How convenient that the biggest "human rights abuses" are coming from the geopolitical enemies of the western capitalist class.
Further, kind of hypocritical to make a meme that simultaneously champions leftism and "human rights" - a term that Marx decried as bourgeois, and really isn't used in class analysis. It's an idealistic way of viewing power and rights.
In order to understand Marx’s position within the history of the Rights of Man, one needs to understand On the Jewish Question in its entire logical connectivity: as a grand scheme within which the critique of the Rights of Man fits contextually. In this essay, Marx launched his first attack on “civil society” and its impact in fostering “egoistic life”; he avowed that “man […] leads a two-fold life, a heavenly and earthly life: life in the political community, in which he considers himself a communal being, and life in civil society, in which he acts as a private individual.” Since the sphere of egoism, in all its “abstract” arbitrariness, separates man from his community, and since the State was the political child of civil society, Marx wrote, the only way to destroy both was to destroy the parent: civil society. It followed, then, that the Rights of Man, which demonstrated an ontological conflict yet still existed in a “spiritual” relation with the State, were consequently “nothing but the rights of a member of a civil society, i.e., the rights of egoistic man, of man separated from other men and from the community.”
Given that the Rights of Man were political rights, they were deeply ingrained within the illusory sovereignty of the State. And since the State was the child of civil society—the society which Marx wished the demise of—the Rights of Man would be automatically abolished along with them. It is made obvious here that the establishment of a political state devoid of concepts such as law, privileges, and rights should become the only way to achieve the final stage desirable for society: a stage described by a political program leading to the emancipation of mankind and resulting in a recognition of their species-being, all to the detriment of bourgeois ideology.
Allen Buchanan has taken this argument even further by claiming that the goal of Marx’s critique of ideology was to highlight the fact that “capitalist conceptions of justice, like other juridical conceptions, presuppose certain factual generalizations which are usually taken for granted.” These generalizations present themselves as an illusion of symmetry between the worker and the exploiter—the free competitive market—that the capitalist puts in place. The free competitive market was, according to Marx, supported and maintained by the Rights of Man that had been articulated in the French and American constitutions. These rights were not eternal truths about the nature of man. Making an example of the right to liberty, Marx saw such rights as the root cause of “the separation of man from man.”
If you think curves and pillars are hard to represent in software, you'll be aghast how hard they are to represent with hand drawings.
Your typical architect or engineer of the era would need a kit of dozens of French curves to achieve proper specs in the drawing.
I think auto cad's role in minimizing residential craftsmanship pales in comparison to pre-fab techniques, fewer craftspeople, high volume assemblies, necessity for faster builds, less old-growth timber availability, and a philosophical shift in the economics of home building that now lean more towards speed and mass production.
I mean I know that. I never said it was an easy switch.
It is a costly, cumbersome process. What better way to make this costly, cumbersome process more attractive than to put a chokehold on global oil supply?
I mean they did nab Venezuela's oil right before all of this. They may be using the Iran war to throw a wrench into global supply and thus make Venezuelan oil more attractive. The geopolitical value of Venezuela's oil undoubtedly spiked at the onset of the war.
Just a matter of time until one of these "once-in-a-lifetime" climate events triggers a positive feedback loop within an understudied or unconsidered corner of climate science.
After 2 million kilometers (1.25 million miles), CATL’s EV batteries retained about 400 km (250 mi) of range. Competitor cells, on the other hand, retained considerably less, at around 350 km (218 mi) and less.
The data is based on 12 electric vehicles, 100 sample batteries, and real-world applications across four major cities in China. You can see in the chart from Morgan Stanley Research that Models 11 and 12, which use CATL batteries, exhibit considerably slower degradation than the other suppliers.
Dog, I don't got to show you shit! Your claim was that there's a genocide. The onus is on you to prove that extraordinary claim with extraordinary evidence. You are confused.
All you've shown is that the OHCHR report in one footnote out of hundreds cited Zenz who works for a right-wing think tank.
Okay, just for fun, lets pick another footnote at random.
See for example, research by S. Zhang, https://medium.com/@shawnwzhang and “Detention
Facilities in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region”, Xinjiang Victims Database
This footnote itself does not reference Zenz. Let's look at it.
If, in discussing the veracity of claims about Iran, you're allowed to throw out the Grayzone as a whole because of stories they've written about Russia, then I am absolutely allowed to throw out your source as a whole when it cites - again - a literal Nazi.
I don't think you understand why I asked you for a source on the genocide claims. That was a softball. That was me asking you to provide a source that:
A) alleges genocide in Xinjiang, and
B) does not rely on testimony from Adrien Zenz
You then replied with a source that doesn't satisfy either condition. 🤣 Dog, you could've at least picked a source that satisfied one of the two conditions.
"Well although the UN report strategically omits the term genocide, I still think it is one!"
So then your source is not the UN. The source was your ass all along. Why did you cite a source that explicitly disagrees with your point of view?
This report is based on sources from Zenz. Tell me again how all of these sources don't just regurgitate slop from Zenz.
Further, find me in your own cited report where it claims there is a genocide. You won't, because the UN has always explicitly stopped short of calling the situation a genocide.
Coming into a comment thread that is calling out the manufacturing consent against Iran, and bleating "but Xinjiang!" is whataboutism if I've ever seen it.
And yes, you are parroting Zenz. He is the source of this myth - via countless western sources regurgitating the same claims he's been making since 2018.
In March 2017, the Jamestown Foundation (Washington DC) published a three thousand-word report on “Xinjiang’s Rapidly Evolving Security State” written by Adrian Zenz and James Leibold.1 A few months later, the same writers published another report, this one slightly longer at nearly five thousand words, with the more aggressive title, “Chen Quanguo: The Strongman Behind Beijing’s Securitization Strategy in Tibet and Xinjiang.”2 At that time, there was not much interest in these stories. Zenz came from the Victims of Communism Foundation, a nonprofit organization set up by the U.S. Congress in 1993 and funded by various right-wing sources, including the Heritage Foundation.
You decided to offer the opinions of countries like Saudi Arabia
And, ya know, a plethora of others that you decided to ignore for some reason... Associating a large swath of Muslim and Arab nations with human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia really lets your racism show.
One can't in good conscience cite the IAGS as an authority when they condemn the genocide in Gaza and then ignore them when they condemn the genocide in Xinjiang.
What is rarely mentioned in Western reports is the international support China has received on its Xinjiang policies. In July 2019, ambassadors from thirty-seven countries sent a joint letter to the President of the UN Human Rights Council commending China’s “remarkable achievements in the field of human rights” and noting that “safety and security has returned to Xinjiang” with “not a single terrorist attack in Xinjiang” in three consecutive years. The signatories included Algeria, Cuba, Egypt, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates as well as others from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.14 By June 2021, this number had grown to sixty-nine countries issuing a statement in defense of China’s policies, with twenty-eight of these being members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), founded in 1969 to bring Muslim-majority countries into conversation with each other.15 This organization itself, after sending delegations to Xinjiang, issued a report in March 2019 praising China for “providing care to its Muslim citizens.”16
If you commit atrocities, genocide, and kill 20 million citizens, dont be surprised when your victim becomes leery at the prospect of you remilitarizing only 3 generations later.
Ferrous @ Ferrous @lemmy.ml Posts 5Comments 686Joined 2 yr. ago 
Ight.