4 ms·

At the end of the day, if all the claims about Xinjiang are false and everything is really peachy and rosey as the CCP claims it to be, then they should allow 1

At the end of the day, if all the claims about Xinjiang are false and everything is really peachy and rosey as the CCP claims it to be, then they should allow 100% absolute freedom of the press to go in and check it out. That will however never happen because it's clearly obvious there is something to hide. So far all the CCP has done is allow some journalists to go to specific areas, are followed and controlled and forced to abide by rules and procedures designed to ensure that the CCP sets the narrative. Influencers are taken on tours to the same places, shown the exact same things, etc, and all this happens 100 miles away from where the re-education camps are apparently located. So who do we believe? The guy who is waving a flag saying "guys look at whats going on" or the guy who is saying "you can't come and see here, that guy is lying, hes a liar! He has no credentials, he's western propaganda, hes fake news. There's no need to come here and see anything cos he's lying"

oreally 4y ago
Not saying everything's false btw. My guess is China/CCP doesn't have much trust in western news outlets, hence no freedom of press. Also, you're making a lot of claims on the second guy too. > There's no need to come here and see anything cos he's lying China did invite muslim countries and some other western ones to xinjiang. Some western countries declined to go claiming taint. If you expand the horizon beyond just a matter of hiding information = guilt, you'll see the US has just as much motivation and track record to blow this issue out of proportion on false grounds too, and the power to get away with it (eg. iraq). Based on that they would/should garner far less trust.
- philliphaydon 4y ago
  I don't have much care for the US as I live in Asia (Currently Taiwan) and am from New Zealand. So I'm in no way trying to justify what the US has done or doing and they can be just as guilty. However the two situations are vastly different. The US has a history of reporting on issues that happen on their own turf. Sometimes with positive outcomes, sometimes without any outcome at all. With China, the CCP controls the narrative 100% of the time. When any information is leaked it's stamped out and censored quickly. For example they claim to have 100% resolved poverty. Part of what they did was hand out money to rural area's to help people. When people claimed they never recieved money, or that they were forced to sign paperwork stating they recieved the money when they hadn't, it was quickly censored and scrubbed from social media in China. So can we trust the CCP when they say they got rid of poverty? When the BBC went to Xinjiang. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55666153 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55666153 > Over a period of less than 72 hours in Xinjiang we were followed constantly and, on five separate occasions, approached by people who attempted to stop us from filming in public, sometimes violently. > But the China Daily chooses not to mention that some of our footage was forcibly deleted and we were made to accompany the same police officer to another location so she could review the remaining pictures. > It was also attended by two propaganda officials who were assigned to accompany us for the rest of our time in Kuqa - adding one more car to the long line that followed us wherever we went. > Far from being fake news, our evidence, along with the post-publication propaganda designed to undermine it, is proof of a co-ordinated effort to control the narrative, extending from the shadowy minders in unmarked cars, all the way up to the national government. So it doesn't matter if China invites anyone in, the CCP will tell us what they want us to hear. Not what's actually going on.
  - oreally 4y ago
    From your post, it seems your issue lies mainly with distrust of the CCP. I agree, that's fine. > However the two situations are vastly different. The US has a history of reporting on issues that happen on their own turf. Sometimes with positive outcomes, sometimes without any outcome at all. I'm not sure what you're trying to justify on the US? My interpretation is that it seems more truthful to you at least because you have some aligned values? This where past details really have to come in imo. Consider the times. China is a rising challenger to the current hegemony and historically they will fight on some level. And fighting is dirty. Most people align with the side that has the most shared common values, and make judgements accordingly. They have no time and energy to dive into the details. Knowing that, these entities will try to manipulate you. If you don't want to be manipulated, you just have to spend a little effort on reading up on different narratives and figure out what's relevant.
chrischen 4y ago
I think you fundamentally understand the political difference between China and the US. The US has adopted an information free-for-all and China has specifically adopted a policy of tight control of information flow. “Letting press in” doesn’t necessarily mean the truth will be revealed either, as it merely allows opponents to build their own counter propaganda. But asking them to completely abandon their political ideals of information control is not realistic either. It’s hard to know who to believe if the sources are well funded, because there are ulterior motives on both sides.

oreally 4y ago

Not saying everything's false btw. My guess is China/CCP doesn't have much trust in western news outlets, hence no freedom of press. Also, you're making a lot of claims on the second guy too. > There's no need to come here and see anything cos he's lying China did invite muslim countries and some other western ones to xinjiang. Some western countries declined to go claiming taint. If you expand the horizon beyond just a matter of hiding information = guilt, you'll see the US has just as much motivation and track record to blow this issue out of proportion on false grounds too, and the power to get away with it (eg. iraq). Based on that they would/should garner far less trust.

philliphaydon 4y ago
I don't have much care for the US as I live in Asia (Currently Taiwan) and am from New Zealand. So I'm in no way trying to justify what the US has done or doing and they can be just as guilty. However the two situations are vastly different. The US has a history of reporting on issues that happen on their own turf. Sometimes with positive outcomes, sometimes without any outcome at all. With China, the CCP controls the narrative 100% of the time. When any information is leaked it's stamped out and censored quickly. For example they claim to have 100% resolved poverty. Part of what they did was hand out money to rural area's to help people. When people claimed they never recieved money, or that they were forced to sign paperwork stating they recieved the money when they hadn't, it was quickly censored and scrubbed from social media in China. So can we trust the CCP when they say they got rid of poverty? When the BBC went to Xinjiang. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55666153 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55666153 > Over a period of less than 72 hours in Xinjiang we were followed constantly and, on five separate occasions, approached by people who attempted to stop us from filming in public, sometimes violently. > But the China Daily chooses not to mention that some of our footage was forcibly deleted and we were made to accompany the same police officer to another location so she could review the remaining pictures. > It was also attended by two propaganda officials who were assigned to accompany us for the rest of our time in Kuqa - adding one more car to the long line that followed us wherever we went. > Far from being fake news, our evidence, along with the post-publication propaganda designed to undermine it, is proof of a co-ordinated effort to control the narrative, extending from the shadowy minders in unmarked cars, all the way up to the national government. So it doesn't matter if China invites anyone in, the CCP will tell us what they want us to hear. Not what's actually going on.
- oreally 4y ago
  From your post, it seems your issue lies mainly with distrust of the CCP. I agree, that's fine. > However the two situations are vastly different. The US has a history of reporting on issues that happen on their own turf. Sometimes with positive outcomes, sometimes without any outcome at all. I'm not sure what you're trying to justify on the US? My interpretation is that it seems more truthful to you at least because you have some aligned values? This where past details really have to come in imo. Consider the times. China is a rising challenger to the current hegemony and historically they will fight on some level. And fighting is dirty. Most people align with the side that has the most shared common values, and make judgements accordingly. They have no time and energy to dive into the details. Knowing that, these entities will try to manipulate you. If you don't want to be manipulated, you just have to spend a little effort on reading up on different narratives and figure out what's relevant.

chrischen 4y ago

I think you fundamentally understand the political difference between China and the US. The US has adopted an information free-for-all and China has specifically adopted a policy of tight control of information flow. “Letting press in” doesn’t necessarily mean the truth will be revealed either, as it merely allows opponents to build their own counter propaganda. But asking them to completely abandon their political ideals of information control is not realistic either. It’s hard to know who to believe if the sources are well funded, because there are ulterior motives on both sides.