What do you think happens to people in western countries spreading terrorist propaganda? Right they sent them to prison.
Also western intelligence seems to be not opposed to the concept of early deradicalisation, here is an interesting take from Richard Barrett, former director of global counter-terrorism at MI6:
We need to get to potential terrorists before radicalisation, not afterwards
Once an individual has fallen for extremist propaganda, it’s hard to change their mind. Better to spot the early signs
Imagine you could go back in time and have an actual state power in Iraq, instead of the hollow shell US contractors left it with, and implement adequate deradicalisation programmes.
I figured ‘use various measures to target people prone to far right extremism, teach them why that’s wrong, then provide employment, while investing in the region to address the material conditions that led to the unrest’ was the nuanced approach.
I’m sure there are ways it can be improved, and I’m sure their approach has its excesses. I’m just so far unconvinced that there’s any better historic approach to draw upon.
The American South is a region filled with religious extremists, some of whom have already radicalized to the point of committing acts of terrorism. Should we make it its own country and fund their schools to boot? Is that likely to improve the situation or make it worse?
you can make the same argument for Hamas in Palestine and Herzbollah in Lebanon. Occupying territories which do not want to be occupied is imperialism.
Edit: sorry, I read "American South" as in South America rather than Southern USA. In the case of USA, yes an ideal leftwing government in my world would help fund a grassroots leftist resistance for BIPOC rather than forced re-education camps for poor working class white people
Likely to improve the situation.
Even if the situation does not improve, their failure (and chance to learn from their mistakes) is now in their own hands. Autonomy and self determination are principles that should be upheld... Wherever we can uphold them.
The CPC could give up and surrender Xinjiang to ISIS. This option condemns millions of people to living under a fundamentalist Islamic State, including many non-Muslims and non-extreme Muslims. This option creates a CIA-aligned state on the border, and jeopardises a key part of the Belt and Road initiative, which is designed to connect landlocked countries for development and geopolitical positioning. This option also threatens the CPC’s legitimacy, as keeping China together is a historical signifier of the Mandate of Heaven.
You dont think "many non-Muslims and non-extreme Muslims" could resist this on a grassroots level - especially if given humanitarian support from China?
I'm well aware of the problems of religious extremism, I just don't believe that putting people you suspect of having sympathies to extremist groups in internment camps to be an appropriate form of combatting it. Rehabilitation programs should certainly be used and I'd definitely support de-radicalisation efforts (e.g messaging) in local communities, but what China actually seems to be doing (taking people they assume might have sympathies to put them in camps against their will) is just indefensible to me. If you're ok with that, fine, we evidently have different values, but I don't think we can pretend this is the only way of going about this here, and there is good reason why other nations with similar issues have not taken the same approach (granted these aren't perfect but you get the picture).
If they’re anything like other western countries, they already do.
Typically it’s standard to have refugees undergo basic language and civics education before integrating them with the rest of the community. The gold standard is to set them up with subsequent employment.
Typically it’s standard to have refugees undergo basic language and civics education before integrating them with the rest of the community. The gold standard is to set them up with subsequent employment.
That would be nice, many are less fortunate, you could point to the camps in Lesbos, or the general treatment of migrants at the south-eastern EU border where they do illegal pushbacks into Serbia instead of taking care of people seeking refuge. You could point to the endless death in the Mediterranean that is just not being televised anymore.
Europe is an inhumane monster, anybody who says otherwise can fight me.
My apologies. I’m speaking mostly from a New Zealand perspective.
Over here, we’re fortunate enough to have Australia take the bulk of the refugees and put them in offshore concentration camps for us, so we don’t get our hands dirty.
But the few refugees we do take, we put through basic courses for a month or two in a camp before integrating into the wider community.
In all fairness, if you make it to ie Germany and you can proof that you come from a country Germany can’t wiggle out of accepting like Syria, you get basically the treatment you mentioned, but if you only flee from poverty in ie Serbia(not part of EU) they send you the fuck back no matter if you’ll end up on the street.
I just wanted to point out what hypocrites we are in Europe. But it seems that, at least your neighbors, are not much different than us.
Uyghurs aren't refugees though. Even if the response is better than the US, it's with taking a critical look at practices that may result in cultural assimilation, a rise in racism against a minority group, and leave a lot of room for individual cases of abuse.
It's not disingenuous because there is significant evidence that the reasons are sincere, as outlined in the original comment. What's your response to the terrorism problem in the region?
That authoritarian governments have used terrorism as a catch-all to pursue their twisted ends before and continue to do so in <not China> even today? Secessionists and militants are consistently branded as brainwashed or outright recruited terrorists by administrations, their agents, and their sympathizers when their power is challenged.
Fine, let's concede that the stated motives are real and legitimate. Is everyone just fine with re-education and cultural assimilation? You deserve freedom only as long as you toe the party/state line? And this is acceptable to people because their goals apparently align? Forgive me for I have libposted but that doesn't sit well with me. Today it's ISIS, who's to say what reason it is tomorrow? I understand these are concrete problems that need to be dealt with one way or the other but the idea of a state having the power to do that is not something I can support, maybe even critically.
My final question is that in a country with a press situation as warped as China, even if it is for national security reasons, how does one establish credibility of a source, external or internal? Because I'm not convinced even by the media in supposedly more "free" and "democratic" countries.
I don't know, even reading my comment now feels like I'm approaching this in bad faith but I don't know what it will take to realign my value system to such an extent that any of this is acceptable. You can ask me to post hog or reply with pigpoopballs, I guess. I'll go through the other comments here on my own time too.
I kind of feel like that's a slippery slope because it can be flipped on you just as easily, the only difference being who is in power. But I understand where you're coming from.
Is everyone just fine with re-education and cultural assimilation? You deserve freedom only as long as you toe the party/state line? And this is acceptable to people because their goals apparently align? Forgive me for I have libposted but that doesn’t sit well with me. Today it’s ISIS, who’s to say what reason it is tomorrow?
I can’t tell you who it will be tomorrow, but yesterday it was Pu Yi, the last emperor of China. Rather than executing him and all his relatives, like the Bolsheviks did to the Romanovs, the CPC reformed him and had him live as a gardener.
but the idea of a state having the power to do that is not something I can support, maybe even critically.
The 2009 Urumqi riots were triggered when news of a few Uyghurs working outside of Xinjiang being murdered by a mob of Han over a misunderstanding made its way back.
The Uyghur populace killed hundreds of Han on the streets, encouraged and coordinated in part by an unfiltered Facebook.
The Han populace prepares to mobilise and fight back, but was stopped by the police.
I’m telling you this to suggest that the inclinations of the masses might not be the best mechanisms to rely on for resolving ethnic tensions and right wing radicalisation.
My final question is that in a country with a press situation as warped as China, even if it is for national security reasons, how does one establish credibility of a source, external or internal? Because I’m not convinced even by the media in supposedly more “free” and “democratic” countries.
Chinese media tends to have a different tone to western media. I don’t think it’s inherently less trustworthy, but it’s different. That’s why, in the above post, I keep references to Chinese media to a minimum, and instead rely on western secondary sources, and leaked Chinese primary sources used by western media. It’s not perfect, but it’s about as good as I can get.
Can't believe 'ISIS existed so we have to put all these Muslims in camps' is an actual take
What do you think happens to people in western countries spreading terrorist propaganda? Right they sent them to prison.
Also western intelligence seems to be not opposed to the concept of early deradicalisation, here is an interesting take from Richard Barrett, former director of global counter-terrorism at MI6:
And why should what western countries do make a difference? Are they the epitome of virtue now?
Also, you're literally engaging in right wing talking points when you describe all the Muslims in the province as terrorists or terrorist sympathisers
I'm not doing that, I don't know where you get that impression, but okay.
Imagine you could go back in time and have an actual state power in Iraq, instead of the hollow shell US contractors left it with, and implement adequate deradicalisation programmes.
Would you do so? Or would you wait a few years, then bomb Raqqa to rubble?
I feel like there's room for nuance between doing whatever the fuck the US did and putting Muslims in camps
I figured ‘use various measures to target people prone to far right extremism, teach them why that’s wrong, then provide employment, while investing in the region to address the material conditions that led to the unrest’ was the nuanced approach.
I’m sure there are ways it can be improved, and I’m sure their approach has its excesses. I’m just so far unconvinced that there’s any better historic approach to draw upon.
If you know of any, please let me know.
leave Xinjiang as an autonomous zone, continue to offer voluntary education and work programs and welcome any refugees to China. Carrot vs stick.
The American South is a region filled with religious extremists, some of whom have already radicalized to the point of committing acts of terrorism. Should we make it its own country and fund their schools to boot? Is that likely to improve the situation or make it worse?
deleted by creator
you can make the same argument for Hamas in Palestine and Herzbollah in Lebanon. Occupying territories which do not want to be occupied is imperialism.
Edit: sorry, I read "American South" as in South America rather than Southern USA. In the case of USA, yes an ideal leftwing government in my world would help fund a grassroots leftist resistance for BIPOC rather than forced re-education camps for poor working class white people
There is a difference between giving the Palestinians their country back vs making a new country to placate religious extremists
It's not "making a new country" it's recognizing autonomy of the people of Xinjiang.
Is the U.S. occupying Mississippi and Alabama?
They should
yeah the american government needs to fuck off and recognise indigenous sovereignty.
Likely to improve the situation. Even if the situation does not improve, their failure (and chance to learn from their mistakes) is now in their own hands. Autonomy and self determination are principles that should be upheld... Wherever we can uphold them.
Do you really think that's what would happen if Xinjiang was given autonomy?
Yes
You dont think "many non-Muslims and non-extreme Muslims" could resist this on a grassroots level - especially if given humanitarian support from China?
deleted by creator
Would you say the same about Muslims in Germany? Do you think Germany should be putting all the Muslims in camps?
What evidence is the claim that China is putting all Muslims in camps based on? If you don't mind me asking.
deleted by creator
Good take.
deleted by creator
I would never trust any level of government in the US to humanely run a re-education camp.
deleted by creator
I'm well aware of the problems of religious extremism, I just don't believe that putting people you suspect of having sympathies to extremist groups in internment camps to be an appropriate form of combatting it. Rehabilitation programs should certainly be used and I'd definitely support de-radicalisation efforts (e.g messaging) in local communities, but what China actually seems to be doing (taking people they assume might have sympathies to put them in camps against their will) is just indefensible to me. If you're ok with that, fine, we evidently have different values, but I don't think we can pretend this is the only way of going about this here, and there is good reason why other nations with similar issues have not taken the same approach (granted these aren't perfect but you get the picture).
If they’re anything like other western countries, they already do.
Typically it’s standard to have refugees undergo basic language and civics education before integrating them with the rest of the community. The gold standard is to set them up with subsequent employment.
That would be nice, many are less fortunate, you could point to the camps in Lesbos, or the general treatment of migrants at the south-eastern EU border where they do illegal pushbacks into Serbia instead of taking care of people seeking refuge. You could point to the endless death in the Mediterranean that is just not being televised anymore.
Europe is an inhumane monster, anybody who says otherwise can fight me.
My apologies. I’m speaking mostly from a New Zealand perspective.
Over here, we’re fortunate enough to have Australia take the bulk of the refugees and put them in offshore concentration camps for us, so we don’t get our hands dirty.
But the few refugees we do take, we put through basic courses for a month or two in a camp before integrating into the wider community.
Sorry I didn’t mean to attack you.
In all fairness, if you make it to ie Germany and you can proof that you come from a country Germany can’t wiggle out of accepting like Syria, you get basically the treatment you mentioned, but if you only flee from poverty in ie Serbia(not part of EU) they send you the fuck back no matter if you’ll end up on the street.
I just wanted to point out what hypocrites we are in Europe. But it seems that, at least your neighbors, are not much different than us.
Uyghurs aren't refugees though. Even if the response is better than the US, it's with taking a critical look at practices that may result in cultural assimilation, a rise in racism against a minority group, and leave a lot of room for individual cases of abuse.
Loving the recycling of arguments used by famous humanitarian projects like Myanmar and India's camps
Yeah, except this time they're being used and applied correctly instead of used disingenuously by racist twats. Did you even read the fucking post?
It's not disingenuous because I like the guy saying it.
It's not disingenuous because there is significant evidence that the reasons are sincere, as outlined in the original comment. What's your response to the terrorism problem in the region?
That authoritarian governments have used terrorism as a catch-all to pursue their twisted ends before and continue to do so in <not China> even today? Secessionists and militants are consistently branded as brainwashed or outright recruited terrorists by administrations, their agents, and their sympathizers when their power is challenged.
Fine, let's concede that the stated motives are real and legitimate. Is everyone just fine with re-education and cultural assimilation? You deserve freedom only as long as you toe the party/state line? And this is acceptable to people because their goals apparently align? Forgive me for I have libposted but that doesn't sit well with me. Today it's ISIS, who's to say what reason it is tomorrow? I understand these are concrete problems that need to be dealt with one way or the other but the idea of a state having the power to do that is not something I can support, maybe even critically.
My final question is that in a country with a press situation as warped as China, even if it is for national security reasons, how does one establish credibility of a source, external or internal? Because I'm not convinced even by the media in supposedly more "free" and "democratic" countries.
I don't know, even reading my comment now feels like I'm approaching this in bad faith but I don't know what it will take to realign my value system to such an extent that any of this is acceptable. You can ask me to post hog or reply with pigpoopballs, I guess. I'll go through the other comments here on my own time too.
deleted by creator
I kind of feel like that's a slippery slope because it can be flipped on you just as easily, the only difference being who is in power. But I understand where you're coming from.
I can’t tell you who it will be tomorrow, but yesterday it was Pu Yi, the last emperor of China. Rather than executing him and all his relatives, like the Bolsheviks did to the Romanovs, the CPC reformed him and had him live as a gardener.
The 2009 Urumqi riots were triggered when news of a few Uyghurs working outside of Xinjiang being murdered by a mob of Han over a misunderstanding made its way back.
The Uyghur populace killed hundreds of Han on the streets, encouraged and coordinated in part by an unfiltered Facebook.
The Han populace prepares to mobilise and fight back, but was stopped by the police.
I’m telling you this to suggest that the inclinations of the masses might not be the best mechanisms to rely on for resolving ethnic tensions and right wing radicalisation.
Chinese media tends to have a different tone to western media. I don’t think it’s inherently less trustworthy, but it’s different. That’s why, in the above post, I keep references to Chinese media to a minimum, and instead rely on western secondary sources, and leaked Chinese primary sources used by western media. It’s not perfect, but it’s about as good as I can get.
I really appreciate your insight on this. You've given me a lot to think about.
deleted by creator
Thanks for your reply. Along with a lot of other responses on this post it has given me a lot to look up and think critically about.