Gulags in China?

Ant22

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I've never lived in the US, but I did live in China. And I asked about a hundred of people what they thought of their government. Only ONCE did I notice one person being uncomfortable with the question, and he said "we can't say anything, it's bad". All the other times, the reply was along these lines: "China is a big country, and there are too many of us. The government keeps us together, there is unity in spite of the hundreds of ethnicities. No, it's not perfect, but I love China and feeling Chinese. We may not be able to criticize the government, but we can do whatever else we want". I wondered at times whether it was simply patriotism or part of the "brain-washing", but then I saw half of my students and friends planning on going abroad, or on forming their own companies, thinking for themselves. And people in rural areas seemed just as happy going about their lives. If the government was THAT tyrannical, it wouldn't allow that. It's not just that the Chinese workers are all "exploited working ants", or they would lack the creativity that we are witnessing in their economy. And the poor working conditions, when present, were imposed by private companies, not the government.

I just wanted to add to this: I lived with a girl from Hong Kong for nearly a year. Her and her family moved to the UK temporarily as her stepfather was British, but they all are planning to go back to Asia. Due to property prices and costs of living in Hong Kong they want to move to mainland China this time. My ex-house mate's mother has family in China and she spends lots of time there each year. If China was as bad as western media portrays it to be I'm pretty sure someone who spends 4-6 months a year there and the remainder of the year in Europe wouldn't want to move there permanently. Yet they are all waiting for the youngest daughter to finish school so they can go back.

My ex-house mate herself has lots of friends there and she was always telling me how much she disliked London. The costs of living are so ridiculous here that she had little money left at the end of the month, while her friends in China had much more disposable income and higher savings despite actually making a bit less. I once discussed what I read in this SOTT article with her and she confirmed this is largely correct:


I used to work near London's Chinatown in a serviced office building and there were plenty of businesses owned and run by Chinese people there. Over the years I made quite a few acquaintances and friendships there and I never steered clear of water cooler chat. I never even once heard someone speak negatively about China. Whenever someone went back for a holiday I got to hear stories about their family gatherings, visiting friends, travelling, and doing tons of shopping. Rarely anything political was mentioned. When asked if they missed China most of them said 'yes' and many planned to eventually return.

In my experience the Chinese aren't overly trusting of strangers and they keep their thoughts to themselves for a long while before opening up. But over time I did have a lot of meaningful conversations with quite a few people, including socio-political topics. Although there were things they liked more about the UK or London, and there were things they didn't like about China, in general those conversations weren't much different from chats with other expats.

I only once met a Chinese guy who deviated from this pattern. He was a consultant in our firm and he was panically afraid of having any online presence. When we became suspicious he said that the Chinese government was after him. But I don't know any details about that so he may or may not have genuinely done something to deserve the government's interest in him. I guess this may show how people who find themselves in trouble with the law are treated but for all I know they guy could have committed a serious crime.

So the picture is a complex one I think. Although what I described is circumstantial evidence I know more Polish people complaining about Poland than Chinese people complaining about China. And I'd think that once out of there they'd feel free to badmouth it if it was so horrible.
 
Last edited:

hlat

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
When the abuse becomes generally for its own sake rather than to further an understandable (from one perspective) goal, i.e. "my goal is to abuse people" is not "understandable".
I'd say sticking it up the butt of millions of Chinese is abuse for its own sake.

Yes, it's a "one-world government" when it comes to vaccines, travel bans, etc. But in that sense it becomes useless to "blame" one side or the other.
To me, it's the many heads of the same monster. Each head, each government, doing some terrible things to people. I see no problem with pointing out the terrible things done by each head.
 

PopHistorian

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I'll just toss in two cents here by responding to various comments by others. My perspective comes from visiting China, almost annually, since 1999. I spent time in about ten cities in the east, wife of twenty years is a PRC citizen. I built and managed a team of engineers there for several years (which included at least one party member), lived there for short stints going to work in a skyscraper every day, been a guest in many homes, even been to the Communist Party museum in Jiaxing. :)

Eulengspiegel wrote:
...Chinese students that come here... come across as more materialist and consumerist than many middle class Germans. When I visit villages in rural Sichuan, the people are not that different from the educated class either. >>
That is definitely my experience. In my former company, I was, by far, the most successful manager of an overseas Chinese team because I learned what they wanted and worked to provide. I also had a "Chinese connection" and they liked me. I even visited with them after the employment was done, and I'm still in touch with a couple. It wasn't difficult to research what they wanted, either. Yuppies there (young urban professionals) are like American yuppies in the 1960s, only more so. They've never seen anything but a growing economy, rapid advancement of conveniences, creature comforts, entertaining distractions, and opportunities. They want to grow their resumes, they want raises, promotions, new experiences, and work-related perks like after-work English classes and yoga classes, and company-sponsored social activities like a bowling club or tennis team (things that have withered away in the US). I catered to those things to prevent what was crippling turnover on other teams. This educated class seems to know well that their state media is bunk, though many living simpler lives, particularly seniors, do not. This same class also seems to very highly respect authority in pyramidal hierarchies, in part, I think, because they want to get ahead and become authority. In this way, they present as well disciplined. If only the traffic were so well behaved! 100,000 traffic deaths there annually, I've heard. Enormous population, but relatively few cars compared to the First World. The sheer density of the eastern cities is mind-boggling when thinking about the logistics involved. There's some discipline. Surveillance is usually highly visible in busy places.

Eulenspiegel wrote:
Temples are, for the most part, tourist attractions and religion is reduced to philosophy(in imitation of philosophy faculties found in the West) and the practical side is practically dead.
That is also my experience. There may a couple of rituals that survive, particularly around funerals and burials, in my experience, but almost no one "believes" the old religion. Buddhist monks stand out by their appearance, and seem to be viewed as relics - those guys who eat vegetables, ask for money, and might try to convert you. I have an uncle-in-law who founded a Christian church in one major city that gets 1000 people for Sunday service, but it's a city of 10 million. He's the only Christian in the family. No apparent rub there.

Hindsight man wrote:
you'll find plenty of examples of Chinese business tactics that amount to little more than outright crime. You see, small to medium business owners will make much more money fleecing customers than doing honest business
Example: people there know that the tacks scattered on the road were placed at 5 AM by the bicycle/scooter repair shop 1/4 km just ahead. At least, I think most of them do know that. One learns to be careful. They also get scam phone calls, but not almost hourly like I do.

Hindsight man wrote:
Another detestable part of their culture and has been for a long time is the concept of face
It's a tough one to deal with. And widespread conspicuous consumption to impress others, even among people who do not have means.

hlat wrote:
There's now substantial evidence - in the Chinese government's own words - that they are detaining Muslims in massive numbers.
CCP dislikes Islam openly, in my opinion, but seems sneakier about suppressing other religions. We see this reflected among urbane Chinese with invention of the term "baizuo" (Baizuo) that very fully includes ridicule of the American Left's alliance with "backward" Islam, revealing the hypocrisy of much of the postmodernist mush that dominates Western culture as pushed by media and corporations. I view the Xinjiang situation as like Tibet's earlier. Destruction of the Muslim Uighur culture being attempted, must be Chinafied. But, of course, cultural diversity is always vanishing by force. Tuva was Russianized. Okinawa was Japanized. Timor was Indonesiafied. Samarkand was Islamized. Hawaii was Americanized. Scandinavia was Christinized. Maori were Anglicized. Algeria was Arabized. The whole world is experiencing Californication. On it goes. Is Xinjiang situation worse? Certainly not. China's brand of leftism does not seem to have impacted racial and ethnic biases, either.

Joe wrote:
China is about as far from Communist as France. In fact, France is probably closer.
Yes, but it is officially communist and what they call it themselves. You'll get a wrong answer on a test if you say otherwise (like I did in a corporate seminar on China business). "Communism" is another word seemingly fallen victim to Newspeak, causing confusion. It's still a loaded trigger word in the US as far as the political Right goes, anyway.

Approaching Infinity wrote:
the question for me isn't whether China has strayed into pathocracy, but whether it ever strayed out.
I think the current system was never out. There are prominent dissidents, even former insiders, in the West (whom our media absolutely silences) who describe it as a thoroughly evil horror show of unimaginable corruption and proportion, but I believe that's no different from elsewhere. Personally, I think, ultimately, their really deep state is our really deep state, or vice versa if you prefer.

Chu wrote:
what if that view is colored by your own culture, and seeing freedom differently, if only a bit?
Yes. I've heard at least one Chinese in the US explain well that, in so many ways, China offers much more freedom. I have witnessed this variously. Small example: if you want to whiz down the street on a scooter without a helmet, with your wife on the back, a baby on her shoulders, one hand on the throttle and one hand on a toddler standing on the handlebars, you can do that.

Renaissance wrote:
The 'revolutionary' tactics of wiping out language, traditions, ancestry, religion, and intellectual discourse have all been used against the Uyghurs. Their mosques and cemeteries have been destroyed, their intellectuals disappeared into camps, their language banned in schools, the practice of Islam declared as extremism and made illegal, and so on. I don't think this is just about extremism. I think they are using a handful of instances of extremism to try and wipe out a culture, the spirit of a people, so they can establish state control.
Yes, but again, not new, and Uighurs are a relatively small group. Every Native American reservation, despite its "sovereign" status is under American state control almost like everywhere else in the States is.

Joe's response to Renaissance:
Fair enough, you can call it immoral, but I think it's a bit naive to think that it's something unusual or stands out from normal affairs.
I agree with this. Just think how incredible it is what our Western PTB do to us, covertly, while pretending to care for us and others in the world, and the kinds of things they are sneakily up to. It really is stunning, but how we view it may just be a case of the devil we know.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Yes. Also in Syria. That, and more on the Caucasus Emirate for the Russian variety. I'm no fan of jihadists. But if you have something specific in mind, I'll check it out. (BTW, the bit you quoted was in reference to the number of false arrests, not the total number of arrests. If there are lots of jihadists, and the Chinese get them, that's great too.)

Consider the "Syrian revolution" that spawned "ISIS" and consider that the Chinese govt. was facing a similar prospect in that region. And then consider how Russia and the SAA dealt with ISIS. Targeting radicalized jihadi types and their families for "reeducation" seems a reasonable alternative to that.
 

Aeneas

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Anti-terrorism is only one reason among many for their existence, and probably a small one at that. There haven't been any terror attacks in China for the past four years - chalked up as a 'success' of the reeducation/detention policy. In 2017 two things happened: the camps were put into operation, and thousands of Uighur jihadists went to Syria. Just like Chechnya and Dagestan, I wouldn't be surprised if most of the hardcore jihadists shipped out to Syria, where they were either killed, or are still holed up in Idlib. So the camps may not be as effective as the government would want everyone to believe.
It could also well be that China did have a success in this area. The argument that most hardcore jihadists were shipped out to Syria and thus no longer causing attacks in China is questionable as it is as if those core jihadists were just an aberration. The root cause for jihadism, might well be poverty, few job prospects and a muslim extremist movement which used this discontent for their own purposes. So even if 5000 hard core jihadists were shipped out to Syria, that didn't stop the new crop of hard core jihadists from being formed if the underlying conditions remained. Perhaps China addressed those underlying conditions and thus limited the attacks on innocent Chinese in the province.
There are good people everywhere susceptible to propaganda and division by pathological people. The biggest difference is not necessarily a racial or a country one, but a psychological one.
Very true. When the C's mentioned that "programming is complete", it might have referred in large part to a programming of the Western population and we can see how little the resistance has been in the West to the totalitarian dictates in regards to Covid and the "Great reset". So many people fell hook, line and sinker for the pathological propaganda.

And to what @Gaby quoted Putin as saying:

As for the party and the party state building in China, this is for the Chinese people to decide; we do not interfere. Today's Russia has its own principles and rules of life, and China with its 1.35 billion people has its own. You try to rule a country with such a population. This is not Luxembourg, with all due respect to this wonderful country. Therefore, it is necessary to give the Chinese people the opportunity to decide how to organise their lives."
Apart from the 12 million Uighurs, China also has to think of the other 1338 billion people which it rules over.

We saw what happened in Ukraine, when the EU and the US repeatedly told Yanukovich to not use any force against the demonstrators no matter how violent those demonstrators chose to be (bulldozers etc.) The West actively supported the violent unrest and goaded it on and Yanukovich didn't react or use force. Had he used force, then Ukraine might still have some resemblance of a country with a functioning constitution of sorts and a rule of law. But as a consequence 40 million were plunged into chaos, abject poverty and living by the law of the jungle with basically no good future on the near horizon. The US or the EU have not been the ones to care for the ordinary Ukrainians and neither will they be if China was plunged into chaos and strife. It would be preferable if such a fate did not happen to China, where 800 million people have just been lifted out of poverty thus effectively ending poverty.

China knows about color revolutions and how they are also being targeted for such. The US has been trying to ignite fires in Hong Kong, Xinjiang and of course in Taiwan so as to sow unrest and chaos in China. If China did nothing like Yanukovich, then the result might well be nothing less than catastrophic. So they are trying to change that situation and create stability and the conditions for the discontent, like the poverty, lack of education etc. Are they perfect in their approach and effort? Most likely not and that there likely is a strong negative sentiments among parts of the uyghur population against the Chinese wouldn't help. There is undoubtedly overreach and abuse of power by some of the Chinese sent there, but then that is nothing new and not specific to the Chinese.

Approaching Infinity mentioned how difficult it is to get accurate information, but then again we have learned from the Russophobia campaigns, that no matter how accurate information Russia delivers, then it can't be true because Russia, Russia, Russia. The same with China now where even if the CCP came up with the most accurate information about what they were doing, then most of the Western pundits wouldn't believe it because China, China, China.

Perhaps a big part is vocational training programs to get the poor into a path where there is a future for them. It doesn't mean that it is all and some might be imprisoned, interrogated or be forcefully turned away from radical Islam or East Turkistan nationalism. Using words like genocide and gulags as some pundits with a vested interest in anti-Chinese sentiments does not help.
 

seek10

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I will make some comments on the topic based on my understanding. It is some what difficult to discern topics of political charge where varying emotions are involved w.r.t moral taste buds. I am sorry for the long post.
The proof US got is very weak.
In a 2018 report submitted to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination – often misrepresented in Western media as a UN-authored report – CHRD “estimate[d] that roughly one million members of ethnic Uyghurs have been sent to ‘re-education’ detention camps and roughly two million have been forced to attend ‘re-education’ programs in Xinjiang.” According to CHRD, this figure was “ased on interviews and limited data.”

While CHRD states that it interviewed dozens of ethnic Uyghurs in the course of its study, their enormous estimate was ultimately based on interviews with exactly eight Uyghur individuals.

This report is pretty typical, for example, and as far as I can tell it matches the kind of stuff in police reports:

Not exactly blockbuster
The challenge i see with this article is this. This guy was victimized by local party leader( happens all the time whether democracy or communism or one party or multi-party) and the proof of eliminating Islam is more based on a rumor. Even if communist party decides to do it, it is not new as they did it in Tibet and other places. But it may not happen the way they think.

Indian experience with getting along with Muslims is not that great, despite 30 years of Gandhi's attempts to bring cohesive unit and his name bearers ruling for another 50+ years, violent separation (where millions dead and lost every thing they had and known) as a big lesson and majority-Hindu religion by its ever adopting with out losing itself.

The problem is, usual politicking for human management where all sorts of the flavors of obedience exist - extreme to mild. Jews and Muslim population tend to have extreme obedience to their religious figures. This leads to so-called terrorism problem where some states ( like Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi) create their mercenary cannon fodder, if some body funds it. One may say this is politically incorrect to say this or even racist, but the impressions doesn't change. It is like playing with fire and West did it in Afghanistan and continue to do it until now.

Terrorism (real or manufactured or reactionary to specific injustices or varied combinations) is not specific to Islam alone. Example in case is Sikh-Terrorism in Indian state of Punjab in 80's. Indira Gandhi tried play with the fire and burnt her self in it, along with it another 50,000 due to subsequent riots and pushed the population to decade of nightmare for the state and country in general.

Luckily, Sikh religion that was born as a intermediary between Islam and Hinduism with their fertile lands came back to normal ONLY when people were allowed to live their lives in Safety and when politics is suspended in the state( i.e Police Rule). It took a decade. Surely, Atrocities happened, many Sikhs migrated to West who were currently in influential positions in West (Canada, US and UK) raise the issue of Separate Sikh country called "Khalistan", though state population moved on with their lifes and periodic political circus for last 25 years. No country can dare to the open secessionism without fight as it opens the flood gates for all else.

This leaves a big conundrum for the rulers (democracy or communism) on how to handle the situation. If leader has the will and means, the first thing they try to do is bring Safety (Often violence involved) and to address the poverty, if it is the issue. In a way, China is doing the same if one looks it as a reactionary to terrorism problem rather than arrogant attempt to eliminate Islam. If they tried to do it, "Best of Luck" with that.

After watching Western narration of news about Eastern countries new items, I felt that looking through Western lens is problematic in some cases - particularly agenda driven topics. These fall under meaning of the words like Democracy, Freedom, Communism, censorship, secularism, one party/multi-party, society (Group/Individuality) . I will take use cases of China, India and Anglo-Saxon dominated West.

ChinaIndiaWest
Story of Founding Fathers (current borders)Military guy Mao who is popular for stabilizing the country despite diverse set of cultures/languages with thousands of years of history etc.Gandhi who wants every body to get along despite diverse languages /religions /cultures/temperaments with thousands of years of historyVolunteers ( & Slaves) moved to large empty land for better life.
Democracy/Communism(voter participation)
one party/multi-party
Mao is Ambitious, Charismatic Communist united the nation. Despite disasters of Mao's programs, his successors corrected bring the economy back in line. Criticizing Mao means questioning the frame work of communism itself and geographic integrity itself.Gandhi & Co found democracy is the ONLY way they can keep the country intact. If imperialists can use divide & rule to split us, only way is to survive is unite. But, decades of License Raj in the name of Democracy hasn't produced economic results. So Indians won't look democracy as a wonderful thing. India has parties of all flavors ( religion( individual religions or secular), caste, language, communism). At the end, communism is another flavor of democracy. It supposed to be so, until Lenin/Stalin hijacked it.Democracy is the ONLY way to bring consensus during the formation. After US enjoyed economic growth and no need of talking of any other divisions. Being communist USSR is the main rival, Democracy is sacrosanct and communism is bad
FreedomFreedom of speech against Govt. strictly forbidden, But the need of basic necessities dominated to have a opinion, when the country is late to industrializationComplete Freedom of speech, but that produced little, except ever changing Govt's. Economic constraints limits the freedom of profession. To some extent history of hierarchical system also constraints this freedom of choice.Freedom of speech and Freedom of profession is possible. But, Political correctness, subtle technological control exist which most People doesn't realize.
censorshipCensorship of Anti-Govt is strictly enforced. People may or may not know Govt. liesGovt. they elect is the chief villain to the point where people forget their own Citizen responsibilities. Occasional censorship exist during sensitive times, which people understand it as a means to reducing violence. As a whole, people can say whatever they want. People know Govt. liesIn theory it doesn't exist. Reality is different.
secularismState discourages religion.In India Secularism means "Religious tolerance" , NOT " separation of religion and State". In fact, Gandhi thought Politics without religion is not possible as religion plays major role in Indian subcontinent. Over the time, political narration of religious tolerance became "Minority Appeasement", Majority became "Minority insecurity" and reminder of Trauma of riots. The counter narration of it as "psuedo- secularism" became acceptable for the majority voters as the economy improved.means: religion and State are separate. All are possible.
society (Group/Individuality)Group Society. Family comes first. Individual freedoms are encouraged according to Govt. rules.Group Society: Family comes first. Individual freedoms exists, if economics permit. Govt. don't care.Individualist: Kids are expected to go out and create their own life 18 and oppurtunities available, Freedom of every thing is paramount.
Challenges with Silence or Censorship or Gray areas: This is a hard area. It took me 5 years to make up my damn mind whether Modi coordinated 2002 Godra massacre or not. Media cried foul day after day, Western Pundit's used snippets of his speech as a proof as indisputable evidence. There is a flavor of "We know how to read between the lines, you are blind to see". I looked at all the proof that I can get and I was not convinced. Arguments goes like this. Modi said
  • "I should have handled media better" ( for Media, that is the proof of his sin. Doesn't matter he just few months on the chair with absolute no experience in power except a back-room strategist)
  • Asked the audience in a meeting "Did I asked you to riot?" (For Media, he is asking them to lie. It is his style of engaging the masses asking questions.),
  • He said "found foreign influence in the riot" ( For Media, he is diverting attention, No body cared to ask the evidence - telephone volume, fund transfers, mysterious mob arrivals before the triggering event that contributed for 75 live burnings)
  • Supreme court acquitted ( For Media, he is super powerful Evil. Don't mind his opposition is ruling the country)
  • Muslims are getting lynched after Modi became PM ( No body cared to compare the stats before he even became PM)
  • He is silent or late criticizing the lynching (For Media, he is guilty. The media who does day to day political calculations, can't they understand the political implications)
  • He doesn't entertain the press conferences ( for media, he has bones to hide and is guilty. Don't bother to check previous conferences he gave which turned out be military tribunals with no fairness)
  • He was missing in action during infamous day of Babri masjid day in 1992 ( For media, he is so cunning evil that he knows every thing)
Despite all the insinuations, he paved his way into masses by giving them what they needed and aggressively promoting his own way, instead of justifying of worn out recording of religious conflict. After 2019 elections, Opposition learned some thing. The more they accuse Modi's character indiscriminately or talking religion, more they are going to lose. Now, he is like a emperor( as long as it lasts) who can name a world's largest stadium under his name despite being he is in power and few can say it is narcissistic and most says "he deserves it".

If one looks back how a literal no-body ( no money, no political background, no caste, even no ambition) can became so big, he should thank the lefties reveling in the bone of biased "religious intolerance", ignoring all else going on.
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Consider the "Syrian revolution" that spawned "ISIS" and consider that the Chinese govt. was facing a similar prospect in that region. And then consider how Russia and the SAA dealt with ISIS. Targeting radicalized jihadi types and their families for "reeducation" seems a reasonable alternative to that.
Yeah, that is a reasonable alternative.

In my first posts, I took too extreme a position, basically assuming that the danger wasn't nearly as great as the government made it out to be - that it was mostly a cover, not just to root out whatever jihadism still existed, but to root out any separatist feelings or potential opposition to the government, whether in thought or deed. But like Aeneas pointed out, even if thousands of the hardcore jihadists went to Syria to get destroyed, that doesn't mean it removes the problem producing the jihadists, whether it's poverty, grievances, ideology, or whatever. More jihadists WILL crop up. I was wrong about that. And seeing it does change my perspective. (ADDED: Plus, there are the ones still remaining, whether in Syria or elsewhere, like Turkey, who may try to come back. Russia faces a similar problem.)

Here's where I'm at. I'll give the Chinese government the benefit of the doubt that they ARE serious about rooting out jihadism, and it is a reasonable and effective method in that regard. But I am still suspicious that the overall program is not JUST for the purpose of anti-terrorism - along the lines PopHistorian's perspective and the list he shared. Kind of like Canada's residential schools for Natives, to add another example to his list.
 
Last edited:

Renaissance

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I know what you mean, and I think that perspective is the 'realist' one, where "decent enough" = the 'law of the jungle', and it's hard to argue against such a 'law', or call it 'unfair', because there's an equally valid perspective that the lion has every right, born of necessity, to keep itself alive by eating the only food that can sustain it. The alternative is death. Likewise, China assesses that it has every right to do what it deems necessary for its 'survival' in a 'dog eat dog' or 'lion eat impala' world.

The discussion here is about whether or not China is going beyond what is necessary to ensure its survival and has strayed into pathocracy. I don't think that claim has been substantiated so far.

My thoughts have been that China hadn't actually recovered from Mao's influence seen not just in still having reverence for him but also in using the state to replace its older culture and religion, perhaps connections to their history, the state control over information, and the mass surveillance. It's mainly those things that led me to think its a pathocracy.

There is some additional clarity for me in your question, is China going beyond what is necessary to ensure it survival? I think the answer is most probably yes. For one, China is working with what they have. Russia went through decades of crisis not just with their revolution, the establishment of the Soviet Union, but as Gaby mentioned, also with it's dissolution. So undoing their social/governmental fabric would naturally bring a great deal of chaos not just for China, but also for Asia and really all the world. In a wider perspective perhaps their extreme order is needed to counter the US' extreme chaos so there can be some somewhat reasonable order in the world.

So, China is working with what they have and it is probably fair to say their 'Maoist artifacts' are mostly expressed in situations where protections are being sought. It is not a black and white world and this is where 'the law of the jungle' is helpful to remember. I also don't see Xi Jinping as a psychopath, and although there's surely pathologicals in government, at this point it would seem they are also largely contained by the controls in place. China is huge and that it operates at the capacity it does is something. I also agree the US destabilizing force is no small threat, especially in re-examining the ramifications.

The majority of the Chinese people do seem genuinely content with their system. I also think this is probably different from the current theme of Westerners accepting and seeking greater controls. They don't seem content at all! And I have to admit a solid thing about China is there is probably much more social and family stability when it comes to people not being consumed by politics. I could be wrong, but I'd wager the Dunning-Kruger effect is also minimized because of this as well. It's interesting because in the US you have detrimental freedom met with detrimental control, and one the result is this really nauseating blend of hysteria.

And I'd agree that my perspective is certainly colored by being from the US. Something this conversation has helped with is in seeing in deeper ways how structures of government have effect on the structures of personality, family life, boundaries, etc.

Really good conversation, and I'm grateful for everyone's input.
 

AndrewMn

Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
Good day! Let me put in my 2 cents too. Of course, I will express a purely subjective opinion based on personal experience. I cannot appeal to any significant sample (survey) of a large number of Chinese citizens. But I will share the experience and opinion of my Chinese friend. For a long time (since 2013) I communicated with her by correspondence and later in WeChat (Chinese messenger). It can be called the middle class. Since 2013, she has been engaged in sewing production, working from morning to night. Selling your products on Aliexpress. It was (in my opinion) a very small store. For all the time of communication - she gave the impression of loving her country, a happy person. I have never heard significant criticism. She did not think that they had serious restrictions on freedoms in their country.

And then, there is the problem of gigantism that Lobaczewski talked about. It's never easy in such a big country.
Rather, the problem might be the size of the country. I agree with Chu and am currently reading this book. There may be serious kinks in the Chinese government. I am not making excuses for them. Surely there are psychopathic synals there. But it may be in a number of cases, otherwise it is impossible to make the right decisions, because anarchy and lack of order in everyday, cultural, religious moments in such a large society can lead to even greater evil.

Unfortunately, I cannot give facts, and therefore I can be mistaken. I have not been personally in China, but only from the words of some friends formulated such an opinion.
--------------------------------------------
Добрый день! Позвольте и я вставлю своё частное мнение.

Безусловно, я выскажу чисто субъективное мнение, основанное на личном опыте. Я не могу аппелировать к какой-либо значительной выборке (опросу) большого числа граждан КНР.

Но поделюсь опытом и мнением своей китайской знакомой. Я долгое время (с 2013 года) общался с ней по переписке и позже вWeChat (китайский мессенджер) . Её можно назвать средним классом. С 2013 года она занималась швейным производством работая с утра до ночи. Продавая свою продукцию на Алиэкспресс. Это был (на мой взгляд) очень небольшой магазин.
За всё время общения - она производила впечатление любящего свою страну, счастливого человека. Я ни разу не слышал существенной критики. Она не считала что у них в стране есть серьезные ограничения свобод.

Скорее, проблема может быть в размере страны. Я согласен с Чу и как раз в настоящий момент читаю эту книгу. Возможно, есть серьезные перегибы в правительстве Китая. Я не оправдываю их. Наверняка, там присутствуют психопатические синалы. Но может быть в ряде случаев, иначе невозможно принять правильные решения, ведь анархия и отсутствие порядка в бытовых , культурных, религиозных моментах в таком большом обществе может приводить к еще большему злу.

Я не могу , к сожалению, привести факты, а поэтому могу заблуждаться. Я не был лично в Китае, а лишь со слов некоторых друзей сформулировал такое мнение.
 

Aeneas

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I came across an article discussing Russia's and China's investment in Norway and to me it highlighted how the issue of the Uyghur has the intended effect of stoking anti-Chinese sentiments.
The stronger presence of Russia and China, in Norway, has led to an ongoing discussion very much at the center of Norwegian society. As the Norwegian government is undergoing free trade talks with its Chinese counterpart, the youth wings of all major political parties (apart from the Progress Party) have voiced their opposition. They want an immediate ceasing of relations due to China’s recent human right record of the treatment of its Muslim Uyghur population.
The youth wing is not concerned about human rights abuses by the West, because it is not in the media and if so it is not emotionalised as it is with the Uyghur. So by default the Empire and the West looks clean despite being engaged in actual wars causing not just human rights abuses, but death, mayhem and destruction. To my knowledge China like Iran has not been engaged in actual wars in the last 20 years and yet the US AND its allies including Norway have been active participants and the death toll alone has been more than a million lives, the destruction of homes and livelihood of 10s of millions.
 

bjork

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
:rolleyes: Unlikely.

You have to take into account the fact that Russia has religions that were at odds with each other in the past and still are in a lot of countries. But not in Russia.

Russia is the most unique country in its diversity because these very religions live together in harmony.

And fight together against any form of intolerance and extremism.

 
Last edited:

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Here's where I'm at. I'll give the Chinese government the benefit of the doubt that they ARE serious about rooting out jihadism, and it is a reasonable and effective method in that regard. But I am still suspicious that the overall program is not JUST for the purpose of anti-terrorism - along the lines PopHistorian's perspective and the list he shared. Kind of like Canada's residential schools for Natives, to add another example to his list.

Here's where I'm at. If you, or anyone, lives in a country, and assuming you are not being unduly discriminated against, you are expected to be loyal to that country in the normal way. If you don't want to be loyal, leave. Historical grievances are not a justification for rebellion and separatism. If you go that route, do not complain about the response from govt. As Steven Crowder would say: 'change my mind'. :wizard:
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Here's where I'm at. If you, or anyone, lives in a country, and assuming you are not being unduly discriminated against, you are expected to be loyal to that country in the normal way. If you don't want to be loyal, leave. Historical grievances are not a justification for rebellion and separatism. If you go that route, do not complain about the response from govt. As Steven Crowder would say: 'change my mind'. :wizard:
Agreed!
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member

Also, there are 22 million people in Xinjiang region. 12 million are Uyghur. The capital city of Xinjiang region is Ürümqi, with a population of 3.5 million, with about half a million being Uyghur. How many of these 12 million or .5 million live peaceably with the Han Chinese, and why? Or are they all signed up to some separatist group (directly or indirectly)? If not, why? Is it the threat of camps? And how many ARE signed up to some separatist group (directly or indirectly), and why? Is it because of the camps?
 
Top Bottom