4 ms·
When people say "there is no evidence of genocide", they mean it in a legal sense. No legal definition of genocide applies to China's domestic policies in Xinji
by pphysch 5y ago
When people say "there is no evidence of genocide", they mean it in a legal sense. No legal definition of genocide applies to China's domestic policies in Xinjiang. The UN and US government both agree on this point; they don't pretend to prosecute China for something they know they can't prove in an international court.
But that's not the point. USG doesn't give a single F--- about distant Muslims, much less Chinese Muslims.
The propaganda effect is the point. And Wikipedia is an important tool for that.
- dragonwriter 5y ago> When people say "there is no evidence of genocide", they mean it in a legal sense. No legal definition of genocide applies to China's domestic policies in Xinjiang. Evidence has been provided specifically to the internationally accepted legal definition of genocide. [0] If that doesn't convince you, that's fine, but there is not “no evidence”. [0] for which, see https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
- pphysch 5y agoAre you referring to when far right racist Adrian Zenz horribly misinterpreted some official Chinese government documents to make his case for "forced birthrate suppression"? Please link this "evidence". The actual primary evidence.
- ignoramous 5y agoWell, I feel your frustration. Indeed the English Wikipedia isn't immune from Systemic (western-anglo) Bias, as one would expect, and there's no one denying that within the community, either: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Systemic_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Systemic_bias