Accepting all that, that’s still essentially colonization, no?
Is there nuance I’m missing here? China’s seemingly codified cultural repression genuinely makes it hard for me to consider supporting them, whether or not they advance the cause of the average worker
I largely agree, though Israel has used many nonlethal methods for a long time. There is a lot of violence involved in the process that doesn’t require death. Forced relocation is a pretty classic tactic, for example, which Israe has made ample use of in their ongoing genocide
The violence requires death, is the thing. People don’t just allow themselves to be forcibly relocated (as per your example), they will fight to stay on their land unless they face the threat of death (and many do stay, and die). Behind every “nonlethal” process is a death machine that makes it possible in the first place. That’s why colonization is always accomplished through mass death.
I’m trying not to get too caught up in semantics here. It sounds like you’re saying that the relocation that the Chinese government puts Uygher people through cannot be comparable to the relocation that other cultures have been put through, and that the lack of a mass death toll is serviceable evidence for that claim. Do I have that correct?
If so, it’s a good point! I think I had a presumption that the true nature of their (and any government’s) crimes was hidden. It does seem a bit far-fetched that it would be possible to cover up the kind of mass death that you’re saying would come with a colonization, so it’s a more reasonable metric than just making assumptions based on vibes I suppose. You’ve at least given me a less propagandizeable thing to research _
They also don’t do cultural genocide, look at videos of random tourists visiting Xinjiang and you’ll see some locals speaking Uyghur, you’ll see mosques, museums, traditional Uyghur food, etc. The previous repression was meant to curve terrorism, it seems to have worked, and things have relaxed afterwards. I don’t see how any of this fits the picture of colonialism.
Well it certainly doesn’t fit the picture I was described! I was told Uyghers were being killed in some cases, and rehoused en masse in others.
If what you’re saying is right, and the Uygher culture is allowed to continue unharried outside of radical minorities then I would agree that doesn’t really compare to the horrors of colonization!
Is it actually illegal to be queer there too? Or is that also exaggerated?
It isn’t illegal to be queer, but gay marriage isn’t really legal either. It’s an upbill battle ironically held back by the fact that the PRC is a democratic country, and the older generations are still more socially conservative. As time goes on it has been getting better.
I’m genuinely undereducated here, not an op…
Accepting all that, that’s still essentially colonization, no?
Is there nuance I’m missing here? China’s seemingly codified cultural repression genuinely makes it hard for me to consider supporting them, whether or not they advance the cause of the average worker
When we look at how colonization in the real world happens we see it is accomplished, again, through mass death.
See: Israel
I largely agree, though Israel has used many nonlethal methods for a long time. There is a lot of violence involved in the process that doesn’t require death. Forced relocation is a pretty classic tactic, for example, which Israe has made ample use of in their ongoing genocide
The point is those “non-lethal” methods only work because they are backed by “lethal” ones.
The violence requires death, is the thing. People don’t just allow themselves to be forcibly relocated (as per your example), they will fight to stay on their land unless they face the threat of death (and many do stay, and die). Behind every “nonlethal” process is a death machine that makes it possible in the first place. That’s why colonization is always accomplished through mass death.
I’m trying not to get too caught up in semantics here. It sounds like you’re saying that the relocation that the Chinese government puts Uygher people through cannot be comparable to the relocation that other cultures have been put through, and that the lack of a mass death toll is serviceable evidence for that claim. Do I have that correct?
If so, it’s a good point! I think I had a presumption that the true nature of their (and any government’s) crimes was hidden. It does seem a bit far-fetched that it would be possible to cover up the kind of mass death that you’re saying would come with a colonization, so it’s a more reasonable metric than just making assumptions based on vibes I suppose. You’ve at least given me a less propagandizeable thing to research _
They also don’t do cultural genocide, look at videos of random tourists visiting Xinjiang and you’ll see some locals speaking Uyghur, you’ll see mosques, museums, traditional Uyghur food, etc. The previous repression was meant to curve terrorism, it seems to have worked, and things have relaxed afterwards. I don’t see how any of this fits the picture of colonialism.
Well it certainly doesn’t fit the picture I was described! I was told Uyghers were being killed in some cases, and rehoused en masse in others.
If what you’re saying is right, and the Uygher culture is allowed to continue unharried outside of radical minorities then I would agree that doesn’t really compare to the horrors of colonization!
Is it actually illegal to be queer there too? Or is that also exaggerated?
It isn’t illegal to be queer, but gay marriage isn’t really legal either. It’s an upbill battle ironically held back by the fact that the PRC is a democratic country, and the older generations are still more socially conservative. As time goes on it has been getting better.
God damn, you actually checked it out. I’m genuinely not used to that level of intellectual honesty on the internet