Second of all, why? What do you wish to discuss? What would you like to happen? What do these people have to do with it?
If you're in the U.S., do you have anything useful to discuss regarding Guantanamo Bay and the many other U.S. black sites or the Mexican concentration camps run at the border? Do you think those are appropriate conversation pieces to bring up if they don't occur naturally? How would you feel if someone brought them up as if to teach you or make you aware of them as if you didn't know or had any affect whatsoever on their existence?
Personally I'd be thankful to know of censored history, particularly if it is occurring and being censored right now, in a democracy.
Good video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsxukOPEdgg
Quite. Just as it would have been vulgar to bring up the Holocaust with a German tourist in Switzerland or Italy in 1940.
If you were good friends, you can mention this and drop it and try to move on. If you're doing this at work, it won't end well for anyone involved, and it'll be doubly bad if you're in an authority position.
Ignoring the "at work" part, you can then both realize that you should acknowledge and fight against any country doing bad things and that these bad things are not excused because other countries (or people) are also doing bad things. Two wrongs don't make a right.
(I'm aware you did not claim that they did.)
As an American, sitting down next to a European on vacation for more than a few minutes is never fun. Once they inevitably ask "Where are you from?", they follow it up with a lecture on American politics before I can even finish my sentence. It's tedious and it's nothing new.
It's probably way more frustrating for people having to listen to their boss lecture them at work about how screwed up a country they've never been to but you've lived your whole life in is. You're not in a position to just politely say "bye" and never see them ever again without any consequence. You certainly can't speak up against them because they're in a position of authority.
Counter-anecdotally; I've never experienced this and in my workplace at least, the people who never stop talking politics are all American.
If you understand the language and culture the locals talk a similar way to the responses from the BBC video. And in the Vice video the locals even spoke for the secret journalists.
Also for mainland china everyone refers people from any ethnic background from Xinjiang a 'Xinjianger' not a singled out 维族人. I'm sure there are a lot of injustice but ethnic minorities are known to entitle a few 'privileges' such as carrying knives and not subject to one-child policy. Hence the cause of the inevitable unfair treatment and conflict (to be honest many policies are not up to modern liberal views). I'm not defending ccp ever, but I'm also shocked people knew very little about everything else.
Not advocating that people should look the other way, but I wouldn't like superiors associating me with the deeds of the government of China.
It might have been a good idea to actually support the protests for freedom in Hong Kong, but the "west" looked extremely weak here, laden with its own problems.
edit: Just to clarify, I wouldn't bring up Hong Kong either...
(But I would not suggest discussing unless you are close friends beyond work)
To convince them you'd really have to go into details and explain just how unjust the whole ordeal is. Most pro-govt people's default assumption will be they're doing a good job taking care of bad people.
Even the notion that someone of a different religion and ethnicity who might not speak the language should be rightfully considered a Chinese citizen deserving all the same freedoms is a tough sell.
You need to approach it from that mindset.
If they bring it up themselves, for or against that slightly changes things but frankly if they're supportive of the oppression then doing anything other than telling them "keep that opinion to yourself" is a minefield. Taking them on will most likely blow up in your face. (edit: no 'most likely' about it. It will).
If they are against it and wish to discuss it with you and what to do, it's still a danger (I can't say why, more a feeling) and I'd advise them to contact/join an external group, or their MP/representative etc. and leave it at that. Shit like this discussed at work is bad news, I don't see how doing it can make things better.
Anyone who disagrees and can make a better suggestion, I'm very willing to learn from.
Edit: to those downvoters, I'm NOT saying don't discuss it, I'm saying don't do so at work. It is deeply unlikely anything helpful will come of for anyone, but it is very likely to damage your reputation or even lose you your job.
Speak up! Sure, but in the right place and to those whose job it is to make a difference.
Do those involve anything as awful as what's happening in China? If they were and you were asked to comment, how would it make you feel?
> I have to say I also find it chilling to say we can't discuss topics which have political implications
Sure you can! Just not at work. Mate, don't do it. Take it from someone who can't keep his mouth shut.
Now people are avoiding that person. Team cohesion suffers. People are calling in sick to avoid the stress of it all. Management is dealing with shit from both sides.
What would you do if you were running the company?
If you want to let people talk politics at work, you can’t just limit it to the politics you agree with.
What country is such a workers' paradise? De Tocqueville wrote that the US was a nation whose social life was composed of overlapping circles of voluntary associations, which sounds much more like the situation here than that (to my eyes) dystopic description (of a world where one's only relations are not only by a single path, but that path is tied to the economic), so I'm assuming you're living elsewhere.
Talking politics == my free time, and I don't want to exchange my leisure hours for talking politics with my co-workers. The entire rest of your life can be talking about politics with your friends, your life shouldn't just be work.
It seems the real problem is too much of people's lives is work and so they think they have no time to talk politics.
The bigger unsaid issue is US/Pompeo/China hawks has zero moral credibility in China. For Chinese, the XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly is seen both as a "fairer" minority policy and more effective COIN model. As long as the west jails minorities disproportionately, and dropping bombs on weddings, there's no argument or propaganda to convince Chinese they're not making the better moral choice.
E: The even bigger unsaid issue, which every expert musing about the global implication of surveillance authoritarianism but won't publicly entertain is: what if XJ works? There's a reason China has 2X support of the XJ program than US can gather against, from majority Islamic countries no less. It's not just lol-debt trap. There are many parties interested in XJ model working. 80% of the world are flawed democracies or worse, and the overall trajectory is illiberal decline and increased geopolitical instability. There are more rulers who is invested in XJ working than not. The even larger issue than that? West doesn't have a alternative model, we've been flirting with incremental improvements over decade scales whenever our own "contradictions" force our hands, i.e. BLM. That's just not good enough.
Amazing hot take. Ethnically cleansing millions of people is A-OK as long as your country's population is large enough. That is prime wumaodang logic.
> XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly
The Chinese model of "ethnocide" -- eradicating the religion, culture and written language of successive minority groups from Manchu to Tibetan, Uighur, Hlai, Zhuang, Oirat Mongols and hundreds of other groups -- is successful in creating a monolithic mass of resource and people subservient to the CCP, to better enrich the CCP Beijing princelings. So understandably it is heavily pushed by media domestically and by the wumao abroad. Nonetheless ethnocide is frowned upon as a crime against humanity these days in the rest of the world (and before you go whatabout on me, yes lots of other countries did it hundreds of years ago).
> [Muslim country support for Uighur genocide is] not just lol-debt trap
It's also lol-sanctions, lol-trade-war and lol-UN-veto-power, not to speak of the CCP siccing their asymmetric warfare units on you. Muslim countries don't mind pissing off EU or US because those don't bother to get into a pissing match these days (unlike in the cold war era). Mainland Chinese politicians however, are incredibly insecure, thin skinned and obsessed with "face", so any perceived insult and they fund some rival warlord or prince to coup you off the throne...
>ME fear CCP
What is this, opposite day? Muslim countries fear China's zero military experience and zero force projection ability versus actual bombs being dropped in ME right now by west? Authoritarian countries likes what China wants to sell. A global order where authoritarianism is seen as a valid alternative governance model, a raising power who actually doesn't sanction or regime change over human rights. About the only Chinese "win-win" benefit most parties unironically believe in. Oh, also China used the Veto least.
>Chinese politicians however, are incredibly insecure
At this point I don't know if you're writing to debate or writing to cope.
Understanding CCP Resilience: Surveying Chinese Public Opinion Through Time. July 2020
>We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. https://ash.harvard.edu/files/ash/files/final_policy_brief_7...
Anyway, we're done.
It may well work. And mass sterilisation of women also works (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/china-conducting-mass-steril...) in that being sterilised stops them having kids, which is the point. Most effective too!
What you're totally, frighteningly blind to is whether it's morally OK.
The original question is how the situation is communicated and discussed in China. And I answered. You know how the west can talk about lots of issues like actual wars where we're aggressors, systemic racism that kept minority down or in jails etc with nuance? That happens in China on various topics too. At the end of the day, just like the west, many don't give a shit. Unlike the west, they can't really protest if they do. But even if they could, most probably wouldn't, because people irrationally and massively overreact to terrorism.
"The Chinese government has deployed a mass sterilization campaign against Muslim ethnic minorities in the country's western provinces, according to a new report, which argues the tactics could amount to genocide."
"Those camps are used as a form of threat and punishment, with officials detaining women and families who fail to comply with pregnancy checks or forced intrauterine contraceptive devices -- more commonly known as IUDs -- sterilizations, and even abortions."
> The original question is how the situation is communicated and discussed in China
I was responding to your delightful comment...
> what if XJ works?
And I pointed out your hideously lack of morality which is the point. So let's ask, how would you like it if your wife was sterilised against her will or had a forced abortion?
ANSWER THAT QUESTION PLEASE. Because that is what morality is about. If you don't like it, don't do it to others.
[1]https://time.com/4881898/china-xinjiang-uighur-children/
[2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2014/08/08/chinese-official-floats...
>Moral Question
I think family planning is necessary evil for China and new 2 child policy, i.e. replacement level is a good compromise for demographic and environmental stability. Ultimately China wants to settle at <1B ppl, which is a responsible position. I have no issue with uniform quota for everyone - minorities previously had +1 child. Where the world is heading, I'd rather cultures concede to population control than vice versa.
E: Apparently applying too fast. It should make the CCP look the same way it did for the last 40 years of one-child policy. Only ones that look bad are useful idiots believing Trump + Pompeo uncritically. I wouldn't have 2 children if the family planning policy is to have 2 children. I would be in a partnership with someone that accepts that. And to be extra clear: necessary evil = I endorse.
AKA it makes the CCP look bad so it must be a 'hit piece'.
So, again, how would you like it if your wife was sterilised against her will or had a forced abortion?
ANSWER THE QUESTION
Those that support the camps genuinely see them as de-radicalization centres.
As for it being a good idea... nope. I wouldn't put myself in a situation where the Chinese government calls my employer and politely asks them to reassign me to the Antarctic branch. It's not a democracy, normal citizens have no power, and expecting your coworkers to do so is putting them and yourself in danger.
Wouldn't citizenship fall under "national origin"?
The video shown by the BBC about the official visit to the vocational training center implants a subliminal message of "bad things are happening here" with eerie BGM and horror-movie-like filter. Your system 1, i.e. your fast, instinctive and emotional mind [2] would also be tricked by that too. Regardless of what's happening there, do you really think this is the way of objective, bias-free reporting?
Personally, I do not like the way they train these people. Westerners would never understand this culturally. But when compared to the war effort instigated by the US against Islamic nations, vocational training is IMHO a much better alternative against terrorism. XJ used to have a terrorism problem, and it's now much safer.
I would suggest you guys to travel in XJ after opening up, if possible, it is an incredible place to visit. If not then there are plenty of local people on youtube vlogging their daily lifes.
[0]: https://twitter.com/DanielDumbrill/status/128826906429753753... [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/hwi7ub/i_am_soph... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
Source: am Chinese living in China, sitting in a coffee shop and procrastinating. Edit: typo.
And how is the western concern for human rights abuses in Xinjiang being covered by the Chinese media?
This is a problem to be handled at the diplomatic level between govts, by govts concerned about human rights abuses using various forms economic and diplomatic leverage and pressure to effect change. You can pressure your own govt to do that if want.
It's hard to change minds when the education system doesn't support free thinking that challenges authority, when identity is caught up with national pride and the us vs them mentality. That's why it's important to use language like CCP instead of China to separate the people from the government.
The most common defense is whataboutism. Talk about Uigher camps in Xingjiang or the Hong Kong protests? "But America has racism, and police beatdowns." The argument against democracy is that the people aren't educated enough to handle voting, for example and bring up covid cases in the US.
I had a conversation a while back with my cousin, who didn't like Morey's (NBA GM) comments about Hong Kong and supported the Rockets ban. me: "But it's his personal opinions, can't he say what he wants?" cousin: "No, because he's a known person. It's like Xi saying California isn't a part of the US." cousin: "That's fine, because everybody knows it's not true. We'll just think he's dumb." cousin (jokingly): "that's just the cultural difference between east and west"
Unfortunately, it's hard to bring up any real nuanced conversation, and especially hard to change any minds. (i.e. like how none of the HK protestors key demands were to actually separate, something many people in China thought)