How is this evidence of genocide? This is evidence for the existence of correction camps (which you can obviously criticise) during a very concrete period of time in Xinjiang over the span of a few years, not evidence of genocide
these camps are purpose built to erase a specific culture through “re-education”
Then why did the camps close after the few years it took for the counter-terrorism campaign to work? Why does Xinjiang have a regional government, with its chairman being an Uyghur man called Erkin Tuniyaz? Why are there above 100 Islamic associations in Xinjiang with imams teaching theology and Arabic?
Have you read the picture which makes this post? It literally revolves around the word “genocide”. Who’s moving the goalposts here by saying “well maybe it’s not a genocide but there’s been some extent of police state during a counter-terrorism campaign”?
You’re correct, that is what the meme is referencing.
However, I responded to your statement attempting to deny photographic evidence of violence.
14 independent sources; yet you still are denying the evidence and moving goalposts.
This is what you wrote as of this comment:
Yet, in 2025, somehow, in the smartphone era, when almost literally every Chinese adult citizen carries a camera in their pocket with internet access (and widespread non-prosecuted access of VPNs in China to bypass the great firewall), there isn’t a shred of photographic evidence of violence against the Uyghur people.
It seems like some evidence of violence against them exists, and has been corroborated by multiple sources.
“14 independent sources”, none of which provides photographic evidence of violence? These “leaks” are mostly reports in Chinese that you have to trust have been translated accurately and unbiasedly by western political actors, not “pictures of people in concentration camps”.
I also mentioned multiple times the genocide in the comment you’re quoting, and you’re choosing to overfocus on the single time I didn’t.
So you’re acknowledging that the actions in China against Uighurs also amount to genocidal?
I also mentioned multiple times the genocide in the comment you’re quoting, and you’re choosing to overfocus on the single time I didn’t.
I’m glad we’re in agreement. It seemed you were trying to make a different point.
Given the sheer volume and consistency of evidence from multiple independent sources, it is difficult to dispute the compelling case of widespread human rights violations.
No, reported violations of human rights during a reduced and specific timeframe in a counter- terrorist campaign accompanied by massive investment in economic development, dont amount to genocidal.
volume and consistency of evidence from multiple independent sources
Calling the comprehensive evidence of human rights abuses against Uighurs ‘CIA propaganda’ dismisses the work of:
Independent UN investigators who found credible allegations of crimes against humanity.
Respected international human rights organizations that conduct meticulous, on-the-ground investigations and collect survivor testimonies.
Academic scholars who publish peer-reviewed research.
Journalists from around the world who have risked their safety to document these realities.
These are not government intelligence agencies. Their findings are based on a volume and consistency of evidence that stands up to scrutiny, regardless of how inconvenient it may be to label it as such. The narrative of ‘economic development’ doesn’t negate systematic human rights abuses.
They don’t have to be to show western anti-chinese bias.
Yes, I dismiss the Amnesty International research based on lies, a.k.a. “anonymous interviews”. Yes, I dismiss western-based analysis of translations of compiled gigabytes of Chinese documents. Yes, I dismiss “scholar” work based on the west.
Would you trust a Chinese university’s analysis of, say, democracy in the US? Would you trust a Chinese NGO in its analysis of the treatment of Ukrainians in the ongoing conflict?
How is this evidence of genocide? This is evidence for the existence of correction camps (which you can obviously criticise) during a very concrete period of time in Xinjiang over the span of a few years, not evidence of genocide
genocide, by definition, includes the erasure of a cultural group.
these camps are purpose built to erase a specific culture through “re-education”. that is genocide.
Then why did the camps close after the few years it took for the counter-terrorism campaign to work? Why does Xinjiang have a regional government, with its chairman being an Uyghur man called Erkin Tuniyaz? Why are there above 100 Islamic associations in Xinjiang with imams teaching theology and Arabic?
This was the point where you moved the goalposts and revealed you’re not willing to discuss in good faith.
Have you read the picture which makes this post? It literally revolves around the word “genocide”. Who’s moving the goalposts here by saying “well maybe it’s not a genocide but there’s been some extent of police state during a counter-terrorism campaign”?
You’re correct, that is what the meme is referencing.
However, I responded to your statement attempting to deny photographic evidence of violence.
14 independent sources; yet you still are denying the evidence and moving goalposts.
This is what you wrote as of this comment:
It seems like some evidence of violence against them exists, and has been corroborated by multiple sources.
“14 independent sources”, none of which provides photographic evidence of violence? These “leaks” are mostly reports in Chinese that you have to trust have been translated accurately and unbiasedly by western political actors, not “pictures of people in concentration camps”.
I also mentioned multiple times the genocide in the comment you’re quoting, and you’re choosing to overfocus on the single time I didn’t.
So you’re acknowledging that the actions in China against Uighurs also amount to genocidal?
I’m glad we’re in agreement. It seemed you were trying to make a different point.
Given the sheer volume and consistency of evidence from multiple independent sources, it is difficult to dispute the compelling case of widespread human rights violations.
No, reported violations of human rights during a reduced and specific timeframe in a counter- terrorist campaign accompanied by massive investment in economic development, dont amount to genocidal.
That is if you swallow CIA propaganda only
Calling the comprehensive evidence of human rights abuses against Uighurs ‘CIA propaganda’ dismisses the work of:
These are not government intelligence agencies. Their findings are based on a volume and consistency of evidence that stands up to scrutiny, regardless of how inconvenient it may be to label it as such. The narrative of ‘economic development’ doesn’t negate systematic human rights abuses.
They don’t have to be to show western anti-chinese bias.
Yes, I dismiss the Amnesty International research based on lies, a.k.a. “anonymous interviews”. Yes, I dismiss western-based analysis of translations of compiled gigabytes of Chinese documents. Yes, I dismiss “scholar” work based on the west.
Would you trust a Chinese university’s analysis of, say, democracy in the US? Would you trust a Chinese NGO in its analysis of the treatment of Ukrainians in the ongoing conflict?