Hardly. Hitler and his cronies were driven by a level of crazy that outdid most of the other autocracies of the 20th century. Just two examples:
* Starting a war of conquest that utterly destroyed Germany itself.
* Murdering millions of Europeans in the name of anti-semitic racial theories developed decades earlier. (Hitler and Goebbels were quite clear about this long before they came to power.)
There are many more. China's rise looks more like great power politics.
If you want to go there, the CCP has its own brand of horrible (The Great Leap Forward) which in some ways is worse, as it continues to treat even its own Han majority as disposable.
That's completely true. But my point is that comparing them to Nazis is at best misleading and at worst actively harmful if you want to reason about what happened then and what's happening.
Perhaps it's more useful to look at figures like Stalin and Pol Pot to understand what happened in the Great Leap Forward. Or from Chinese history itself.
And to understand the current situation and how to react to it (from the point of view of American strategy) you need to look at comparisons that include nuclear and naval power. In some ways what's going on now in the Eastern Pacific looks like a replay of the Japan/US rivalry with a more formidable adversary operating on interior lines. As for nuclear issues, look at the Cold War. (If only because we got out of that one without incinerating the planet.)
<rant>
I'm an American and find the constant Nazi analogies really tiresome. It's as if everyone's knowledge of history comes from WW II movies. GGPs post was a thoughtful and enjoyable contrast.
</rant>
The suffix "-cide" means "kill." See also: "pesticide," "regicide," and "patricide." Reeducation camps are not mass killing camps. The Nazis committed genocide in the Oxford Languages definition.
The comment the GP comment was responding to was about genocide. I'm certain you didn't know that already, or you wouldn't have posted the parent comment.
It's pretty awful but does not seem to rise to the level of Nazi extermination camps as far as I can tell. Seeing it through the lens of the Nazi regime does not seem either illuminating or helpful to stop it.
Its intent to treat Hong Kong like the rest of China? How is that anything like Hitler's intent to conquer Europe? The author is as delusional about China as he is about democratically elected governments using COVID to gain permanent control over their citizens.
Yes, Xi is bad, and we should not want to be governed as Xi governs, but there is absolutely no risk of this happening outside the areas China controls or claims it should control.
Japan's refusal to fully acknowledge comfort women, and the evils of the co-prosperity sphere is feeding opposition in countries as diametrically different as south Korea and china.
If they want to defuse tension, stopping writing their history books as white out and celebrating yasakuni shrine war criminals would be a good start, based on the west German experience. I don't love the federal Republic of Germany or the CDU but they aren't in denial about 33-45.
No amount of prostrating will ever appease every faction, such as Polish conservatives regard Germany. It's all irrelevant anyhow as Japan and Germany are about distant from their pre-war selves in terms of militarism and nationalism as any country on this planet. What's actually keeping these debates alive are cultural enmities which predate WWII by centuries. That's why you don't see, e.g., Vietnam constantly making a fuss about American reverence for their soldiers who fought and killed Vietnamese--the history just isn't there to support that kind of national grudge even if there are plenty of individuals who might be bothered by it.
I probably agree with this in substance. It's an independent good of it's own accord akin to British public recognition of its role in slavery but probably has next to no real impact on the deep time resentments inside China.
> the People's Daily, ran an article in which two Chinese academics challenged Japan's sovereignty over the Ryukyu chain of islands, which includes Okinawa.
This is Beijing's policy about as much as Fox News' rantings were GOP or Trump Administration policy. Beijing holds a leash and can tighten or loosen at will, but to that extent it's still just saber rattling and fodder for domestic politics. Just like with American media, such opinions deserve attention only after after a long-term, durable pattern of specific policy preferences which see significant uptake by the political machine.
> How is that anything like Hitler's intent to conquer Europe?
I thought you were hinting at the Anschluss, but here is something to think about: why does Putin invade Georgia, Moldavia, Ukraine? The answer is that dictatorships ultimately have to eat outside its borders, because for a productive society you need to have a broad middle class, allow dissent, foster debate, allow ideas to spring up so as to make sure society can progress, keep the rule of law, have an accountable government etc. Instead, if you want to make it you will need to be part of the Party. You need the favor of those that are closer to the center of the power.
Your business can be closed any day, you have no say about what new legislation will be put in place. All the power and capital will accumulate at the center of the party.
The rule of dictators tend to end with a bang. The bad thing is: the surveillance is on such an evil level that it will be really hard for the people to rise up and free themselves. They can only hope for a power struggle in the highest echelons. These are dark days..
Largely yes, we have. De facto most western powers prefer not to engage on the topic. They're also pretty apathetic about Uigher issues. I find that depressing too. China used to make a lot of noise about tolerance for minorities, the re-education camps are a sign of deep seated fears. Flooding Tibet with a han Chinese overclass, is pretty much complete now.
The CCP has always claimed Tibet was part of China, with the Similar Convention not signed by any representative of China. China does not lay claim to Europe, the entirety of Asia, or anything like that.
Hardly. Hitler and his cronies were driven by a level of crazy that outdid most of the other autocracies of the 20th century. Just two examples:
* Starting a war of conquest that utterly destroyed Germany itself.
* Murdering millions of Europeans in the name of anti-semitic racial theories developed decades earlier. (Hitler and Goebbels were quite clear about this long before they came to power.)
There are many more. China's rise looks more like great power politics.