>And as for foreigners, our view of China is far worse than it actually is, China doesn’t need to hide anything, people who visit China will come away with a more positive view of the country than those who do not visit.
To the extent that's true, it's because they won't let you see the uyghur reeducation camps.
We can get videos from remote hellholes of Africa like Dafur and Mali but apparently,that's too much to ask in Xinjiang.We can't even get satellite images to show us evidence of this so called wigur genocide
The Xinjiang Police Files: A 2022 leak of over 5,000 police photos, internal documents, and spreadsheets revealing the scale of detention, with images showing prisoners shackled, hooded, and under guard in 2018.
The China Cables (2019): Leaked, classified instructions on how to run the camps, including directives to ensure "no escapes" promote "repentance" and use full video surveillance.
Satellite Imagery Analysis: Researchers from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) identified over 380 suspected detention sites, including new construction and expansion, often featuring guard towers and razor wire.
Testimonies and Research: Former detainees have reported torture, rape, forced sterilization, and intense indoctrination to abandon their religious and cultural practices.
Government Documentation: The Karakax list, a leaked document, provided detailed, case-by-case justifications for detention, such as having too many children or wearing a veil.
Are you this incredulous when someone reports that the US locks up more Black people capita than White?
Someone defending the US could make the same claims you are that everyone is out to make the US look bad. That multiple independent groups are fabricating evidence etc…
1. give links or one link to the collection of above "evidence" to let others to get conclusion by their own. BTW, I've seen some ("Leaked, classified instructions...) but easily get different interpretation.
2. Also using "I" is better than "We". That means you get your conclusion, not representing others.
1. I've provided a half dozen links in this thread. Feel free to google for more if you want them. Most of the people I'm replying to will respond with some variation of "funded by nefarious group x" regardless of what links are posted.
2. Lecturing random people you meet like they're a freshman English student is patronizing.
Can you imagine hundreds of journalists who would lie to promote a false story that hasn't really been all that effective and harming China (the only possible motivation for such a campaign). And not a single one of the journalists approached by the creators of this campaign leaked anything. If this really was a massive conspiracy theory, that itself is a much much bigger story than the Chinese rounding up people that most of the world don't seem to care about. One of those hundreds of journalists wouldn't have been able to resist such a scoop.
I'm guessing the next part of your conspiracy theory is that the conspiracy group is so powerful that everyone is scared to come forward. But if they are that powerful, why construct such an ineffective anti-china story? Surely such a powerful group could construct something more damaging.
That's a very outdated model for how conspiracies work. Why would it be necessary to bribe and threaten journalists working at these organizations? They genuinely believe in the project of the US financial, military, and cultural empire. They went to the same schools and were socialized with the same core beliefs as the people in US government and high finance or those running the intelligence agencies and military-industrial complex. They wouldn't have the opportunity to work at these 'news' organizations if they had worldviews that were radically incompatible.
Likewise, I don't believe anyone is coercing you to push these ideas online. I believe I could drill down on every single source and claim, and your fundamental beliefs about this question would remain the same.
Proximity to and dependence upon established institutions exerts an inexorable gravity on worldview. It determines one's social circle and path to advancement in every area of life. Those inside the bubble feel themselves to be 'free thinkers', but one who strays outside the acceptable range of beliefs and ideas will immediately experience a sharp discontinuity in this 'freedom'.
You have a group of Swiss journalists who regularly publish critical stories about war crimes in Gaza, the US detaining immigrants, the Trump administration, and waning influence.
And your first thought is that these people have such a hard on for the American Cultural Empire that they are willing to fabricate massive amounts of evidence of Chinese wrongdoing with no coercion required?
They’re just all sitting around writing stories about how fucked up the Trump administration is and how America is over and how the next century belongs to China, and then they think “hey we should probably all work together to make China look bad because America Fuck Yeah! Am I right!?!?”
Please calm down. They might not like Trump — that would be a given for many in these elite circles — but are they really opposed to the prevailing world order? In what material way?
How does being Swiss contradict anything I said? Switzerland is deeply integrated into this prevailing order. It is home to the Bank of International Settlements, the supra-national central bank of central banks whose charter grants it immunity from any national subpoena or inquest.
Sure. I can also much more easily imagine pseudnonymous accounts making material misrepresentations for politically motivated reasons, spreading FUD about journalists making things up.
On the other hand you can travel to Xinjiang, visit mosques, Uighur museums, experience Uighur culture, observe Uighurs just minding their own business in their daily life.
“Subjected to arbitrary arrests and forced labor, sterilizations to torture, more than one million Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and other minorities are estimated to have been locked up in so-called “re-education” camps and prisons in the region over the last decade, according to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.”
UN High Commissioner on Human Rights Michelle Bachelet actually visited Xinjiang and made no such assertions. Whoever did release the report you're referencing, they waited until immediately after her term ended to release it (within hours). Pretty conspicuous.
No it was actually released hours before her term ended not after. And the reason she held off releasing until the last minute is because of pressure from China to refrain from releasing it.
In addition to releasing the report she released a 131 page Chinese rebuttal simultaneously. Not the actions one would expect of a shadowy group at the UN out to get China.
“Bachelet’s damning report was published with only 11 minutes to go before her term came to an end at midnight Geneva time. Publication was delayed by the eleventh-hour delivery of an official Chinese response that contained names and pictures of individuals that had to be blacked out by the UN commissioner’s office for privacy and safety reasons.”
The organization’s human rights office delivered its much-delayed report minutes before Michelle Bachelet, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, was to leave office.
I agree it was reported this way, but do we have evidence it was actually prepared and published by her at that time? The report conspicuously does not mention the viewpoint and concerns of the High Commissioner as other OHCHR reports do nor does it reference Bachelet's findings from her May 2021 visit to Xinjiang.
So you don't have any evidence it was published the next day? You just made that up out of whole cloth?
The internet archive lists the first time they archived the document as August 31 22:23 GMT, which was August 31 23:23 in Geneva. That matches the reporting from NYT and Guardian from the next morning. Both of those reports are also available on the internet archive.
Yep missed that. The internet archive did indeed fist scrape that document 23 minutes after midnight Geneva time.
However it is unlikely that the internet archive web scraper would have picked up a relatively obscure document within 23 minutes of its release.
The NYT and Gaurdian articles published that morning (verified by the internet archive) said that the article was published 11 minutes before midnight Geneva time. That lines up with the internet archive scraping it about 30 minutes later.
So unless they were both wrong or in on it, it was released before midnight Geneva time.
What evidence do you have to support that the UN was lying, and that the NYT and the Guardian were wrong about the time?
The Internet Archive recorded an error page for that URL just four minutes prior. So we know that the document was not available before September 1, after Bachelet's term had ended.
So your evidence is that the internet archive didn’t scrape the document until 23 minutes after midnight? And the most likely explanation isn’t that it took the IA scraper a few minutes to pick it up? The most likely explanation is that the NYT and the Guardian were wrong or lying and that the UN was lying?
Did you even know about the time on the internet archive before I brought it up? You said “within hours” so I assume you didn’t? Where did you hear that it as published on September 1st?
You chose the Internet Archive as authoritative evidence, not me. Your back-pedaling "most likely explanation" is again disproven by your own source as the Internet Archive recorded an error page for that URL just four minutes prior. So we know that the document was not available before September 1, after Bachelet's term had ended.
Where has the UN asserted that Bachelet prepared this report? Please share if you are aware of any such assertion.
Again, the report does not make any reference to the High Commissioner's inquiries as other reports do. Your "most likely explanation" fails to account for this.
Yes, media outlets lie and make errors all the time. Sorry to be the one to break this to you.
There could be a grand global conspiracy to push this story about how the Chinese are persecuting the Uyghurs, involving the US government, the Australian government, the United Nations, France, the UK, A Swiss journalism consortium, private companies, thousands of Chinese expats, satellite companies, newspapers, and television reports, which seems to have very little payoff because most people don't care about it at all.
Or it could be that the same government of China that less than 40 years ago admitted to killing 200 protesters and likely killed at least 2500, has severe restrictions on religious freedom, and is known for targeting family members of activists and dissidents, is also rounding up and reeducating members of a very publicly troublesome minority group.
They have a well documented history of similar tactics in Tibet over the last 75 years or so. I mean there have been over 150 Tibetans who have self immolated just in the last decade and a half as a protest against Chinese actions in Tibet. I can't think of very many acts of self-immolation protests where the target government wasn't doing something untoward, much less when there's an average of 10 per year.
Given the recent history of the Chinese government response to dissidents, and the terrorist attacks perpetuated by Uyghurs in the 2010s, I'd honestly be surprised if China didn't do something similar to what is alleged.
Nah just the lunatic Adrian Zenz. Feel free to ignore the fact Muslim countries actually visited xinjiang and agreed there was no concentration camps.
Like believe the crap you want, but Uighur language is literally on display in every road sign, every metro station, every shop. Xinjiang has the highest density of mosques in the world. College admissions offer incentives to people of Uighur origin. Ppl can just go to xinjiang and see it for themselves
Do you think that Spanish street signs and Catholic Churches in El Paso prove that the United States isn’t detaining thousands of Hispanic immigrants?
Do you think that the United States lets dignitaries from other countries tour ICE detention camps?
You think Adrian Zenz convinced dozens of respected journalists and news organizations to lie about interviewing hundreds of victims?
You think he manufactured the Xinjian police file leaks, or the China cable leaks?
You think he altered UN fertility data to show that the fertility rate in Xinjian declined by 50% in 2 years?
You think he tricked the UN in to releasing their report?
I’d also like to see a source for the most mosques claim that isn’t Chinese state media. For someone so suspicious of western media you seem to have readily swallowed actual direct Chinese government propaganda hook line and sinker.
He we go with the Zenz talking point again. I've never understood the fixation, especially when most of the time when this gets talked about is drawing from a vast trove independent documents that have nothing to do with him, from everywhere from human rights, watch to the international criminal court to diverse reporting. Yet somehow the only response to all of this is Zenz, Zenz, Zenz.
Also is ASPI supposed to have a Zenz association because I didn't see one:
>We are grateful for the advice and assistance of a range of global experts on Xinjiang including Maya Wang from Human Rights Watch, Dr Timothy Grose from the Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and Dr Darren Byler of the University of Colorado Boulder.
To the extent that's true, it's because they won't let you see the uyghur reeducation camps.