Chinese mass-indoctrination camps evoke Cultural Revolution

[guillaumeb]

From the article:

The internment program tries to rewire the political thinking of detainees, erase their Islamic beliefs and reshape their very identities. Chinese officials have largely avoided comment, but some have said in state media that ideological changes are needed to fight separatism and Islamic extremism. Radical Muslim Uighurs killed hundreds in China in years past......

“Do you obey Chinese law or Sharia?” instructors asked. “Do you understand why religion is dangerous?”

To read more:

https://www.apnews.com/0db368402a214799921a05743b7acff7

[MineralMan]

1. Gay conversion therapy.

That's my answer. Or forced religious training for Native American children. Or forced conversion in many places and at many times. Would you like more examples? I can provide them.

We do not live in China.

[guillaumeb]

2. So we agree that intolerance, no matter the motivation,

is a problem.

[MineralMan]

5. No, we do not agree, since our definitions of intolerance

are different. I am tolerant of religious people worshiping whatever deities they wish. I am intolerant of any attempts they might make to foist their beliefs off on others.

As I stated earlier, I do not live in China, nor do I study China to any great degree. I live in this country, which I have studied. It has been highly intolerant of non-Christian beliefs in the past, and is still intolerant of them today.

I can tolerate any sort of belief, because beliefs of others have no effect on me. I do not, however, tolerate any actions by anyone which violate the rights of others to believe or disbelieve as they choose or can.

Actions. Beliefs are not actions. They are simply thoughts. I care about actions. My tolerance ends when actions based on beliefs injure people who do not believe the same in any way.

[edhopper]

3. The instructor is not wrong.

Not saying the camps are good. But he's not wrong, just saying.

In America I prefer American Law from that of the Christian Taliban we have here.

[guillaumeb]

7. I disagree. eom

[edhopper]

14. About preferring

Christian Law over our Government Laws.

Or that there are dangerous Muslim ideologies?

[guillaumeb]

17. The ending.

[Voltaire2]

23. ? This is typical.

Instead of clearly answering a question asked to clarify a prior statement you reply cryptically, or deflect, or refuse to answer at all, or insult the questioner.

[guillaumeb]

26. There is danger in many things.

And I understand the need to say :what about..." in matters like this, but this particular article concerns an avowedly atheist government persecuting religious and painting that persecution with the popular label "terrorism".

[Mariana]

4. Gil, what do you think China should do about the terrorism

that has been perpetrated by religious extremists in the area?

[guillaumeb]

8. This, for me, exemplifies Chinese policy:

“Do you obey Chinese law or Sharia?” instructors asked. “Do you understand why religion is dangerous?”

They are actively hostile to religion and are punishing believers while calling it a response to terrorism. What do you think Tibetans call Chinese policy toward Tibet?

[Mariana]

10. You haven't answered my question.

Why are you trying to hijack your own thread?

[MineralMan]

11. Intolerance of religion trumps everything,

according to some few. Any religion. It matters not what followers of a religion do. Religion is sacred and not to be challenged. That's what is being promoted here.

[guillaumeb]

13. What is being avoided is that this is persecution of a religion.

If you are in favor of this example of the Chinese persecuting theists, make that point. If you are opposed, make that point.

[MineralMan]

16. Yes, it is intolerance. I said as much.

Your replies do not answer the questions. Intolerance of the bad behavior of religious people is justified.

[guillaumeb]

12. What the Chinese call terrorism

can also be called fighting for survival on the part of a marginalized and oppressed group. Just one of the religious groups that are victimized by the Chinese rulers.

Or are you siding with the Chinese on this one?

[Mariana]

15. You still haven't answered my question. nt.

[guillaumeb]

18. Your question is a position.

The question accepts the Chinese narrative that this is a fight against terrorism, rather than the standard persecution of a religion by the Chinese Communists.

[Mariana]

20. The excerpt you put in your OP says

that hundreds have been killed by religious extremists. What do you call it when religious extremists kill hundreds of people?

[trotsky]

22. Something something whatabout patriotism n/t

[guillaumeb]

25. Murder, the same as when religionists are killed by the Chinese government.

[Act_of_Reparation]

21. You clearly know a lot about Chinese internal politics.

I had no idea the Xinjiang separatist movement and the dozens of terrorist attacks it has carried out over the past twenty years were total fabrications. Thanks for enlightening us.

[trotsky]

6. Current Chinese (Communist) law ain't much to write home about.

Neither it nor sharia are a system of laws I would want to live under.

What about you, gil?

[guillaumeb]

9. Do you agree that this is intolerance directed at religion?

Given that this was said:

“Do you obey Chinese law or Sharia?” instructors asked. “Do you understand why religion is dangerous?”

[trotsky]

19. Sure, gil. They pose a threat to the authoritarian regime.

But they pose no threat to atheism, and it isn't because of atheism that they are being put into education camps.

I answered your question. Now answer mine. It is the absolute very least you could do - if you value dialog as you claim.

Or perhaps your heart is so full of hatred and anger that you won't.

Your call, gil.

[Major Nikon]

31. Crickets, meanwhile calls out others for avoidance

Interesting how that works.

[guillaumeb]

24. We live under neither.

And, as I have said numerous times in this group, I believe in a far greater separation of church and state. How many times should I repeat this? Should I make it my signature line?

[trotsky]

51. You didn't answer my question.

The Chinese government has a much greater separation of church and state than we do, I guess. Are you saying you'd prefer to live under their laws then?

[pangaia]

27. It is not so far fetched to see this happening here in one form or another.

I do not know anyone in Xinjiang. But I do know several people who DO know people there.
My ex-wife, who is Chinese, for one.

And I have a number of Tibetan acquaintances/friends - in Nepal and the US.
A few people in Yunnan - a restaurant owner in Kunming, a "motel' owner in Dali and a taxi driver in Lijiang.... and I know a few people in Chengdu.

These people know what is going on despite the difficulty of getting information. These events, and all that has gone before, should be a warning to us.

[guillaumeb]

28. And it should be a reminder that intolerance,

no matter the ideology or beliefs, is a huge issue.

[pangaia]

30. Agreed, for sure.

Earlier this evening, I tried to follow the discussion between you, MM and a few others... but could not..

So I decided to add what meager input I could.

I often read post in the religion group but almost never comment..

[guillaumeb]

34. Your input is not meager.

I am glad you read and hope that you feel inspired to post.

[Major Nikon]

32. It's also a reminder that indoctrination is a huge issue

Although that message is certainly going to be lost on some

[guillaumeb]

37. As in Chinese "anti-religion" indoctrination?

Yes, that type of indoctrination is an issue, and as the Russian experience shows, it did not work.

[Major Nikon]

39. As well as other types you seem to be conveniently forgetting about

Like the sort which produced the response to begin with.

[DonCoquixote]

29. it is one thing to fight terrorism

It is another to say Islam IS terrorism. It seems that the Chinese are in danger of making the very same mistake the US has made.

[Major Nikon]

33. There's 4 times more people in China with a much lower per capita income

They also have some very radical populations as neighbors. It’s not really fair to judge them by our standards. Image how our system would fare under the same circumstances. We take one large attack and we now have a gulag and spend trillions on “security”, despite having the luxury of geographical isolation.

[guillaumeb]

36. I agree with your analysis of the US response

to individual terror. But state terror is terrorism on a larger scale, and the current Chinese leaders are engaging in it.

[Major Nikon]

38. Which isn't what terrorism is

And exactly what authoritarianism is.

[guillaumeb]

40. Make that distinction to those being terrorized.

I am certain that they will appreciate the difference.

[Major Nikon]

41. I don't put much stock in obvious appeal to emotion fallacies

YMMV

[guillaumeb]

42. Do you have no sympathy for those being terrorized?

Interesting.

[Major Nikon]

43. I have no sympathy for those who try to pass off fallacies as logic

Your comments are no better than those who make “think of the children” arguments as justification for puritanical public policies. The best you can say about it is it’s intellectually bankrupt, not unlike your last round of strawman horseshit.

[guillaumeb]

44. SO:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1218285391

[Major Nikon]

45. SO:

[guillaumeb]

46. Probably the best reply that you could have made.

I understand.

[Major Nikon]

47. You stole my line!

[guillaumeb]

48. Thank you.

[Major Nikon]

49. De nada

[MineralMan]

50. Why did you link to my post in this thread?

Please explain.

[guillaumeb]

35. Agreed. Blanket judgment is never a good thing to see. eom