What is? Calling China fascist isn’t American propaganda because the government and its sources do not claim China is fascist. The Americans calling China fascist are poorly educated in fascism. China is authoritarian but not fascist.
Lmao you know ml just stands for Mali in this case right? Like do you think they're doing ideological purity testing when you sign up? Do you think my whole instance is CCP agents?
This is exactly the propaganda I'm referring to. I'm sure some people are being detained unjustly. I'm also very sure that number, whether per capita or in raw headcount, is a lot lower than in the US.
Using language like "disappeared" to refer to detainees just because the Western media can't conduct interviews with them in prison is textbook propaganda-speak.
Been on xiaohongshu for a while now and the chinese netizens I interacted with were nothing but kind to foreigners even when we treated them like shit.
Many of them use VPNs to get around firewalls and I speak with them aswell on other platforms. I am learning mandarin and it is quite helpful. I don't like everypart of their society, there is still some of misogyny and homophobia that makes me uncomfortable but I have seen worse here. The people of xiaohongshu are actually making great strides to combat this and I applaud them. I have probably spoken candidly with people from every major city. What makes you think people without global internet are inherently more reactionary. Wouldn't their views be reflected in the people that have that access as well? If it is so nation wide?
The Han Chinese represent 91.11% of the population in China
There are long running documented campaigns of cultural erasure of China's minority groups. It's no shocker that a country with billions of people they would use ethnic clensing to maintain social stability.
I said Han because I am well aware that is the ethnic majority in China lmao. I'd love to see your sources for the ethnic cleansing.
The ottomans had a stupid amount of ethnic minorities and managed to last for centuries. Ethnic and cultural diversity does not necessarily mean instability. Xinjiang and Tibet are autonomous regions for a reason.
Genuinely, what on earth are you talking about? China's past is full of poverty, humiliation, and exploitation, literally, "The century of humiliation!" The only people who "appeal to restore past glory" are the CIA-funded Shen Yun performances romanticizing "China before communism." The Chinese people I talk to will specifically point to the Qing as a clear demonstration of the danger of clinging to tradition and the necessity of adapting and looking forward.
China literally had a cultural revolution seeking to abolish tradition. I expect you would call that fascist just as you call if fascist whenever some people still follow tradition, after all:
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology... What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”
Not agreeing with your dictator makes it impossible to leave the country, keeps your bloodline out of good schools, and if your rhetoric is bad enough you just get abducted and dissappear.
The social credit score stuff is basically a Western myth. There was some local level rumblings and plans, but most of it has been unpopular or axed. The only thing that exists at a national level for individuals is the equivalent of a credit score in the US and western countries. I believed this narrative at one point, but then I delved deeper.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/11/22/1063605/china-announced-a-new-social-credit-law-what-does-it-mean/
I think many might reference the Uyghur genocide + extreme authoritarianism to explain why they call China fascist. I personally, am not educated on the persecution of the Uyghur genocide part, so I'm not so sure.
But China definitely has hints of nationalism and "former glory" or whatever when they start talking about Taiwan and the South China Sea. Sooo ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This is copy pasted but solid information, I can list plenty more as well. America loved to lie about the USSR then and they love to lie about China now. They use the same disprovable tactics but we fall for them because we are a new generation and have been taught propaganda in our history classes as if it is fact.
However, this claim is completely absurd when you stop and think about it even for a minute. That figure 1 million is repeated again and again. Let's just look at how much space would you actually need to intern one million people.
This is a photo of Rikers Island, New York City's biggest prison. The actual size of a facility interning ten thousand people.
According to Wikipedia, "The average daily inmate population on the island is about 10,000, although it can hold a maximum of 15,000." Let's assume this is a Xinjiang detention camp, holding ten to fifteen thousand people. How many of these would it take to hold one million people?
Let's do some math:
Rikers Size
Rikers Prisoners
One Million Uyghurs Size
413.2 acres (0.645 square miles)
10,000 to 15,000
43 to 64 square miles
In reality, one million people would probably take more space; all the supposed detention camps we see are much less dense than Rikers.
For comparison, San Francisco is 47 square miles. Amsterdam is 64 square miles. You'd literally need detention camps that total the size of San Francisco or Amsterdam to intern one million Uyghurs. It'd be like looking at a map of California. There's Los Angeles. There's San Diego. And look, there's San Francisco Concentration City with its one million Uyghurs.
Practically all the stories we see about China trace back to Adrian Zenz who is a far right fundamentalist nutcase and not a reliable source for any sort of information. The fact that he's the primary source for practically every article in western media demonstrates precisely what I'm talking about when I say that coverage is divorced from reality.
Along with his “mission” against China, heavenly guidance has apparently prompted Zenz to denounce homosexuality, gender equality, and the banning of physical punishment against children as threats to Christianity.
The fact that this nutcase is being paraded as a credible researcher on the subject is absolutely surreal, and it's clear that the methodology of his "research" doesn't pass any kind of muster when examined closely.
It's also worth noting that there is a political angle around the narrative around Xinjiang. For example, here's George Bush's chief of staff openly saying that US wants to destabilize the region, and NED recently admitting to funding Uyghur separatism for the past 16 years on their own official Twitter page. An ex-CIA operative details US operations radicalizing and training terrorists in the region in this book. Here's an excerpt:
It's also worth noting that the accusations originate entirely from the west while Muslim majority countries support China, and their leaders have visited Xinjiang many times.
Is there anything you could share that would shed more light on the Zenz thing? I'm not very keen on just "tuning out" my ideological opponents or dismissing them just because they don't affirm my biases. I'd rather read up on it myself and decide.
Part of admitting that I'm not immune to propaganda, for me, is working to root it out wherever I can by reading and cross-referencing a wide range of sources. If my deepest beliefs and biases can't stand up to that sort of scrutiny then I don't want them anymore.