5 ms·

I was struck by the Chinese embassy that got banned a couple months ago. They said that their fight against radical islam is good for uighur women.. which is p

I was struck by the Chinese embassy that got banned a couple months ago. They said that their fight against radical islam is good for uighur women.. which is propaganda but also the exact same propaganda that western interventionists use all the time. One is ok, the other is not.

vorpalhex 6y ago
Well it probably helps only one of those is sterilizing muslim women while keeping them in detention camps? Fighting a multi-national ground war against ISIS is a bit different then genocide against your own citizens.
- refenestrator 6y ago
  Like I said, the 'good guys' propaganda is good :) If you track down some of the claims you're making, you'll find that most of them originate with this guy Adrian Zenz who is literally a paid propagandist for his job at the "Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation". Not that anybody who claims to be 'liberating the muslims' is ever up to any good. But some more objective measures might be things like, what is the body count associated with either nation, or has the population been going up or down in a given region.
loceng 6y ago
I don't think it's comparable - however yes, bad actors and bad actions are decentralized to a degree. The different between China and the US is the CCP is in "permanent" tyrannical control vs. the US et al have democratic elections and at least the society, the people, have the chance to evolve society to elect better people who will steer the ship better towards the ideal global society.
- solosoyokaze 6y ago
  Electoral politics in the US has done nothing to stop the US from invading countries around the world (particularly in the Middle East) for the past half a century+. Who would I vote for if I wanted to stop bombing people? There is no one.
  - loceng 6y ago
    Then run for political leadership.
  - pudhbithyftdti 6y ago
    Well, there was, but a lot of people really went out of their way to remove him from power.
dirtyid 6y ago
Also consider that Chinese narrative of Counter Insurgency / Deradicalization is the majority diplomatic position with plurality of UN support. The opposition to XinJiang block is not only smaller, but the "genocide" position is also currently the absolute minority position. It's a case where Twitter content policy goes out of the way to align with US propaganda.
Robotbeat 6y ago
Of course, Twitter DID take action against a Western leader who was leading an attempted coup, and they got absolutely creamed by the “freedom of speech” folks for doing so. So Twitter has been willing to draw the line for Western leaders as well. But that raises a good point: if the media outlets in the lead up to the 2003 Iraq invasion (I won’t even mention the 2001 Afghanistan invasion as there just was not the same level of meaningful opposition) had stood up to Bush’s propaganda even with the limp-wristed[0] way Twitter stood up to Trump’s, perhaps we wouldn’t have been dragged so deep into Middle East interventionism to begin with. [0]It really was.
- refenestrator 6y ago
  That's american-on-american, I was talking about geopolitical interests. I saw reports of posts from air force bases supporting our attempted coup in Bolivia, for example.
  - Robotbeat 6y ago
    Uyghurs in Xinjiang are typically Chinese citizens. Chinese-on-Chinese (in the nationality sense). So it sounds fairly consistent to me.
    - refenestrator 6y ago
      I guess it depends on how you split it, there's not a significant population of Uyghur nationalists of twitter. It's mostly westerners using them as a bludgeon to try and strike the chinese.
      - Robotbeat 6y ago
        A bludgeon? The Chinese government doesn’t need defending from the big bad westerners telling them not to genocide their own people. It’s not about Uyghur nationalism (although I suppose more Uyghurs may desire that if China keeps this up) but about human rights. This eagerness to defend the CCP is not going to help anyone abused by Western nations. One genocide does not justify another.

vorpalhex 6y ago

Well it probably helps only one of those is sterilizing muslim women while keeping them in detention camps? Fighting a multi-national ground war against ISIS is a bit different then genocide against your own citizens.

refenestrator 6y ago
Like I said, the 'good guys' propaganda is good :) If you track down some of the claims you're making, you'll find that most of them originate with this guy Adrian Zenz who is literally a paid propagandist for his job at the "Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation". Not that anybody who claims to be 'liberating the muslims' is ever up to any good. But some more objective measures might be things like, what is the body count associated with either nation, or has the population been going up or down in a given region.

loceng 6y ago

I don't think it's comparable - however yes, bad actors and bad actions are decentralized to a degree. The different between China and the US is the CCP is in "permanent" tyrannical control vs. the US et al have democratic elections and at least the society, the people, have the chance to evolve society to elect better people who will steer the ship better towards the ideal global society.

solosoyokaze 6y ago
Electoral politics in the US has done nothing to stop the US from invading countries around the world (particularly in the Middle East) for the past half a century+. Who would I vote for if I wanted to stop bombing people? There is no one.
- loceng 6y ago
  Then run for political leadership.
- pudhbithyftdti 6y ago
  Well, there was, but a lot of people really went out of their way to remove him from power.

dirtyid 6y ago

Also consider that Chinese narrative of Counter Insurgency / Deradicalization is the majority diplomatic position with plurality of UN support. The opposition to XinJiang block is not only smaller, but the "genocide" position is also currently the absolute minority position. It's a case where Twitter content policy goes out of the way to align with US propaganda.

Robotbeat 6y ago

Of course, Twitter DID take action against a Western leader who was leading an attempted coup, and they got absolutely creamed by the “freedom of speech” folks for doing so. So Twitter has been willing to draw the line for Western leaders as well. But that raises a good point: if the media outlets in the lead up to the 2003 Iraq invasion (I won’t even mention the 2001 Afghanistan invasion as there just was not the same level of meaningful opposition) had stood up to Bush’s propaganda even with the limp-wristed[0] way Twitter stood up to Trump’s, perhaps we wouldn’t have been dragged so deep into Middle East interventionism to begin with. [0]It really was.

refenestrator 6y ago
That's american-on-american, I was talking about geopolitical interests. I saw reports of posts from air force bases supporting our attempted coup in Bolivia, for example.
- Robotbeat 6y ago
  Uyghurs in Xinjiang are typically Chinese citizens. Chinese-on-Chinese (in the nationality sense). So it sounds fairly consistent to me.
  - refenestrator 6y ago
    I guess it depends on how you split it, there's not a significant population of Uyghur nationalists of twitter. It's mostly westerners using them as a bludgeon to try and strike the chinese.
    - Robotbeat 6y ago
      A bludgeon? The Chinese government doesn’t need defending from the big bad westerners telling them not to genocide their own people. It’s not about Uyghur nationalism (although I suppose more Uyghurs may desire that if China keeps this up) but about human rights. This eagerness to defend the CCP is not going to help anyone abused by Western nations. One genocide does not justify another.