3 ms·

They're using "genocide" in the same sense of the word as people who allege "white genocide", i.e., to mean that policies are reducing fertility of a certain de

by dilap 6y ago

They're using "genocide" in the same sense of the word as people who allege "white genocide", i.e., to mean that policies are reducing fertility of a certain demographic. Specifically, they allege: > the use of arbitrary detention, political re-education, forced labour, torture and forced sterilization The traditional, dictionary definition of genocide is "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group". To use genocide in this other sense seems to me disingenous; it's an attempt to invoke the strong emotional reaction we have to mass-killings when that is not what is alleged to be ocurring. It is, in a sense, fake news: many people will see just the headlines, and assume that China is in fact carrying out vast, demographically targeted killings.

ygjb 6y ago
No, they aren't. They are using genocide as a generally accepted legal term, and not a dictionary definition, or an interpretation of the root words that make up the word. Read the definition of genocide as it pertains to international law by reviewing the UN page on the topic[1]. There is a specific meaning, and it relates to the intention of destroying the Uigher people as a cultural identity through a campaign of imprisonment, physical harm, forced sterilization and family separations. Each of those are detailed in well respected publications around the world, and links to the articles backing that can be found by reviewing the citations on the Wikipedia article on the Uigher Genocide[2]. [1]https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide
- dilap 6y ago
  Ah, I see. Interesting. So the claim is (I presume) that China is "imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group" with "intent to destroy". Fair enough. (It's too late to edit my comment, but I would strike out the disingenuous claim if I could.)
DanBC 6y ago
> In contemporary international law the crime of genocide is part of the broader category of “crimes against humanity,” which were defined by the Charter of the International Military Tribunal (Nürnberg Charter). The charter granted the tribunal jurisdiction to indict and try the leaders of the Nazi (Nazi Party) regime for inhumane acts committed against civilians, as well as for acts of persecution on political, racial, or religious grounds; in so doing, it also contributed to the international criminalization of other forms of abusive conduct. The momentum created by the Nürnberg trials and the ensuing revelations of Nazi atrocities led to the passage by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly of Resolution 96-I (December 1946), which made the crime of genocide punishable under international law, and of Resolution 260-III (December 1948), which approved the text of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the first UN human rights treaty. The convention, which entered into force in 1951, has been ratified by more than 130 countries. Although the United States played a major role in drafting the convention and was an original signatory, the U.S. Senate did not ratify it until 1988. > Article 2 of the convention defines genocide as > any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: > (a) Killing members of the group; > (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; > (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; > (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; > (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. This is from Encyclopaedia Britannica 2010

by dilap 6y ago

ygjb 6y ago

No, they aren't. They are using genocide as a generally accepted legal term, and not a dictionary definition, or an interpretation of the root words that make up the word. Read the definition of genocide as it pertains to international law by reviewing the UN page on the topic[1]. There is a specific meaning, and it relates to the intention of destroying the Uigher people as a cultural identity through a campaign of imprisonment, physical harm, forced sterilization and family separations. Each of those are detailed in well respected publications around the world, and links to the articles backing that can be found by reviewing the citations on the Wikipedia article on the Uigher Genocide[2]. [1]https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide

dilap 6y ago
Ah, I see. Interesting. So the claim is (I presume) that China is "imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group" with "intent to destroy". Fair enough. (It's too late to edit my comment, but I would strike out the disingenuous claim if I could.)

DanBC 6y ago

> In contemporary international law the crime of genocide is part of the broader category of “crimes against humanity,” which were defined by the Charter of the International Military Tribunal (Nürnberg Charter). The charter granted the tribunal jurisdiction to indict and try the leaders of the Nazi (Nazi Party) regime for inhumane acts committed against civilians, as well as for acts of persecution on political, racial, or religious grounds; in so doing, it also contributed to the international criminalization of other forms of abusive conduct. The momentum created by the Nürnberg trials and the ensuing revelations of Nazi atrocities led to the passage by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly of Resolution 96-I (December 1946), which made the crime of genocide punishable under international law, and of Resolution 260-III (December 1948), which approved the text of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the first UN human rights treaty. The convention, which entered into force in 1951, has been ratified by more than 130 countries. Although the United States played a major role in drafting the convention and was an original signatory, the U.S. Senate did not ratify it until 1988. > Article 2 of the convention defines genocide as > any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: > (a) Killing members of the group; > (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; > (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; > (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; > (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. This is from Encyclopaedia Britannica 2010