Not only is China indisputably persecuting Uyghurs, but we have far more proof for the genocide in the Xinjiang province than we do for the one in Gaza. Millions of scholars who are not at all associated with either Adrian Zenz or Uyghur separatists agree that the Uyghur genocide is the deadliest, most important, and best documented atrocity of all time. If you need links to the evidence, I can give you as many links as you want.
But first, I need you to solve a CAPTCHA to make sure that you are not a robot.
To prove that you are not a robot, enter the number of trees visible in the image below:
The US tried to foment division in China by funding and organizing Salafi terrorist into Xinjiang, and once its efforts failed, it made lemonade out of its lemon by concocting and promoting a genocide narrative.
The only countries pushing this narrative are the “always the same map” imperial core countries, which just so happen to be largely the same ones supporting Israel’s genocide.
Almost no predominantly-Muslim country buys the Uyghur genocide narrative, because they know it’s bullshit, because they talked to the Uyghurs themselves. https://twitter.com/un_hrc/status/1578003299827171330
#HRC51 | Draft resolution A/HRC/51/L.6 on holding a debate on the situation of human rights in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of #China, was REJECTED.
project syndicate link which is an op-ed site (not news)
a wiki page from an incredibly biased group
a youtube link…
a site calling itself a news site, yet no actual credentials, but seems to be associated with China (Ajit Singh has written Chinese propaganda books)
a substack link
This has to be the least compelling list of evidence one could provide, and yet you get upvotes because it looks like you’ve provided proof of something. All you’ve done is provide a lot of incredibly, seriously biased opinions with no actual facts at all.
I’m absolutely not going to provide sources or even argue with anyone from .ml on an .ml community because it’s pointless. You all do not care about proper sourcing and think it’s even a detractor because it’s “western”. I’m pointing out the problems with the sources for all the other people that are observing that comment and being swayed, because it’s a bunch of baloney.
Critisizing someone’s sources and then refusing to provide any other ones “because it’s pointless” seems a little hypocritical to me.
I’m pointing out the problems with the sources for all the other people that are observing that comment and being swayed, because it’s a bunch of baloney.
So we should trust your word over someone’s who has at least put in the effort to provide sources?
Look, you don’t need to prove anything, but if you’re gonna argue or act like you’re defending people from misinformation, then I’d expect to see more than just “don’t listen to that guy”. It’s not exactly easy finding objective information about various issues in China and filtering out all the American propaganda. Personally, I’d very much appreciate any links that don’t lead to obvious manipulation.
If someone claims to solve string theory and then provides shit sources there is never an obligation to provide sources that solve string theory. Pointing out sources are shit is part of science. I don’t need to provide a counter argument because that’s not the purpose of the conversation. I don’t need to provide proof of the alternative because the only thing I’m trying to accomplish is to stop this liar from spreading misinformation.
A lie can travel around the world before the truth takes a few steps. That’s exactly what that user is trying to do. Post as many lies as possible so that refuting them takes hours if not days if not months or years.
How can you know if the sources really are bad if it’s not obvious aftet reading? Do you just trust a random person’s words? In this case, you’re essentially arbitrarily picking one version over another.
The problem with ‘stopping lies’ is it requires effort, which not everyone may wish to dedicate. I’m by no means denouncing the other person for trying to stop misinformation (assuming that’s the case, since I still have no idea). However, it’s all in vain if they don’t bother to do anything to prove their point.
Anyone can post misinformation as sources, just as anyone can post that the sources are bad. Fundamentally there isn’t a whole lot of difference between the two. If you really feel the need to defend people from being misinformed, some better source or other form of proof, or at the very least a deeper explanation would go a long way.
How is it hypocritical? Either the sources are biased or not. The poster not providing proof for a counterargument is irrelevant. Or do you mean they should provide proof for the original sources being biased?
You’re conflating “proper sourcing” with being western, that’s already an error, and second of all it’s the west that has been most prominently pushing the genocide theory. Of course it’s going to be contested by China. The validity of sources used by posts on YouTube and Medium aren’t in question because of where they are hosted, they are often hosted on these kinds of platforms because opposing western narratives gets you blacklisted.
If that were true then non western sources would have plenty of news articles, yet all ml users post are things directly from Russia or China or “alternative” “sources” like medium (which isn’t a source). There are plenty of regimes that do not align with anything America has to say, yet no news articles from them.
Not really true. We post sources from all over, especially groups like Al Mayadeen that post in English. If we post something in spanish from Granma, for example, people can’t read that.
The first step is to understand the media, which Media Bias/Fact Check and the Ad Fontes Media* are never going to teach you. The only people who are taught it are those who get degrees in marketing, public relations, political science, history, and journalism; and even then only some of them.
The standards are part of RAND’s ongoing project on “truth decay”: a phenomenon that RAND researchers describe as “the diminishing role that facts, data, and analysis play in our political and civic discourse.”
None of it is a secret, though, and it can be learned.
Nobody said anything about MBFC. Good luck, like I said in another comment I’m not going to argue with anyone from .ml. I was pointing out the faults in your sources because they’re not proper sources no matter what region of the world you’re from.
It’s OK to distrust more than one Government, but how anyone can believe the Chineses Government in this matter is beyond me.
Did you not see the insanely violent crack down on Hong Kong Democracy Movement with you own eyes? Do you not remember Tianamen Square? Great Fire-Wall?
Theres liyteraly over 10GB or evidence of the persecution of Uyghurs by the Chinese Government:
The Xinjiang Police Files are said to be leaked documents from the Xinjiang internment camps, forwarded to anthropologist Adrian Zenz from an anonymous source.
Adrian Nikolaus Zenz (born 1974) is a German anthropologist known for his studies of the Xinjiang internment camps and persecution of Uyghurs in China. He is a director and senior fellow in China studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, an anti-communist think tank established by the US government and based in Washington, DC.
Then you should try it, you hypocritical dipshit. You believe everything that comes out of the western propaganda machine without question, and then assume anyone who doesn’t believe them are “believing the Chinese government”
If it were 2002 you would be accusing anyone who didn’t believe Iraq of having WMDs of “believing Saddam!”
Do you not remember Tianamen Square
So do you do this in the opposite direction? When people doubt a claim made by China, do you start randomly bringing up unrelated events from forty years ago. What exactly was the chain of reasoning that made you thought this was relevant? Oh right, there wasn’t one: you’ve just been trained like a literal dog to compulsively blurt out “Tinyman Square!” every time you hear the word “China”.
I’ve already asked another commenter this but it’s valid here too: Would you class the western oppression of dissent to be on the same level as that famous student protest in China?
Only someone misinformed about the 1989 protest and US/CIA/NED-orchestrated, murderously violent riot would ask this, which to be fair is 99% of Westerners.
Edit to add: YouTube took the original video down for “violating YouTube’s terms of service,” but I found a reploaded a copy, splitting it up into three pieces. This is why you don’t know what really happened, because Western corporate media don’t want you to know. They were reuploaded just today; who knows how long they’ll stay up.
[Chinese Intellectual’s founder] Liang [Heng] had come from his New York office, where he serves as the magazine’s foreign editor, to Washington Thursday and Friday to address the board of directors at the National Endowment for Democracy – a substantial financial backer of the magazine – to tell it what he knows, what he thinks and what will possibly happen.
After his arrival in the United States, he earned his master’s degree in literature from Columbia University and secured an initial $200,000 grant from the NED, a private corporation created in 1983 to “strengthen democratic efforts worldwide,” to start his magazine.
That is not to say [Gene] Sharp has not seen any action. In 1989, he jetted off to China to witness the uprising in Tiananmen Square. In the early 1990s, he sneaked into a Myanmar rebel camp at the invitation of Robert Helvey, a retired Army colonel who advised the opposition there. They met when Helvey was on a fellowship at Harvard; the military man thought the professor had ideas that could avoid war.
The firewall isn’t there to keep Chinese people from The Truth. It’s there to keep imperial core meddling out, and to help China develop its own domestic internet services. In contrast, the rest of the world is dependent on / addicted to US internet services from Google/Alphabet, Amazon, Facebook/Meta, Microsoft, etc., which many countries are beginning to regret.
You’re arguing with a guy that doesn’t want to change their mind. He literally sent me a video whose sources contradicted him and guess what happened when I pointed that to him? Never bothered to reply and he still uses that video as proof that he’s right.
Seeing as how I actually watched his video and looked at their sources and other sources and only after that did I reply? Yes. And even to this day I still leave room for doubt. I still think the truth is actually somewhere in the middle. Not you, tho. You’re convinced that what you believe is correct.
The US tried to foment division in China by funding and organizing Salafi terrorist into Xinjiang, and once its efforts failed, it made lemonade out of its lemon by concocting and promoting a genocide narrative.
Much like how after China foiled their color revolution attempt in 1989, the CIA had to pivot to the “Tinyman Square Massacre” narrative.
Very much like that, and they’re still getting mileage out of it with no effort, because Lemmitors get an endorphin rush every time they do the CIA’s work for free, the brave defenders of freedom & democracy that they are 🤦♂️
“Authoritarian state” is a bullshit category. Authoritarian states are just states insufficiently subservient to Washington. It’s no more or less coherent than “terrorist state,” which the US uses in the same way.
“Authoritarianism” is the contemporary word for “totalitarianism,” which is just an erudite-seming term for horseshoe theory, which is horseshit. Previously:
Funny thing about Hannah Arendt’s construction of “totalitarianism”: She came from a bourgeois family and so was unsurprisingly anti-communist, and she was funded & promoted by the CIA. Imperialist Propaganda and the Ideology of the Western Left Intelligentsia: From Anticommunism and Identity Politics to Democratic Illusions and Fascism One of the centerpieces of the cultural cold war was the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF), which was revealed in 1966 to be a CIA front. Hugh Wilford, who has researched the topic extensively, described the CCF as nothing short of one of the largest patrons of art and culture in the history of the world. Established in 1950, it promoted on the international scene the work of collaborationist academics such as Raymond Aron and Hannah Arendt over and against their Marxian rivals, including the likes of Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir.
To liberals, “simping so fucking hard” literally just means, "not believing literally every piece of propaganda that right wing western propaganda outlets pump out about them.
If they were old enough to be paying attention in 2002, they would be accusing anyone who didn’t believe Iraq had WMDs of “simping so fucking hard” for Saddam.
If not reeducation, which method would you prefer China use to combat the foreign radical Wahhabism and terrorism spread by the CIA in Xinjiang for the purpose of regional destabilization and regime change?
We all know how the US chose to implement its own war on terror. Muslim majority countries in the Middle East support China’s method.
"Yes, the US does evil shit in the Middle East. Killing brown-skinned practitioners of the other Abrahamic religion overseas is an American tradition.
That still doesn’t change the fact that Iraq is building weapons of mass destruction to attack the USA.
You can’t shit-talk one authoritarian state and cheer on another."
Seriously, how many times do you need to hear it before you western chauvanists realise it’s not about “good or bad”, it’s about trustworthy or untrustworthy.
(Mass dislikes time!)
Yes, the US does evil shit in the Middle East. Killing brown-skinned practitioners of the other Abrahamic religion overseas is as American tradition.
That still doesn’t change the fact that China is persecuting Uyghurs in the Xinjiang province.
You can’t shit-talk one authoritarian state and cheer on another.
But it’s not a fact though? You can’t imagine up some fictional scenario and then just claim it’s a fact; words have meanings
Not only is China indisputably persecuting Uyghurs, but we have far more proof for the genocide in the Xinjiang province than we do for the one in Gaza. Millions of scholars who are not at all associated with either Adrian Zenz or Uyghur separatists agree that the Uyghur genocide is the deadliest, most important, and best documented atrocity of all time. If you need links to the evidence, I can give you as many links as you want.
But first, I need you to solve a CAPTCHA to make sure that you are not a robot.
To prove that you are not a robot, enter the number of trees visible in the image below:
The image isn’t loading for me.
So here it is uploaded:
Previously:
Sources:
This has to be the least compelling list of evidence one could provide, and yet you get upvotes because it looks like you’ve provided proof of something. All you’ve done is provide a lot of incredibly, seriously biased opinions with no actual facts at all.
Would you prefer something from America’s own fox news or New York Times?
As opposed to all those unbiased sources you’ve provided, lol.
I’m absolutely not going to provide sources or even argue with anyone from .ml on an .ml community because it’s pointless. You all do not care about proper sourcing and think it’s even a detractor because it’s “western”. I’m pointing out the problems with the sources for all the other people that are observing that comment and being swayed, because it’s a bunch of baloney.
Disclaimer: not .ml.
Critisizing someone’s sources and then refusing to provide any other ones “because it’s pointless” seems a little hypocritical to me.
So we should trust your word over someone’s who has at least put in the effort to provide sources?
Look, you don’t need to prove anything, but if you’re gonna argue or act like you’re defending people from misinformation, then I’d expect to see more than just “don’t listen to that guy”. It’s not exactly easy finding objective information about various issues in China and filtering out all the American propaganda. Personally, I’d very much appreciate any links that don’t lead to obvious manipulation.
If someone claims to solve string theory and then provides shit sources there is never an obligation to provide sources that solve string theory. Pointing out sources are shit is part of science. I don’t need to provide a counter argument because that’s not the purpose of the conversation. I don’t need to provide proof of the alternative because the only thing I’m trying to accomplish is to stop this liar from spreading misinformation.
A lie can travel around the world before the truth takes a few steps. That’s exactly what that user is trying to do. Post as many lies as possible so that refuting them takes hours if not days if not months or years.
How can you know if the sources really are bad if it’s not obvious aftet reading? Do you just trust a random person’s words? In this case, you’re essentially arbitrarily picking one version over another.
The problem with ‘stopping lies’ is it requires effort, which not everyone may wish to dedicate. I’m by no means denouncing the other person for trying to stop misinformation (assuming that’s the case, since I still have no idea). However, it’s all in vain if they don’t bother to do anything to prove their point.
Anyone can post misinformation as sources, just as anyone can post that the sources are bad. Fundamentally there isn’t a whole lot of difference between the two. If you really feel the need to defend people from being misinformed, some better source or other form of proof, or at the very least a deeper explanation would go a long way.
So like
If someone claims there’s totally a genocide
Then provides shit sources…
🤔
🤔 I wonder who would do that?
How is it hypocritical? Either the sources are biased or not. The poster not providing proof for a counterargument is irrelevant. Or do you mean they should provide proof for the original sources being biased?
You’re conflating “proper sourcing” with being western, that’s already an error, and second of all it’s the west that has been most prominently pushing the genocide theory. Of course it’s going to be contested by China. The validity of sources used by posts on YouTube and Medium aren’t in question because of where they are hosted, they are often hosted on these kinds of platforms because opposing western narratives gets you blacklisted.
If that were true then non western sources would have plenty of news articles, yet all ml users post are things directly from Russia or China or “alternative” “sources” like medium (which isn’t a source). There are plenty of regimes that do not align with anything America has to say, yet no news articles from them.
Not really true. We post sources from all over, especially groups like Al Mayadeen that post in English. If we post something in spanish from Granma, for example, people can’t read that.
Wow, I wonder why there aren’t any Western corporate media sources with a Media Bias/Fact Check seal of approval…
Previously:
Nobody said anything about MBFC. Good luck, like I said in another comment I’m not going to argue with anyone from .ml. I was pointing out the faults in your sources because they’re not proper sources no matter what region of the world you’re from.
It’s OK to distrust more than one Government, but how anyone can believe the Chineses Government in this matter is beyond me.
Did you not see the insanely violent crack down on Hong Kong Democracy Movement with you own eyes? Do you not remember Tianamen Square? Great Fire-Wall?
Theres liyteraly over 10GB or evidence of the persecution of Uyghurs by the Chinese Government:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_Police_Files
I can understand not wanting to believe/trust the US and EU Govs, but trusting the Chinese Government is (IMO) insane.
Yeah… not suspicious at all.
Then you should try it, you hypocritical dipshit. You believe everything that comes out of the western propaganda machine without question, and then assume anyone who doesn’t believe them are “believing the Chinese government”
If it were 2002 you would be accusing anyone who didn’t believe Iraq of having WMDs of “believing Saddam!”
So do you do this in the opposite direction? When people doubt a claim made by China, do you start randomly bringing up unrelated events from forty years ago. What exactly was the chain of reasoning that made you thought this was relevant? Oh right, there wasn’t one: you’ve just been trained like a literal dog to compulsively blurt out “Tinyman Square!” every time you hear the word “China”.
That’s the reddit mindset: being as rude, condescending, and smug as humanly possible is fine, but a naughty word is just uncivil.
Previously:
Previously:
The firewall isn’t there to keep Chinese people from The Truth. It’s there to keep imperial core meddling out, and to help China develop its own domestic internet services. In contrast, the rest of the world is dependent on / addicted to US internet services from Google/Alphabet, Amazon, Facebook/Meta, Microsoft, etc., which many countries are beginning to regret.
I already covered Xinjang elsewhere in this post, and if you had read it you would know that Adrian Zenz is a crackpot.
“How anyone can believe the foreigners is beyond me” Let me guess you don’t consider foreigners human
“All foreigners are ‘insane’ btw” calm down hitler
You’re arguing with a guy that doesn’t want to change their mind. He literally sent me a video whose sources contradicted him and guess what happened when I pointed that to him? Never bothered to reply and he still uses that video as proof that he’s right.
As opposed to you people, who are totally open and eager to change your minds
Seeing as how I actually watched his video and looked at their sources and other sources and only after that did I reply? Yes. And even to this day I still leave room for doubt. I still think the truth is actually somewhere in the middle. Not you, tho. You’re convinced that what you believe is correct.
Yeah, as opposed to believing what I believe is incorrect…
Do you even understand the concept of other minds?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
What previous argument that “got deleted within minutes lol”? See this is why Lemmy’s modlog is public.
Removed by mod
Much like how after China foiled their color revolution attempt in 1989, the CIA had to pivot to the “Tinyman Square Massacre” narrative.
Very much like that, and they’re still getting mileage out of it with no effort, because Lemmitors get an endorphin rush every time they do the CIA’s work for free, the brave defenders of freedom & democracy that they are 🤦♂️
I thought I’d blocked ml already. Guess I need to do that again.
How self absorbed do you have to be to announce that?
Blocking ml is a frequent topic of discussion, as it’s widely considered to be propaganda unconnected to reality.
“Authoritarian state” is a bullshit category. Authoritarian states are just states insufficiently subservient to Washington. It’s no more or less coherent than “terrorist state,” which the US uses in the same way.
“Authoritarianism” is the contemporary word for “totalitarianism,” which is just an erudite-seming term for horseshoe theory, which is horseshit. Previously:
.ml simps so fucking hard for authoritarians in Russia and China?
To liberals, “simping so fucking hard” literally just means, "not believing literally every piece of propaganda that right wing western propaganda outlets pump out about them.
If they were old enough to be paying attention in 2002, they would be accusing anyone who didn’t believe Iraq had WMDs of “simping so fucking hard” for Saddam.
You don’t believe there are WMD? What are you some authoritarian simping tankie?
🤣 Their jabs are so far off the mark, but every time they think they’ve hit the bullseye. If they could see our fremdschämen faces…
Yeah
If not reeducation, which method would you prefer China use to combat the foreign radical Wahhabism and terrorism spread by the CIA in Xinjiang for the purpose of regional destabilization and regime change?
We all know how the US chose to implement its own war on terror. Muslim majority countries in the Middle East support China’s method.
Vocational training and extraordinary rendition & torture at a black site are exactly the same. You fool. You absolute baffoon.
Removed by mod
-You in 2014, just before the coup
Bro you haven’t engaged with any of the material we’ve presented in this conversation.
Removed by mod
You forgot the /s
"Yes, the US does evil shit in the Middle East. Killing brown-skinned practitioners of the other Abrahamic religion overseas is an American tradition.
That still doesn’t change the fact that Iraq is building weapons of mass destruction to attack the USA.
You can’t shit-talk one authoritarian state and cheer on another."
Seriously, how many times do you need to hear it before you western chauvanists realise it’s not about “good or bad”, it’s about trustworthy or untrustworthy.
Ironically Abrahamic religion’s influence feeds into liberalism’s good vs. evil worldview.
Philosophy professor Hans-Georg Moeller: If Morality Exists Everything Is Permitted
this post isn’t cheering on china, it’s shitting on the west’s hypocrisy.
also you might want to look up who funded the wahabis who groomed the terrorists that the crackdown is a response to.
Removed by mod