• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ethnic cleansing makes a comeback — in China

American

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,085
Reaction score
33,411
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d17b48f15cb2

If ethnic cleansing takes place in China and nobody is able to hear it, does it make a sound? That’s what millions of Muslims inside the People’s Republic are asking as they watch the Chinese government expand a network of internment camps and systematic human rights abuses designed to stamp out their peoples’ religion and culture.
Since last year, hundreds of thousands — and perhaps millions — of innocent Uighurs and other ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang region in northwest China have been unjustly arrested and imprisoned in what the Chinese government calls “political re-education camps.” Thousands have disappeared. There are credible reports of torture and death among the prisoners. The government says it is fighting “terrorism” and “religious extremism.” Uighurs say they are resisting a campaign to crush religious and cultural freedom in China. The international community has largely reacted with silence.
Click to expand...
It's seems to me that the silence stems from a notion that it's normal for this stuff to occur in a socialist regime.
 
As ethnic cleansing goes, that is not much. No mass killings, no mass migration

Myanmar and the Rohingya, now that is current ethnic cleansing
 
rocket88 said:
It's normal for Communists. Most Socialists feel differently, but I wouldn't expect that you'd understand that there's a difference.
Click to expand...

"The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin
 
American said:
The result is the same, thanks for pleading guilty.
Click to expand...

No it's not...what are you even talking about? You might wanna hold your appreciation until you find out whether your first remark puts you further in the hole or not... Your statement doesn't make sense. What's your comparison, to make such a claim?
 
OlNate said:
No it's not...what are you even talking about? You might wanna hold your appreciation until you find out whether your first remark puts you further in the hole or not... Your statement doesn't make sense. What's your comparison, to make such a claim?
Click to expand...

You're trying to make a distinction without a difference. You should just be quiet, it'd work better that way.
 
American said:
You're trying to make a distinction without a difference. You should just be quiet, it'd work better that way.
Click to expand...

Really, American? I should keep quiet? Tsk...that sounds like flamebaiting to me, bud. We don't do that here : Civility is a must!

Your own quote made the distinction...by saying one leads to another, they cannot be the same thing... Did that subtlety escape you in your enthusiasm to perpetuate a false equivalency? ;)

Now, you wanna answer the question, or is it just time to admit that maybe, just maybe, you don't know what you're talking about? :)
 
Where's the chorus of complaints from Muslim majority countries about this treatment of the Uighurs....crickets
 
HERA the Stars said:
Where's the chorus of complaints from Muslim majority countries about this treatment of the Uighurs....crickets
Click to expand...

Yes. Muslims believe that all the Muslims around the world are one. So as you rightly say, why are others keeping
quiet?
 
OlNate said:
So, they're not the same...thanks for clarifying. ;)
Click to expand...

It's the same goal, who care's how it's packaged? Well, progressives would care I suppose.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
It's the same goal, who care's how it's packaged? Well, progressives would care I suppose.
Click to expand...

No it's not. :shrug:

Also, as a progressive I have no desire to see more communism in the world, as it's a proven failure. Advocating for that wouldn't be very progressive, would it?

Perhaps a helpful first step would be for you to look up all these words you're using, and actually understand them. After that we'll talk. :)
 
I believe that supposed quote from Lenin -- "The goal of socialism is communism" -- is fake. I'd like to see the reference.

For one thing, it's illiterate: political systems don't have goals. People do, which they sometimes try to realize via political systems.

In any case, the unqualified use of any word like 'socialism' 'communism' 'capitalism' 'liberalism' 'conservatism' -- is just an invitation to semantic confusion, even when used by intelligent people. And unintelligent people are frequently found using them without giving their use any thought (because they have little thought to give).

Here's an assertion that can actually be argued with: "People who believe in most or all of the following: a high minimum wage, strict limits on who can be fired, unlimited immigration, racial quotas for scarce things like agreeable jobs and places at good universities, close government regulation, and often outright ownership, of the economy, and who denigrate the traditional family as the best environment for raising children, and who see most of the problems of the world as being caused by an evil and aggressive West, led by the United States -- these people also want as their eventual ideal society, a society where everything but personal property is owned collectively -- although not by a 'state', which will have withered away -- , and where remuneration is not tied to the quantity or quality of labor an individual does.

I don't believe the second follows from the first, nor is it a logical consequence of it.

In fact, few 'progressives' today (and I'm aware that not many progressives would endorse everything I've listed above and have implied about their beliefs) want full 'socialism', much less 'communism' (whatever that might mean).

Life has shown that the Free Market people are right on the inability of central planning to match the efficiency of the market. When these people -- 'progressives' -- use the word 'socialism', they mean they want a health care system like Sweden's.
 
Another point about China: they've liberalized a lot since the insane days of the Red Guards. (Everything is relative, of course.) What's happening to the Uighurs is exceptional.

So why are they doing it?

Answer: they've seen how the US and Europe have responded to Islamist terrorism within their own borders, and have decided they're not going to have the same thing happen to them, if they can help it.

In the US and Europe, radical Muslims can machine-gun the staff of satirical magazines, set off bombs at children's concerts and marathons, ram speeding cars into crowds, knife policemen, behead soldiers ... and we all just wring our hands and reassure ourselves that "it's only a minority".

The Chinese are not sentimentalists. They're not going to let that happen to them. And they couldn't give a monkey's what we say -- they know we'll keep buying those iPhones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom