Why I don't think there are "Xinjiang atrocities"？

Post Reply New Topic

This is "The Elephant in the room".

quite possible - but increased pressure from the government might just as well radicalize more Uyghurs, and/or split the people into a radical faction and a pro Chinese faction that will basically disperse and adapt. Either way, my bet is that what will remain of the Uyghur etnicity will tell itself a story of brave defiance of the evil empire.

most of them are monarchies, with the monarchs living off oil exports, though, aren't they? They don't seem to care much about their own people, I wouldn't expect them to argue with trade partners about some other people...

and the actual islamic nationalist places are currently hardly "countries"...

Without resorting to extreme nationalism, the economically more backward groups of peoples who are geographically and culturally connected will eventually be assimilated. Individuals tend to choose a more advanced life.
The Manchu even lost their native language in their own dynasty.

This is an irreversible trend.
I don't think extremism is superior in comparison.

Come to our Western world!
We have cookies!

I have language difficulties.
The skills I have acquired are only valuable in the Chinese world.
As of now, I have not met the corresponding conditions.

And that doesn't really solve the "problem".

I will remain on the sidelines.

Well, the Uyghurs have certainly had an interesting history, and appear to have been rather widespread in the past... Maybe one day they will even return to some of their former glory:

3

Last edited by cyberdad on 22 May 2022, 1:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Or as history has taught us....colonised.
https://thediplomat.com/2020/11/is-chin ... ial-power/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepar ... in-africa/
https://theprint.in/opinion/the-role-ch ... lp/907684/

China's "neocolonialism" is a theory.
Of the two articles you published on China-Africa, the second only introduced the existence and basic situation of the accusation, and held a neutral attitude towards the accusation. And the first text actually refutes the "neocolonial" charge.

And about Sri Lanka's "debt trap":
https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=405984#p9038057
Quite an untenable allegation.

I would dispute both contentions about China's involvement in Africa and Sri Lanka. In the case of Africa I have watched numerous news stories about the unequal arrangements made between greedy African dictators who are basically giving away their countries natural resources (and future) for generous investments in their private Swiss bank accounts (arrangements their predecessors made with unscrupulous western companies).

In addition there have been numerous cases of Chinese companies and expatriates operating and functioning in a most disrespectful manner to the local people that echoes the disgusting conduct of European colonists (some of whom have the audacity to still control the economy of south Africa).

Sri Lanka is an absolute tragedy, China took advantage of the civil war in Sri Lanka by supplying arms to the then military government and thus aiding and abetting (and profiting) from the genocide of the Tamils of northern Sri Lanka. In the aftermath of the civil war in 2009 China entered agreements with successive governments in Sri Lanka in building projects that provided no profit or benefit to Sri Lanka but put the country in debt to China. The biggest loss is the natural harbour of Trincomalee which the Chinese will likely use as a military base in future. Chinese involvement in complete collapse of Sri Lanka is nothing short of evil. But to be fair the government of Sri Lanka largely made this all possible with a series of stupid economic decisions, The worst is banning chemical fertlisilsers and enforcing organic farming as mandatory. That decision will result in mass starvation without foreign aid.

I have reservations about the inclination of this passage.

I am not an expert on Sri Lankan history.
As far as I know, the government had a policy of discriminating against Tamils before the civil war. But there seems to be an Indian shadow behind the extreme nationalism of Tamils.
India sent troops to conduct a three-year "maintenance operation" in Sri Lanka and withdrew after a failure, but when they evacuated, they released 1,500 members of the Tamil extremist group, the Tamil Tigers, they were holding.
And this group subsequently carried out what can be called terrorist attacks on both India and Sri Lanka. And, to carry out the massacre of the main ethnic civilians and Muslim communities.
In the civil war that followed, the Tamil Tigers used civilians as human shields in areas of their control - and I wouldn't be surprised if that was one of reasons for the "genocide" accusation.

I don't think it is extremely unethical to deal with either party in this pot of soup.

I have followed Sri Lankan politics since the Sri Lankan government of JR Jayawardene conducted a pogrom against Tamil civilians across the island as retribution for the deaths of security forces in 1982,

During the British colonial administration Tamils (an ethnic minority) were given all the professional and public service jobs because they were deemed more intelligent than the majority Sinhala population. A scenario that played out in India where Tamil brahmins were over-represented in Indian politics. Thus in Sri Lanka they gained a reputation similar to the jews in Germany. (A curious side fact is that South Asians (despite the US media stereotyping academic success of east Asians) are the most successful community in the United States and the most successful south Asian community are Sri Lankans and the most successful Sri Lankans in the US are Tamils.)

From independence the Sinhala dominated governments have tried to disenfranchise the Tamils to the point where in 1983 they escalated harassment to outright murder and the Tamils had no choice but to create an insurgency movement largely to protect civilians living in their homelands.

I agree the Tamil tiger movement conducted unethical acts on both Sinhala people and on their own people. But ultimately the Sinhalese government (who by the way were supplied weapons and training from Israel's Mossad, South African apartheid government, Pakistan's military and eventually China). A curious occurrence was the joint support the Sinhalese dictators received from both India and Pakistan concurrently but for completely different reasons. Pakistan was making overtures to Sri Lanka and wanted alliances. India was worried about Tamil separatism in India

(just on a side note: another curiosity is the Chinese government provided money for a Tamil speaking radio station which was set up with Chinese journalists trained to speak in the Tamil language and broadcast from China from 1948 up to now). It's one of the oldest foreign radio programs beamed into India and directed at Tamil people. One of the broadcasters (a Chinese woman) visited India about 20 years ago and was greeted like a celebrity in Tamil lands where people were amazed to meet a young Chinese woman who was fluent in Tamil.)

But I digress. Following the collapse of the Tigers in 2009, the process of rebuilding started. China jumped in to secure most if not all the building contracts. The rest (as they say) was history (leads on the my earlier post about China's involvement in the collapse of the Sri Lankan economy).

I actually mentioned this in a discussion with you about the culture of the South Asian region. About two months ago in my memory.

After an archaeological excavation in the late 21st century, a certain Chinese woman was found to be actually a descendant of the ancient royal family of Ceylon. She and her family had previously kept this a secret and had no idea it actually corresponded to Sri Lanka.
She later became a diplomatic bridge between China and Sri Lanka/Tamil. I heard she was seen as part of the modern royal family.

Insert a piece of historical knowledge. Issues concerning the modern history of race/nation/ethnic in China.
Five Races Under One Union
At the end of the Qing Dynasty, the northwest region (Hui, which at that time refers to all Muslims) was invaded by Tsarist Russia, the southwest region (Tibetan) was invaded by Britain, and the northeast region (Mongolians, Manchus and some Han people) was invaded by Japan and Tsarist Russia. The main body of the Han ethnicity faces more complex interference. And the weak Qing government had lost its actual control in Xinjiang and Tibet when the Qing Dynasty collapsed.

This established the concept of multi-ethnic alliances in the later anti-Qing and anti-colonial struggles. That is, only by uniting and building the concept of the Chinese nation can survive. The translation of the concept of nation/ethnic is politically and deliberately confused.
"Five races/ethnic" does not mean that other ethnics are not regarded as the Chinese nation, but at that time other ethnics did not have influential independent armed forces, so no political statement was required.

Namely, the claim to Xinjiang/Tibet exists in every Chinese regime after the Qing Dynasty.
Including the Beiyang government , the Nanjing Kuomintang government and the current Taiwan Kuomintang government of the Republic of China. The People's Republic of China merely inherited the territorial claims of the Republic of China.


I'm not sure how the Western media tells the history of Xinjiang, but I expect that's a very different narrative angle.
And the history I added explains why so many Uyghurs are not interested in secession or "international impact".


Affirmative action in China
The contentious point of the ethnicl affirmation action is that many ethnic groups who are not very different still enjoy preferential treatment, even if they are not actually discriminated against. (It's hard to think that you will be discriminated against without being recognized by others.）
The main argument against is that equality in education should be based on actual poverty levels rather than ethnicity. Otherwise, it would be extremely difficult for the Han nationality living in ethnic minority areas to go to higher education, which would instead create an artificial confrontation. I personally, as a minority, quite support this claim.
As far as I know, this push for reform has not yet included the use of separate languages and easily identifiable ethnic groups.

There were prehistoric connections between most of east Asia with southern India (land of the Tamils). It is therefore not surprising that many Tamil words are present in both Korean and Japanese

Here is a cute conversation between a Tamil girl and a Korean girl