Jul 17, 2020Evil, evil regime. F*** religion but this is what state atheism manifests as.
Jul 17, 2020·1 reply
krishna boundit's also probably more like they just don't care since it's not being done expansively, the hard truth is that most cultures dont really care about this type of stuff as long as it doesnt reach outside the borders of the participating country. near unlimited self-determination isnt that weird or foreign of a concept to most countries; like, for example, you think Saudi Arabia isn't on board with countries wanting to do whatever tf they want? The culture gap in universalist global morality vs relative self-determination is really only a western-european concept. This doesn't mean they necessarily endorse or agree, just that they don't think any form of intervention or condemnation matters if it's domestic. This is one of those things which we haven't really figured out, the whole local vs global morality thing. Admittedly I think a lot of western people struggle with this too; wanting to be non-interventionalist but also wanting to assert morality.
For the record I'm obviously not endorsing any of this as I've said earlier in the thread, I'm just saying the international situation regarding it is a lot more complicated than simply foreign policy relations or single morality decision-makingNah not rly there are these types of votes in the UN for other issues as well and it's not like it's always only the West that condemns it if it's a domestic issue
- Jul 17, 2020·1 replyScratchin Mamba
Nah not rly there are these types of votes in the UN for other issues as well and it's not like it's always only the West that condemns it if it's a domestic issue
meant in general not just in the UN
- Jul 17, 2020·1 replykrishna bound
meant in general not just in the UN
I know but I just disagree with the idea that condemning domestic oppression is unique to Western countries.
- Jul 17, 2020·1 replyScratchin Mamba
I know but I just disagree with the idea that condemning domestic oppression is unique to Western countries.
I would say that I don't think that in reality it's as clean cut as west/non-west but i definitely think it falls along those lines more than not and its not uncommon have different views of what constitutes oppression and what constitutes involvement. like some countries may look at stuff abroad and be like "yeah that's kinda messed up i guess, but not my problem". especially on a civilian level, not necessarily governmental which is obv more complicated because of global relations like trade.
- Jul 17, 2020·1 replykrishna bound
I would say that I don't think that in reality it's as clean cut as west/non-west but i definitely think it falls along those lines more than not and its not uncommon have different views of what constitutes oppression and what constitutes involvement. like some countries may look at stuff abroad and be like "yeah that's kinda messed up i guess, but not my problem". especially on a civilian level, not necessarily governmental which is obv more complicated because of global relations like trade.
But this can't be reduced to that because Turkish civilians for example care way more about this than any Western civilians regardless of their government's stance.
Same with Muslims and Israel's treatment of Palestinians, or Africans and South-African apartheid.
There are other factors that are more important than some deeply rooted ideological differences between Western and non-Western countries that you're making the case for.
- Jul 17, 2020
NakedBalenciagaYou sound ignorant
ironic
- Jul 17, 2020Scratchin Mamba
But this can't be reduced to that because Turkish civilians for example care way more about this than any Western civilians regardless of their government's stance.
Same with Muslims and Israel's treatment of Palestinians, or Africans and South-African apartheid.
There are other factors that are more important than some deeply rooted ideological differences between Western and non-Western countries that you're making the case for.
you're right, i would agree there are other factors involved and i was oversimplying it a little in how i was originally describing it
OPJul 17, 2020- Jul 17, 2020·1 reply
Number of Mosques in Xinjiang in 1989: 2,000.
Number of Mosques in Xinjiang in 2020: 24,000 (renovated, restored, or rebuilt total)Conclusion: the Chinese government is trying to destroy Islam in Xinjiang. By building 22,000 mosques.
Jul 17, 2020·1 reply
KuntaKinteBro people like him are why people who arent susceptible to western fear mongering concerning socialism and communism end up hating socialists/communist.
When you end up shaking your ass every f***ing time to absolve literal s***hole countries, you look like a tool. Literal "It looks like Noam Chomsky was 3 statements from denying the Cambodian gencoide" tier
"Oh bro, only western countries are siding with the US"
??? As opposed to f***ing North Korea, Russia, Nigeria (China is literally investing heavily in Africa), the UAE, etc...
How stupid do you have to be to willingly make this comparison??? Utter lack of critical thinking to think the average person is going to side against Japan, New Zealand, etc for Russia, NK, China, etc.
How do you possess such a low level of self awareness.
The worst part is, how if I google this Uighur denialism s*** it all leads back to some communism reddit. Why the f*** are you caping for f***ing regimes this hard when you yourself dont even believe them to be communist??? Stop trying to have your cake and eat it too.
Thats not @ you btw. Its at the clowns youre speaking with
It showcases that the Imperial Core wants to do away with China, China is such a massive threat to the imperial core they will manufacture consent for a war against them.
- Jul 17, 2020Scratchin Mamba
The fact that other countries are siding with China over the US here has more to do with China being less predatory in their foreign policy and trade deals than the credibility of the claims being made about China.
Look how many Muslim countries are opposing China in this, look how many are in favour of their actions, you can claim it’s strictly about trade deals but it is not
sace 👍Jul 18, 2020so... water is wet
Jul 18, 2020·editedVersettianybody thinking China is doing ethnic cleansing should take a step back and consider this:
over the decades, the percentage of minorities in China has been consistently growing.
when the One-Child Policy was in place, it was only forced on the Han population. minorities could have more kids, and can still have more kids.
mosques are being built all the time, there are about 40.000 mosques in China, more than any non-muslim country in the world. the religion is flourishing. it's safer to be a muslim in China than in Europe or the USA.if they're indeed genociding and ethnic cleansing, they're TERRIBLE at it.
and in regards to that dumbass and offensive comparison to the Holocaust, I don't remember the germans putting limits on their own population while letting the jews have kids and build synagogues for them.
just because the Uighur population and # of mosques grew doesn't discount what's happening CURRENTLY.
maybe severely cracking down on the Uighur wasn't high on the agenda of the government until recently when the population reached some particular 'tipping point' or domestic counter-terrorism became more of a focus (not that what's happening now is the right way to handle those things, and please don't engage in 'whataboutism' by saying the U.S. does worse by bombing the Middle East).
'it's better to be a Muslim in China than in Europe/USA' - extremely doubtful insofar as most Western countries have not passed policies similar to this:
- Jul 18, 2020·edited·1 replyPexlivanis
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XiHrkJ_zudQZP1hBIBCgJKKAfAILxEG0cmQGrNH8pIU/
mf linking mediums, blog posts, globaltimes articles, (literally CCP owned/funded), and CGTN articles (ran by a Chinese state-controlled outlet)
yeah i'm definitely going to get objective information from this
- Jul 18, 2020·1 replyMoon
mf linking mediums, blog posts, globaltimes articles, (literally CCP owned/funded), and CGTN articles (ran by a Chinese state-controlled outlet)
yeah i'm definitely going to get objective information from this
I can see that you're linking BBC articles in your above post so I should assume that it is all objective information as well
- Jul 18, 2020·edited·2 repliesPexlivanis
I can see that you're linking BBC articles in your above post so I should assume that it is all objective information as well
it's more about the content of the articles.
the BBC articles are reporting on the objective passage of policies that the Chinese government has admitted to implementing. Admittedly there is some minor opinion passed on said policies from human rights organizations/the Chinese government (so it's not one-sided), but regarding the policies themselves (the primary reason I linked the articles) there's little-no potential for bias to affect the nature of the reporting being done whereas your links are subject to this because they're more or less one-sided opinion pieces that are written by/quote people with evident links to the Chinese government and therefore have a vested interest in engaging in denialism.
- Jul 18, 2020·edited·1 replyMoon· edited
it's more about the content of the articles.
the BBC articles are reporting on the objective passage of policies that the Chinese government has admitted to implementing. Admittedly there is some minor opinion passed on said policies from human rights organizations/the Chinese government (so it's not one-sided), but regarding the policies themselves (the primary reason I linked the articles) there's little-no potential for bias to affect the nature of the reporting being done whereas your links are subject to this because they're more or less one-sided opinion pieces that are written by/quote people with evident links to the Chinese government and therefore have a vested interest in engaging in denialism.
What are you talking about?
How are these not
The most
Trustworthy sources?
Literal schizophrenic compilation of sources with delusional claims in the header like "China using CORONAVIRUS as a BIOWEAPON?"... Like what type of discourse are you engaging in where this is a topic of contention?
Is this an entire google document for individuals who failed research methods to use against people who've never passed grade school?
- Jul 18, 2020·editedKuntaKinte· edited
What are you talking about?
How are these not
The most
Trustworthy sources?Literal schizophrenic compilation of sources with delusional claims in the header like "China using CORONAVIRUS as a BIOWEAPON?"... Like what type of discourse are you engaging in where this is a topic of contention?
Is this an entire google document for individuals who failed research methods to use against people who've never passed grade school?
unreal lmfao
like i dont even care if you're generally gonna cape for communism (not that China is communist)/be anti-USA or whatever but engaging in this level of denialism and deflecting over something as inhumane as this is just sad to see
- Jul 18, 2020·edited·2 repliesMoon
it's more about the content of the articles.
the BBC articles are reporting on the objective passage of policies that the Chinese government has admitted to implementing. Admittedly there is some minor opinion passed on said policies from human rights organizations/the Chinese government (so it's not one-sided), but regarding the policies themselves (the primary reason I linked the articles) there's little-no potential for bias to affect the nature of the reporting being done whereas your links are subject to this because they're more or less one-sided opinion pieces that are written by/quote people with evident links to the Chinese government and therefore have a vested interest in engaging in denialism.
and BBC has no links to UK government? And one of the links have no sources, in the other the BBC quotes itself as the source.
The irony.
You're putting your trust in a publication that has ties to the government that said Huawei is a national security threat, yet Huawei gonna keep providing their 5G for 7 more years, and previous Gs indefinitely. Must be huge security threat 🤡 and the BBC is echoing this s***show instead of calling it out like actual journalists would do.
- Jul 18, 2020·edited·2 repliesVersetti
and BBC has no links to UK government? And one of the links have no sources, in the other the BBC quotes itself as the source.
The irony.
You're putting your trust in a publication that has ties to the government that said Huawei is a national security threat, yet Huawei gonna keep providing their 5G for 7 more years, and previous Gs indefinitely. Must be huge security threat 🤡 and the BBC is echoing this s***show instead of calling it out like actual journalists would do.
Can you Chinese bootlickers flock to a different forum?
Or back to Reddit where you belong??
Are you some kind of Asiatic culture fetishist?
F*** off b
Crazy how to you, ICE is running concentration camps but China isn't?
D-da-damn bro
The mods need to ban weirdos like these running obvious gimmick accounts to spread their warped opinions
You would never let niggas named Hitler run around posting with joke avatars of him in Adidas or Supreme
Why are all the prolific commies or socialist on this site near fascist adjacent weirdos
- Jul 18, 2020·1 replyPexlivanis
It showcases that the Imperial Core wants to do away with China, China is such a massive threat to the imperial core they will manufacture consent for a war against them.
Do you consider modern day China to be Communist?
- Jul 18, 2020·editedKuntaKinte
Can you Chinese bootlickers flock to a different forum?
Or back to Reddit where you belong??
Are you some kind of Asiatic culture fetishist?
F*** off b
Crazy how to you, ICE is running concentration camps but China isn't?
D-da-damn bro
The mods need to ban weirdos like these running obvious gimmick accounts to spread their warped opinions
You would never let niggas named Hitler run around posting with joke avatars of him in Adidas or Supreme
Why are all the prolific commies or socialist on this site near fascist adjacent weirdos
Finished him
