[kuyan]

> It's illustrative how Americans get up in arms about how the Chinese dealing with Muslim terrorists in their own country deal with human rights, while they have flown across the world to perform massacres in the country on Xinjiang's western border.

The United States has a long, violent history that continues into the present day. I don't think anyone here is arguing that. It doesn't make the PRC's actions better, nor does it mean that we shouldn't condemn abuses of human rights where we see them.

[jedimind]

Don fall for the "terrorism" deception, it's about the geopolitical importance of xinjiang: https://youtu.be/ZxvYcByv2M8

[monocasa]

You'd be better off not pushing a video of unsourced commentary over clips from Mulan and Captain America.

[aptidude187]

You'd be better off not shilling for the ccp by attacking the validity of the video with petty remarks instead of specifying what exactly you are missing sources for. Most of the content was from well known research and is visible directly in the video itself.

[monocasa]

I'd suggest you look at how documentaries like "What the Bleep Do We Know" and "The Principle" are created out of editing together unrelated emotionally impactful set pieces and out of context statements from authorities and otherwise valid sources.

This video is using all the same editing techniques as you would to push geocentricism and make it look like Michio Kaku is onboard with it.

That's why they include crap like a The Winter Soldier from Marvel being interrogated and random clips from Mulan, while giving quotes that can't use an entire sentence of before being forced to use a jump cut.

[aptidude187]

>I'd suggest you look at how documentaries like "What the Bleep Do We Know" and "The Principle" are created out of editing together unrelated emotionally impactful set pieces and out of context statements from authorities and otherwise valid sources.

That's a false equivalency and doesn't apply to this very well researched and excellently presented mini documentary. If that were the case it wouldn't have received over 62000 likes and over 1 million views, so don't insult people's intelligence with your pseudo intellectual 'critique' by making hand wavy allegations without pointing out anything specific to which it actually applies in the content.

>This video is using all the same editing techniques as you would to push geocentricism and make it look like Michio Kaku is onboard with it. That's why they include crap like a The Winter Soldier from Marvel being interrogated and random clips from Mulan, while giving quotes that can't use an entire sentence of before being forced to use a jump cut.

Wow you don't like the editing, could you be more shallow and desperate in your defence of the ccp's genocide? The video is excellent in its approach to deliver an important topic in an entertaining and engaging manner, that's why it has successfully reached a greater audience. Your 'criticism' is a joke.

[monocasa]

> That's a false equivalency and doesn't apply to a very well researched and presented mini documentary. If that were the case it wouldn't have received over 62000 likes, so don't insult people's intelligence with your pseudo intellectual 'critique' by making hand wavy arguments without pointing out anything specific.

And "What The Bleep Do We Know" made tens of millions of dollars (which is worth way more then 62k likes, but instead millions of people paying to watch it). It's still a load of horse crap.

Andrew Wakefield's documentary on how vaccines cause autism also pulled in 10's of millions with a lot of people believing it, and used similar editing techniques.

62k likes on youtube is not some high barrier of truth to clutch your pearls about. Go look at the like count of flat earth videos for another example.

> Wow you don't like the editing, could you be more shallow and desperate in your defence of the ccp's genocide? The video is excellent in its approach to deliver an important topic in an entertaining and engaging manner, that's why it has successfully reached a greater audience. Your 'criticism' is a joke.

I'm pointing out that it's using well known techniques to make people seem like they're saying the opposite of what they're actually saying, while infusing the whole argument with emotional impact unrelated to what's being said.

As I said originally, the OP would be better off not using a documentary that doesn't use techniques known for telling lies via editing.