[trasz]

Can you show me the part where the post documents systemic sterilization, or torture, or any of the “cultural genocide” claims?

Note that nobody claims there were no cases of the above; it’s just those cases also happen in eg American prisons.

(And of course note how simply asking a question - and suggesting the apparently missing evidence is, indeed, missing, gets quickly downvoted.)

[md_]

I'm confused. Is your point that the rates in Xinjiang of forced sterilization and IUD implantation--in the general population, not merely in prisons--is equivalent to the rates of forced sterilization in American prison populations? I think that's exceedingly unlikely; there's no pattern of forced sterilization in American prison populations, though indeed a shameful history of such practices (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/30/california-p...). Compare that to population-wide sterilization campaigns in Xinjiang: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/22311356/china-uyghur-bir....

And if that is your claim, is your point that a population-wide rate of torture and forced sterilization equivalent to that inside American prisons is...acceptable?

It's really unclear to me what you are trying to say with your repeated analogies to other human rights abuses. That there are multiple bad things in the world, so we should give up on trying to criticise them?

I don't think anyone takes the American Cancer Society to be saying that death by heart attack is good--merely that their focus is on cancer. So too, critics of systemic, widespread, and officially sanctioned torture and genocide in China are not saying that other torture--be it systemic or not, widespread or not, sanctioned or not--is somehow better. They're merely focusing on one particular hotspot, where the offenses are particularly stark.

Those who, like you in this thread, say, "But what about X", are hard to take on good faith. They never seem to be saying, "Let's also talk about X", or "how can we eliminate all torture." Rather, they seem to suggest that critics of widespread Chinese torture are somehow anti-Chinese, that the motives should be questioned, and, by implication, perhaps that well-documented Chinese torture does not exist.

It's deliberate obfuscation for the purposes of disinformation, as you are clearly engaged in here.

[trasz]

See, this is a common pattern in anything involving Adrian Zenz: by throwing together two facts, the growing usage of contraceptives - itself a healthy trend in a region where it’s common to have lots of kids (one child policy didn’t apply to Uighurs) - and several cases of forced sterilization, he gets to conclusion of “population-wide forced sterilization” - which is not supported by factual evidence.

As for “what about” - I agree that all violations of human rights matter. But if we ignore facts and believe propaganda instead, eventually we will forget about those facts. Just how most people don’t think much about Saddam’s victims because of how US lied to justify the invasion.

Can you show me the source for the claim that those crimes in Xinjang are officially sanctioned?

[md_]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/abortions-..., for example.

[trasz]

This only shows that they happen. That part is pretty well documented, but the same thing happens in Western prisons. What it doesn't show is that they were officially sanctioned, as opposed to being committed by a guard against the law.

[md_]

Sure, and the Wansee Protokoll didn't come out until 1947 (and, famously, was itself quite euphemistic).

The entire topic of this thread is the disclosure of official documents which, like the Wansee Protokoll, expose the regime's real goals and practices.

Of course, there are people who still disbelieve that the Holocaust happened. I try not to argue with them online, once they have shown their true motives.

[trasz]

>The entire topic of this thread is the disclosure of official documents which, like the Wansee Protokoll, expose the regime's real goals and practices.

Again, can you show me where said document says so?