to say I also find it chilling to say we can't discuss topics which have political implications for fear of it being construed of harassment. I have been frequently asked about political events/situations in Germany (where I come from), without it feeling like harassment at all.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
> I have been frequently asked about political events/situations in Germany Do those involve anything as awful as what's happening in China? If they were and you were asked to comment, how would it make you feel? > I have to say I also find it chilling to say we can't discuss topics which have political implications Sure you can! Just not at work. Mate, don't do it. Take it from someone who can't keep his mouth shut.
- katbyte 6y ago
  The “don’t talk politics” at work thing has always confused me, isn’t standing by silent while injustices occur sorta what led to the nazis?
  - refurb 6y ago
    Pro-life/anti-abortion people believe that they are fighting for human rights. Let’s say they start talking to people at work about it. If the conversation stays civilized, no big deal. But they don’t want to limit it to talking. This is about human rights how can you just sit there and do nothing? You’re complicit! Now people are avoiding that person. Team cohesion suffers. People are calling in sick to avoid the stress of it all. Management is dealing with shit from both sides. What would you do if you were running the company? If you want to let people talk politics at work, you can’t just limit it to the politics you agree with.
- mattigames 6y ago
  "Just not at work" always sounds strange to me, a lot of people know all their friends and acquaintance exclusively from work, so when people is recommended to avoid talking about those issues with coworkers many times the result is for all practical purposes they are being told to avoid talking about the issue at all. I'm not sure what the solution is but "just not at work" doesn't seem to be it.
  - 082349872349872 6y ago
    > a lot of people know all their friends and acquaintance exclusively from work What country is such a workers' paradise? De Tocqueville wrote that the US was a nation whose social life was composed of overlapping circles of voluntary associations, which sounds much more like the situation here than that (to my eyes) dystopic description (of a world where one's only relations are not only by a single path, but that path is tied to the economic), so I'm assuming you're living elsewhere.
  - metrokoi 6y ago
    Work is for talking about work, not anything else. A few cordial off-topic comments here and there are fine, but if I have time to discuss politics at work that's time that I could have spent doing my job, and likely and subsequently more of my free time will be taken finishing up projects. Talking politics == my free time, and I don't want to exchange my leisure hours for talking politics with my co-workers. The entire rest of your life can be talking about politics with your friends, your life shouldn't just be work. It seems the real problem is too much of people's lives is work and so they think they have no time to talk politics.
dirtyid 6y ago
XJ is interpreted as a counter-terrorism / COIN operation in China - aka War on Terror. Go look up Uyghur terrorism attacks in China on Global Terrorism DB, there's 100+ that stopped abruptly after XJ security architecture / Strike Hard campaign. Spreading to interior provinces including TianAnMen. Western MSM will report 2009 minority riots and probably stop there, but it was ongoing for until 2017s. Generally, you won't find much mainstream sympathy because Uyghurs were already getting massive affirmative action privileges, and the ones outside of XJ has reputation (right or wrongly) of being Chinese gypsies. You'll find more sympathy from Han in XJ, because they have to deal with apartheid, but even this sympathy is declining due to increased nationalism and domestic propaganda. Overall, average Chinese will find re-education strategy much more humane and western forever wars. And really like... 1-2 million is ~0.1% of the Chinese population. Statistically it's hard to convince them it's a big deal compared to US prison industrial complex. Sure it's whataboutism, but it's also math. The average Chinese is focused on covid recovery, and before that pork prices. XJ/Tibet is just not something on the radar, and there's enough domestic propaganda to counter western propaganda. The bigger unsaid issue is US/Pompeo/China hawks has zero moral credibility in China. For Chinese, the XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly is seen both as a "fairer" minority policy and more effective COIN model. As long as the west jails minorities disproportionately, and dropping bombs on weddings, there's no argument or propaganda to convince Chinese they're not making the better moral choice. E: The even bigger unsaid issue, which every expert musing about the global implication of surveillance authoritarianism but won't publicly entertain is: what if XJ works? There's a reason China has 2X support of the XJ program than US can gather against, from majority Islamic countries no less. It's not just lol-debt trap. There are many parties interested in XJ model working. 80% of the world are flawed democracies or worse, and the overall trajectory is illiberal decline and increased geopolitical instability. There are more rulers who is invested in XJ working than not. The even larger issue than that? West doesn't have a alternative model, we've been flirting with incremental improvements over decade scales whenever our own "contradictions" force our hands, i.e. BLM. That's just not good enough.
- MagnumOpus 6y ago
  > 1-2 million is ~0.1% of the Chinese population Amazing hot take. Ethnically cleansing millions of people is A-OK as long as your country's population is large enough. That is prime wumaodang logic. > XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly The Chinese model of "ethnocide" -- eradicating the religion, culture and written language of successive minority groups from Manchu to Tibetan, Uighur, Hlai, Zhuang, Oirat Mongols and hundreds of other groups -- is successful in creating a monolithic mass of resource and people subservient to the CCP, to better enrich the CCP Beijing princelings. So understandably it is heavily pushed by media domestically and by the wumao abroad. Nonetheless ethnocide is frowned upon as a crime against humanity these days in the rest of the world (and before you go whatabout on me, yes lots of other countries did it hundreds of years ago). > [Muslim country support for Uighur genocide is] not just lol-debt trap It's also lol-sanctions, lol-trade-war and lol-UN-veto-power, not to speak of the CCP siccing their asymmetric warfare units on you. Muslim countries don't mind pissing off EU or US because those don't bother to get into a pissing match these days (unlike in the cold war era). Mainland Chinese politicians however, are incredibly insecure, thin skinned and obsessed with "face", so any perceived insult and they fund some rival warlord or prince to coup you off the throne...
throwr432345 6y ago
The closest analogy I can think of is Conservatives and BLM. Those that support the camps genuinely see them as de-radicalization centres.

labster 6y ago

What does it have to do with ethnicity? He said "mainland Chinese", which is a form of citizenship. I think that all sides would agree that a good fraction of people from Taiwan are ethnically Chinese. As far as I know, citizenship is not a protected class (outside of certain treaties). As for it being a good idea... nope. I wouldn't put myself in a situation where the Chinese government calls my employer and politely asks them to reassign me to the Antarctic branch. It's not a democracy, normal citizens have no power, and expecting your coworkers to do so is putting them and yourself in danger.

throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
It's still construable as an ethnicity, even in in fact it's just citizenship (but nice distinction). It doesn't have to be what is, only what can be construed in an unfriendly tribunal or court situation.
triceratops 6y ago
> As far as I know, citizenship is not a protected class Wouldn't citizenship fall under "national origin"?