u/TranscendentalEmpire

None of what you've copypasted here would prove anything close to genocide

Lol, I think I specifically outlined that this was evidence of a minority group being suppressed, not genocide.

systematic oppression even if any of it were true

And what is your rebuttal to this sourced information? What evidence do you have to dispute any of the evidence I laid out?

For someone who is so anal about the sourcing of evidence, you seem to be lacking any kind of counter argument.

your "source" presents absolutely no evidence to support their claims, it's literally just paragraph after paragraph of "trust me bro".

Lol, what aspect of their write up are you rebutting? In the "paragraphs after paragraphs" of information you are rebutting they state they are utilizing information published by census data published by the Chinese government.

Your only source is also verifiably funded by the US and our allies,

Central European Initiative

Eleanor Rathbone Charitable Trust

European Union

Evan Cornish Foundation

Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Foundation for International Law for the Environment

International Development Research Centre

International Research & Exchanges Board

Irish Aid

Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights

Open Society Foundations

Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency

The Blanes Trust

The Miaan Group

The United Nations Democracy Fund

The United States Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

The United Nations Population Fund

Wellcome Trust

And much of these sponsors are also condemning the crimes sponsored by the US in Israel. Just accepting funding from an org doesn't mean your evidence is by rote incorrect.

You are not rebutting any of the actual evidence, you're just moralizing.

There is not "plenty of evidence", there are plenty of wild claims and unverifiable stories,

"Xinjiang is a vast region with an area of 1.66 million km2. Until the 1950s, Uyghurs were the majority ethnic group in the region, accounting for more than 90 percent of the total population."

"Between the 1940s and the 1980s, attempts to incorporate the region into the modern Chinese national state brought about a 2,500 per cent increase in the Han population. Today, Han and Uyghurs each account for approximately 40 per cent of Xinjiang’s total population of roughly 25.5 million. Clearly, the basic trajectory over the past decades has been one of moving Han rapidly into the region. This is coupled in more recent years with a significant shrinking of the Uyghur population."

"The Han population in the region increased at an average rate of 8.1 per cent yearly, from 5 per cent in 1947 to around 40 per cent in 2000. Officially, Uyghurs comprise about 45 percent of Xinjiang’s permanent population with Han representing approximately 42 percent, and Kazakh, Hui and other ethnicities making up the rest. However, these figures belie the very high number of long-term resident and temporary Han migrant workers as well as thousands of security personnel in Xinjiang. They also obscure data from the 2020 Chinese Statistical Yearbook, showing that between 2017 and 2019 the birth rate in Xinjiang dropped approximately 48.7 per cent, from 15.88 per thousand in 2017 to 8.14 per thousand in 2019. The average for all of China was 10.48 per thousand."

"The capital of the province itself went from being a city in which there were hardly any Han Chinese before 1949 to one in which the Uyghurs have been almost completely displaced. In addition, across Xinjiang, urban redesign projects have demolished hundreds of thousands of homes and resettled millions of Uyghur residents on the pretext of ‘civilization’ (文明) and ‘beautification’ (美化)."

"Since the mid-1990s, the gradual exclusion of Uyghurs from state-based employment – and the rising number of private jobs – is statistically verifiable from a variety of sources. While Han Chinese were able to secure employment, Uyghurs were kept out of construction jobs, road-building projects and oil and gas pipelines. Uyghurs with graduate degrees were only employed at an estimated 15 per cent, and, according to a 2013 study, Uyghurs earned an average of 59 per cent of what their Han counterparts earned."

Source from Minority Rights Group

about a country& region that is currently completely open to foreign tourism no less.

"While Xinjiang is generally open to international tourism, there are specific travel restrictions and measures in place, particularly for certain groups and areas. Generally, foreigners do not need a special permit to enter Xinjiang, but they do need a valid Chinese visa. However, there are restrictions on travel in specific areas, and increased security measures are common, especially in major cities. "

You admit you don't believe there's a genocide occuring, yet still choose to believe the people/organizations making these claims despite the fact that all of them claim that a genocide is occuring.

You can still massively suppress a minority group without committing what is commonly thought to be a genocide.

Just because I don't completely agree with the conclusions made from a body of evidence doesn't mean the evidence is invalid.

Han chauvinism existing does absolutely nothing to prove the specific accusations being presented. When a government chooses to target a minority population it invariably results in physical evidence, see Palestine for examples.

What accusations of mine are you denying?

As I said there is plenty of evidence to confirm that a minority group is being put into concentration camps for "reeducation " and that they are being forced to move away from their traditional homeland. This isn't even being denied by the Chinese government, they just validate it as a way to control what they lable as terrorism.

The evidence I provided is sourced by an organization that also documents the crimes currently occuring in Gaza.

should be more than enough reason for any reasonable person to disregard these stories until such evidence is presented.

As I said, there's plenty of evidence that's been cross referenced and verified by dozens of advocacy groups who often stand against America's foreign policy. Most of the evidence comes from internal documents created by the Chinese government itself.

I don't have any specific prejudice against the Chinese government, it like any government does things that I agree with and disagree with. You on the other hand don't seem to be able to get over your own biases.

There is plenty of evidence widely available from organizations like human rights watch and amnesty international. Claims that deny any evidence exist of the persecution of China's Muslim population rely on logical fallacies to attempt to obscure the validity of the body of evidence. Namely ad hominem attacks against the individual who first gathered the evidence to begin with.

While the researcher obviously has biased opinions about the CCP, that doesn't affect the validity of the evidence gathered, most of which comes directly from publicly available information released by the CCP itself, or from leaked internal communication from party members that have been widely verified by reputable journalists and organizations specializing in human rights violations.

While I personally wouldn't claim that there is a genocide as we traditionally understand it has occurred, it's hard to deny that the Uyghur people aren't being systemically oppressed or that significant human rights violations haven't occurred.

Simply looking at publicly available census data releases by the CCP we can tell that Uyghur people are being driven from culturally important sites that are being replaced by ethnically Han Chinese, and that Uyghur populations have been shrinking at a worryingly abnormal rate.

If we look at recent history of ethnic conflict within China in tibet, Manchuria, and inner Mongolia, I fail to see why it's logical to assume that the accusations of crimes against humanity is pure propaganda.

Han chauvinism is well documented, and even Mao Zedong spoke about how it would negatively affect the future of the party. Ethnic conflict/cleansing has been a constant in the region and is part of the foundational history of modern China.

Xinjiang is literally completely open to foreign tourism

No it's not, large parts of xinjiang require permits to visit, or are still completely blocked to outsiders.

Also, there is plenty of evidence to verify that systemic abuse of minority rights has and still is occurring in China. You deny any of it is valid.

Gotta feed your hounds if you want to sic your attack dogs on someone. At this point there is going to be some sort of judicial or legislative confrontation whether it be meek or consequential. Midterms will be here sooner or later and he needs his constituents to feel like they are being attacked, he needs to feel like they need him to defend their ways of life.

Putain has ***zero*** intention of ending this without the full and complete subjugation of Ukraine.

Even if Russia subjugated the entirety of Ukraine, they still couldn't afford to stop. They've completely transitioned to a war time economy and have isolated all foreign capital.

If Putin decides to end the campaign in Ukraine, it would just mean that they're about to invade somewhere like Slovenia. They're economy couldn't handle the transition into a regular economy without imploding.

The mistake is assuming that Orban was ever anything but a populist. Orban never really changed, what changed was the state of populism in central Europe.

Basically, in the 90's liberal reform was popularized following the implosion of the Soviet Union. However, there was a conservative backlash following the "shock therapy" doctrine the IMF took when reforming the former Soviet block.

Conservative backlash in this case being styled after late Soviet socialism. Which was conservative in social mores, and in nationalist intent, but left leaning in economically. The older more impoverished population wanted to go back to the days before the collapse and before the implementation of shock therapy.

Orban has almost always riden the sentiment of populism whether that be liberalism or the sentiment of the Soviet era. The lone time he abandoned populism was in the early 00's where he tried to align himself with the middle class, which cost him the election. Since then he has doubled down on his populist agenda.

That is the problem with transitioning your government into a war time economy, once it starts sustaining itself it's nearly impossible to decouple from without initiating a huge recession.

It's the reason Putin is treating peace negotiations as a joke, there is no economic incentive for peace. Most foreign capital left Russia after the war in Georgia in 08, and the rest left or were gobbled up by the state after the war in Ukraine.

If the Russian government doesn't sustain a war in Ukraine or start another war relatively soon their economy will soon spiral out of control. The Guns vs Butter model is still a *removed* to deal with, and Russia as a nation throughout history seems to be incapable of learning that particular lesson.

America actually has plenty of rare earth deposits, it's just not profitable to mine them and then build facilities to refine them.

Lol, we aren't going to be mining anything. Rare earth minerals aren't rare because they're only located in isolated places, they're rare because they are only present in small amounts when mining other materials.

The hard part is the refining of rare earth minerals because it requires large investments in refineries to separate the materials and consolidate them. Infrastructure that Ukraine or America haven't invested in.

The minerals deal is just something that trump can point to as a "win" when in reality it's not worth anything. Just like everything this administration does, it's nothing but smoke and mirrors.

Welcome to government brought to you by fascism, chaos is how they consolidate power. You create enough chaos to exhaust and scare people, blaming the chaos on a scapegoat. You then say, well I could totally get rid of all this chaos if you give me the power to do so. The courts, and the legislators are obviously not equipped to stop this mess, we just need one person with supreme power to cut through the bureaucracy.....

that Russia doesn't need minerals, nor land, nor resources, but an assurance that nuclear capabilities aren't being deployed along its border.

I mean if that was the entire point of the war wouldn't it still be a strategic failure considering the invasion prompted Finland to join NATO?

I mean it's kinda hard to separate from COVID and the set back in their housing market. Basically in an attempt to meet their GDP quotas local governments loaned out way too much money to keep production. So local governments are in a lot of debt which at some point should have cascading effects on the economy.

But you gotta hand it to the guy, he took control of the most powerful nation the world has ever known

Eh, that's kinda feeding into the propaganda surrounding him. In reality the Russian Federation is just run by the people who scammed the most citizens from their ownership rights after the privatization of the Soviet state. Since the fall of the Soviet state, it's basically been pretending to be a world power by bullying smaller nations with the military it inherited.

His real talent is propagandizing and intimidating his way to the top of basically a government run by a mob.

it's pretty clear who's pulling the oompa-lumpas strings)

Again, I think this is exactly what they want you to think. I just think trump wants what Putin has, supreme power to whatever he wants, and a state where his cronies can do whatever they want so long as they are loyal. American oligarchs have been envious of Russian oligarchs for some time now.

This is going to be a hard pill to swallow for the Russian nationalist cosplaying as leftist on Lemmy......

More than likely possible depending on how they came up with valuations on old stock piles from the cold war. Depends on if you value them based on their original cost, or the modern cost to replace them.

Yeap, I just think trump went to Russia and liked how they did things. I think American billionaires see the government as a boss, and they think rich people shouldn't be able to be told no. They think if there is a hierarchy of power they should get to wield it to do the things they want to do, it shouldn't ever be wielded against them.

I think that's why he is generally bewildered when he is still told no, or held accountable, and why he's so vindictive when he's told no. He doesn't really understand why people are allowed to say no, in his head he's boss of America.

So when he sees Putin getting to do whatever he wants without any resistance, it makes sense to him, and he's jealous. If Putin is boss of Russia, why can't I be boss of America?

I mean..... If your only real accomplishment is inheriting huge sums of wealth, it makes a bunch of sense. I personally don't really see the need for Trump to be compromised by Russian intelligence, American oligarchs have always been jealous of the federations kleptocracy.

What could be better for someone like Trump and his cronies than a system where as long as you're loyal you can literally do anything you want?

Have a journalist poking around your business, simply introduce them to the window. A rival business won't sell you their company for nothing? Make a call and have the government do a "corruption investigation". Your company is coming under protest for displacing minority groups....off to jail for subversion.

The Russian Federation is just America in ten years of we don't make a drastic about face. Our oligarchs have been pushing that way for a while, trump is just accelerating the process.

true, Putin tried to join NATO once, to join the imperialism club, but the US rejected Russia

They never made an official application, Putin wanted to be invited.

because the US wanted (and still wants) Russia Balkanized and re-plundered instead.

"a small but growing lobby in Europe and the United States making the case for the break-up of the Russian Federation. Their main argument is that Putin’s denial of Ukraine’s right to exist proves that the Russian state is irredeemable imperialist"

Kinda an underwhelming theory considering your article is talking about a small group reacting to very modern imperialism, not a scheme from the early 00s to deny Russia NATO membership, especially when they were made a permanent joint council.

Russia has figured out that it’s better off allying with Global South countries than attempting imperialist adventures upon them

Ahh yes, famous liberators like....bashar al-assad.

The Intercept, 2021: Meet NATO, the Dangerous “Defensive” Alliance Trying to Run the World

• CounterPunch, 2022: NATO is Not a Defensive Alliance

• Noam Chomsky, 2023: NATO “most violent, aggressive alliance in the world”

• Thomas Fazi, 2024: NATO: 75 years of war, unprovoked aggressions and state-sponsored terrorism

• Gabriel Rockhill, 2020: The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It

And notice how none of those "sources" are before 2014, and especially not before 2008. It's almost like there's a modern push to reinterpret the dangers of NATO.

NATO is imperialist and I'm not a fan of it, however post Soviet dissolution it wasn't ever enough of an actual threat to validate invading Ukraine, Georgia, or sponsoring the other break away factions in their neighbors back yard.

I'll leave it at that, because I don't think you're arguing in good faith, and you've already said you aren't a socialist, so I'm guessing by our just a Russian nationalist and I'm wasting my time.

Just the small problem of thousands of murdered eastern Ukrainians, and the Ukrainian state’s efforts to systematically suppress their political representation and their language.

• BBC, 2014: Ukraine underplays role of far right in conflict

• Human Rights Watch, 2014: Ukraine: Unguided Rockets Killing Civilians

• The Hill, 2017: The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda

• The Guardian, 2017: 'I want to bring up a warrior': Ukraine's far-right children's camp – video

• WaPo, 2018: The war in Ukraine is more devastating than you know

• Reuters, 2018: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem

• The Nation, 2019: Neo-Nazis and the Far Right Are On the March in Ukraine

• openDemocracy, 2019: Why Ukraine’s new language law will have long-term consequences

• Al Jazeera, 2022: Why did Ukraine suspend 11 ‘pro-Russia’ parties?

• NYT, 2024: U.N. Court to Rule on Whether Ukraine Committed Genocide

• History of Fascism in Ukraine: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV

I think this can be covered with one source.

George Washington Univ., 2017: NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard *Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner*

Because discussions between an administration and a head of state is now considered binding geopolitical contracts?

Orinoco Tribune, 2022: Former German Chancellor Merkel Admits that Minsk Peace Agreements Were Part of Scheme for Ukraine to Buy Time to Prepare for War With Russia

" the 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give time to Ukraine. It…used this time to become stronger as can be seen today. The Ukraine of 2014-2015 is not the modern Ukraine.”

Not a very intellectually honest interpretation from this "journalistic website"

- Al Mayadeen, 2023: Zelensky admits he never intended to implement Minsk agreements

I don't see how not following through on the minsk agreement is really provoking a war when Russia has already broken The Budapest Memorandum.

Jeffrey Sachs, 2023: NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine

"The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition to not invade Ukraine. Of course, we didn't sign that.The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second-class membership. We rejected that.So, he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite.”

Demanding the impossible....that NATO retract to levels back in the 90s and to prevent an invasion that had already happened is a bit far from

"NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine"

The NATO chief was just repeating putina claims, not making claims.

This is ridiculous and just a historical and dishonest.