#41
i took that to be more anti-confushun than racist, because fuck that guy. not marimite. confucius.
#42

elias posted:

yeah who can forget the sordid history of slander leveled at confucian thought by such orientalist institutions as uh squints the communist party of china 1921-1976


Yes who could forget mao's condemnation of sucking confucius dick. The post was definitely in that spirit.

#43

Petrol posted:

Yes who could forget mao's condemnation of sucking confucius dick. The post was definitely in that spirit.


maoists at the time overtly accused reactionaries of worshipping confucius, i don't see how this isn't just a vulgar restatement of the same. i think you're really reaching here, mao explicitly called for education against han cultural chauvinism, this isn't the product of western orientalist misunderstandings

#44
#45
Good to know everyone here is cool with using dick sucker as an insult as long as it's directed at the CCP. God bless this "communist" message board
#46
i was skepticalat first but the by the 50th consecutive glowing review from an upperclass white schmuck i became convinced that america needs a lot more shen yun
#47

Petrol posted:

Good to know everyone here is cool with using dick sucker as an insult as long as it's directed at the CCP. God bless this "communist" message board


I don't think anyone would even notice if a similar insult was used against anyone else on this message board where saying fail aids is funny & acceptable, and your objection here seems disingenuous. It wouldn't be unusual at all if someone here complained about liberals sucking Bush's d*ck in the wake of his death or whatever. you can probably rightfully criticise the insult in general but i really don't think there's any kind of double standard or exception being drawn here

#48
reeducation camps for ethnic minorities seem fairly fuckin problematic but here they're made by a party that has the word 'communist' in its name so it's impossible to say if they're bad or not
#49

gay_swimmer posted:

reeducation camps for ethnic minorities seem fairly fuckin problematic but here they're made by a party that has the word 'communist' in its name so it's impossible to say if they're bad or not


not sure i'm the one being disingenuous itt.

my point isnt that the CCP is above criticism but that we can probably do better than regurgitating western hyperbole about xinjiang and calling them dick suckers. i'm here trying to pin down where the xinjiang security apparatus is going too far and so far all i can see is that it targets an ethnic minority and among other things involves cultural education. this is problematic to be sure but, taken in context, how bad is it? what would a better security apparatus look like, given that one is necessary in some form? i am more interested in this sort of discussion than oneupmanship regarding communist and/or dick sucking credentials.

#50
I mean surely it would involve criticising and condemning han cultural chauvinism among party officials, in the tradition that mao called for, instead of reinforcing it. i don't know how you could argue that han cultural education is a necessary component of any kind of security apparatus among ethnic minorities unless you actually subscribed to such chauvinism.
#51
i think we're all pretty sincere in not regurgitating western bullshit and are trying to figure out how to discern between US state department psyops like this



and other reactionary/revisionist developments in turanist/'turkestani' seperatism vs the somewhat han-supremacist turn the CPC has taken in managing the central asian constituent entities of china

let's all remember to drink some water and be good to each other
#52
nah dude there is a serious element of racism and profiling on the basis of physical appearances involved. In the carl zha interview he goes into detail about a policy in which hotels have to inform the police whenever Uyghurs check in or out, and other alarming shit thay shouldnt be glossed over as just a matter of preventing some AQ affiliate from taking over towns or something. People who look physically turkic of have islamic or turkic names are racially profiled in some pretty nasty ways.

Anyways, one incredibly interesting relationship and comparison is that between the uyghur and the hui, who are the other major muslim population in china. Hui and Han have a history of cooperating in conquering Xinjiang, and Uyghurs have had long-standed ethnic tensions with both groups, sometimes erupting in riots and massacres.

Hui seem to be a "model minority", they are anti-seperatist, spread out all over and integrated well with Han chinese. It seems China's trying to craft Uyghurs into that mold, with the national unity stuff, and has resolved to try and demographically and culturally change Xinjiang by promoting Han migration there and through some culture policing and re-education camps. Most importantly (probably) is trying to economically develope the region. And yes, re-education camps are prisons - you aren't allowed to leave them and they have guards. If you wanted to be unduly generous you could compare them to mental wards instead or something.

Edited by Caesura109 ()

#53

blinkandwheeze posted:

i don't know how you could argue that han cultural education is a necessary component of any kind of security apparatus among ethnic minorities unless you actually subscribed to such chauvinism.


to be clear i am not arguing that.

#54

Petrol posted:

Good to know everyone here is cool with using dick sucker as an insult as long as it's directed at the CCP. God bless this "communist" message board


#55
so i read this whole thread and i still think china could stop the ogres. they literally have a wall
#56

Petrol posted:

it targets an ethnic minority...taken in context, how bad is it?



in conclusion, a land of contrasts

#57

littlegreenpills posted:

Petrol posted:

it targets an ethnic minority...taken in context, how bad is it?

in conclusion, a land of contrasts


to the extent that gross racial profiling occurs it is obviously bad, but there remains the problem of stamping out the remnants of a terrorist insurgency that only exists among members of a specific ethnic minority. what do you do?

herein lies the rub: for all the criticisms of china's xinjiang strategy (and there are clearly some non-trivial problems), i'm not hearing any viable alternatives to re-education per se.

#58
isn’t that just a skylark joke from a few years ago? “I’ve noticed lots of people talk smack about the Final Solution without offering their own ideas on how they would have solved the problem.”
#59

Petrol posted:

littlegreenpills posted:
Petrol posted:
it targets an ethnic minority...taken in context, how bad is it?

in conclusion, a land of contrasts


to the extent that gross racial profiling occurs it is obviously bad, but there remains the problem of stamping out the remnants of a terrorist insurgency that only exists among members of a specific ethnic minority. what do you do?

herein lies the rub: for all the criticisms of china's xinjiang strategy (and there are clearly some non-trivial problems), i'm not hearing any viable alternatives to re-education per se.



look i respect you as my senior poster, but this an astoundingly bad take

#60

Petrol posted:

herein lies the rub: for all the criticisms of china's xinjiang strategy (and there are clearly some non-trivial problems), i'm not hearing any viable alternatives to re-education per se.


you claim to not be arguing for cultural education and internment as an essential component of the security apparatus, but i think you're implying it by this consternation about alternative models.

if it's a nonessential security process, then clearly the alternative model is trivial to identify: literally any other mobilisations the prc uses against insurgency and antisocial behaviour in cases that do not involve a marginalised ethnic minority. the prc is a developed and sophisticated security state, the idea that their hands are tied to han cultural chauvinism by default is giving them extremely little credit

#61

blinkandwheeze posted:

Petrol posted:

herein lies the rub: for all the criticisms of china's xinjiang strategy (and there are clearly some non-trivial problems), i'm not hearing any viable alternatives to re-education per se.

you claim to not be arguing for cultural education and internment as an essential component of the security apparatus, but i think you're implying it by this consternation about alternative models.

if it's a nonessential security process, then clearly the alternative model is trivial to identify: literally any other mobilisations the prc uses against insurgency and antisocial behaviour in cases that do not involve a marginalised ethnic minority. the prc is a developed and sophisticated security state, the idea that their hands are tied to han cultural chauvinism by default is giving them extremely little credit


i'm not arguing against internment as such. i am arguing that some re-education may be necessary but it should only stick to actually useful subject matter (politics and vocational training) and not attempt to turn uyghurs into caucasian han, so to speak. i don't think it's productive to handwave away the specific circumstances in xinjiang and say "well they could use literally any other method to deal with islamist uyghur separatism". what other methods precisely? and why would it be preferable to the hypothetical re-education i describe, with the cultural chauvinist elements removed?

#62
As far as i can tell this is the first time you've mentioned any kind of hypothetical alternative interment model at all. which i think is a weird shifting of goalposts, as i really don't think the stalinist irony forum has any fundamental objection to internment and political re-education. the issues people are raising are very clearly specifically internment on the basis of large scale ethnic profiling and re-education in service of han cultural chauvinism
#63
This is what i mean about conceiving of alternative models being entirely trivial, because you clearly recognise that the alternative to cultural chauvinism is "not conducting cultural chauvinism."
#64

blinkandwheeze posted:

i really don't think the stalinist irony forum has any fundamental objection to internment and political re-education.


So this is perhaps one of those times we're furiously agreeing and didn't realise it?

I still think the extent of the program and the extent of its problematic elements is not entirely clear, and I look forward to more information becoming available about it through reliable channels (I have some ideas about that but I won't go into detail here). I do think it's important to nail these things down so that when we condemn something we know exactly what we're condemning and why.

#65
i mean i think it's very clear that everyone was specifically condemning internment based on large scale ethnic profiling and forced education on a cultural chauvinist basis. i think you are the only one who apparently interpreted this is a discussion about the relative merits of an abstract unrelated process instead of the actual particular conditions under question. and since all your previous posts seemed to actually be framed regarding this particular instance your admission that you're apparently discussing some abstract hypothetical model seemed to come out of nowhere
#66
you two are arguing in a boring way because in the interests of propriety petrol isn't just flatly saying what he believes without qualification.

the uighur imbroglio is interesting to me because of this question; is it ok to stamp out religion? i think yes, and indoctrination is the only way to do this. but i'm not sure that's entirely what the ccp is doing in xianjing. when they do things like suppress the uighur language, that crosses into destruction of national culture. soviet nationalities policy under stalin emphasized the promotion of national culture and autonomy in particular before the war, and it was very successful in promoting alongside this soviet humanism. there doesn't seem to be anything similar to Сове́тский наро́д in the People's Republic of China, which I think is a real obstacle to socialist internationalism and humanism. han chauvinism seems to really be an ascendant aspect of the ruling ideology.

when i was doing some investigation into the uighur affair, which is really difficult to parse, i came across these archived uighur forums and a lot of the complaints in the poorly translated google rendering were about insufficient resources being allocated to the uighur minority. there was a class component to the complaint, ethnicity and class were intersecting in a way that clearly privileged the han over the uighur. some examples here in links and pictures:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110912175018/http://www.uighurbiz.net:80/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=228208&extra=page%3D1

https://web.archive.org/web/20110913070350/http://www.uighurbiz.net:80/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=228964&extra=page%3D1

https://web.archive.org/web/20110913090155/http://www.uighurbiz.net:80/html/2009/0622/13103.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20110731150010/http://www.uighurbiz.net/#





That last picture in particular is illuminating to me and makes me think of Lenin when he talks about the proletariat of Britain being infected with cultural chauvinism.



Xianjing strikes me as an example of internal colonization, we see this with the reports of incentives for marriage between ethnicités, which on the face of it isn't objectionable, but when mixed with the chauvinism we see many examples of takes on a sinister turn, Australian settlers attempted a similar project; there's not a lot of hard evidence out there but it strikes me as part of a strategy of homogenization.

I'm reaching further back into the depths of memory, but there was a Sean's Russia Blog Podcast episode with Ronald Suny where Suny talked about how in the Soviet Union there were certain ethnicites associated with certain class roles, and how development policy, particularly in Central Asia, by encouraging local culture and administration and competence sought to break these class tags that ethnicities were saddled with. We see it in a crude form in the US with the conception of the Mexican as itinerant labourer.

once again this has been a bellingcat open source investigation funded in part by the foundation for the defense of democracies and viewers like you. thank you.
#67
thank you, good post and im pleased we seem to be coming to a more productive point in the discussion - primary source analysis and soviet comparisons.

just want to quickly address bnw's last post and say i haven't set out to be obtuse or move goalposts in a dishonest way, in fact i really meant it when i said early on that i felt like official chinese statements about the situation were a good starting point, that's where i was coming from, and i've now shifted to a position where i can better appreciate the chauvinism involved, while still asking how the xinjiang security problem can best be solved.
#68

Parenti posted:

Xianjing strikes me as an example of internal colonization, we see this with the reports of incentives for marriage between ethnicités, which on the face of it isn't objectionable, but when mixed with the chauvinism we see many examples of takes on a sinister turn, Australian settlers attempted a similar project; there's not a lot of hard evidence out there but it strikes me as part of a strategy of homogenization.

I'm reaching further back into the depths of memory, but there was a Sean's Russia Blog Podcast episode with Ronald Suny where Suny talked about how in the Soviet Union there were certain ethnicites associated with certain class roles, and how development policy, particularly in Central Asia, by encouraging local culture and administration and competence sought to break these class tags that ethnicities were saddled with. We see it in a crude form in the US with the conception of the Mexican as itinerant labourer.

once again this has been a bellingcat open source investigation funded in part by the foundation for the defense of democracies and viewers like you. thank you.



Thank you. Internal colonization is exactly what it is, and I suspect it has less to do with religious extremism as it does ethnically based seperatism. This isn't an effort to stamp out extremist cells or shut down particularly wahhabi mosques, whatever hard evidence we have points to it as a large scale pacification campaign against an ethnically turkic region prone to rioting against the dominant ethnicity.

As to the question of what is the alternative to reeducation camps and forced "assimilation" (again, assimilation to a cultural and ethnic group coming to them, not one that they thenselves are joining), the answer is usually "listen to their grivances and address them to the best extent you can". There are clear indicators of material inequality and alination from a distant state that sets limits on religious and cultural practice, while offering little in return but an influx of developers with a different religon, language and ethnicity who by every measurement control the regional economy and government. The tricky part is reconciling the fact that integrating Xinjiang with the rest of China will be better for China in the long run, and deoendig on how its done, for Xinjiang as well, and the fact that there is a long history of Uyghur demands for self-determination.

Edited by Caesura109 ()

#69
economic development of xinjiang without ethnic chauvanism seems like it would be sweet
#70
good, we solved it. now to get this thread to president xi and he will definitely do the right thing once he reads it.
#71
good job everyone
#72

Parenti posted:

good, we solved it. now to get this thread to president xi and he will definitely do the right thing once he reads it.



kind of aside from the whole metaphysical debate over whether china is/not socialist cuz SOEs or the land-property relation whatever-- it's obv that the chinese working class didn't democratically engineer the security state there, or elect to support such a concentration of non-working, parasitic cops, eating+buying at their class's expense. like nobody's claiming, even the CCP, that this was a concession to chauvinistic pressure from the han masses. they're claiming it's a response to terrorism and uygher national ambitions, right?

that's in contrast to amerika's internal colonies, where the standing white lumpen tended to act after settlers suffered military defeats on the frontier, or to shore up klan activity during the civil rights war, or to renegotiate land claims in the mexican cession following a mass settler push west. there's a history of the settler military directly following the lumpen-peasant's chauvinistic will. obv the military doesn't need much coaxing to get paid. just trying to highlight the difference in amerikan internal colonization vs the CCP acting alone, for whatever it's worth. cuz the results will be different.

#73
I don't know much about Soviet Khazakhstan, but the little I know seems to indicate there might be a comparison to be made
#74
yeah