China makes it illegal to discuss independence for Xinjiang

[bemildred]

Source: Telegraph.UK

A new law in the far-western Chinese province of Xinjiang makes it a criminal offence for people to discuss separatism on the internet, according to state media.

Xinjiang was the scene of deadly race riots earlier this year between local Uighurs, a Muslim ethnic minority, and Han Chinese.

Almost 200 people died in Urumqi, the capital of the province, as Uighurs rose up against the Chinese government.

China has accused a tiny minority of Uighurs of wanting to split the vast desert province away from the rest of the country and declare it as independent East Turkestan.



Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/6239309/China-makes-it-illegal-to-discuss-independence-for-Xinjiang.html

[Brickbat]

1. OK, wait, is China one of those emerging economies we should be all happy about, or is it a

respectable established economy that's going green and so we should be all happy about it? I can't remember.

[Fearless]

2. I believe it's the nation whose economy has us by the short and curlies.

[Brickbat]

3. Oh, THAT China! Whew! Thanks!

I can never remember if they're good or bad.

:sarcasm:

[bhikkhu]

4. As would most powers that be

unfortunately one of the conundrums of the nation-state is what to do about separatist regions wishing for self-rule. Typically they are dealt with like China has done, with the tacit approval of every other nation-state dealing with the same problems. There are no real international standards or programs to resolve self-rule issues.

The US has supported separatism when some political advantage is served, and ignores it when it is not.

[Xithras]

6. Gotta disagree there.

Russia has fought against seperatists for over a decade now, in actual open combat, and yet they have never taken the extreme step of prohibiting it's discussion. Most civilized countries recognize a difference between speech and actions.

[bhikkhu]

14. If you read history

responses to actual separatism are different from ordinary dissent. It certainly wasn't pretty here. Abroad its a situation that has been alternately encouraged and discouraged by our government, depending upon the advantage of the times.

[bemildred]

15. Prohibiting discussion is a sign of weakness.

It means the threat is seen to be real and present, and yet one feels unable to take direct action because of the risk.

Russia has taken vigorous steps that go far beyond forbidding discussion when it has felt the need was acute, e.g. the Caucusus, and I have no doubt that they would resort to this method if they felt unable to use more active means.

[Posteritatis]

9. Most powers that be don't prohibit mere discussion of the issue. (nt)

[NewAgeThinker]

5. China Owns You!

You can diss China as much as you wish
i'm not fond of them either

but.... The own us!
We are slaves to China.

China owns us, we owe them so much money under a Fiat economic system where debt is not backed by the gold standard but rather the american people.

This means we are all slaves to China!

[prostomulgus]

7. You're right and we need to be careful what we say here. nt

[Old Hob]

10. when they come for our country, they won't be carrying AK-47s, they'll be carrying briefcases

and our lawmakers will let them in without hesitation because fiat money must be preserved regardless of anything else; otherwise, the entire power structrure by which most every government on earth maintains control over its populace will vanish as will the mechanism by which bankers maintain control over most all of the governments on earth. Should we blame the bankers or should we blame the politicians who borrowed or should we blame ourselves for insisting on living way beyond our means for so many decades? I would say default and start over but it won't be allowed to happen because too many powerful interests are looking forward to the power they'll wield over us once we are relegated to making interest payment for the rest of eternity. Yes, we are well on our way to becoming a plantation economy again but this time, we'll all be slaves.

[amandabeech]

8. Thomas Friedman's piece in the Times last week essentially praising dictatorship

was simply appalling.

The guy never, ever, ever sees the blowback to any of whatever the chattering class in Washington is advocating. Or advocated six months ago.

Really, I think that this guy should be reincarnated for cycles to eternity as some working class man or woman in just about every place in the world.

He is simply clueless and for the life of me I cannot figure out why he is such a big deal.

[ShortnFiery]

11. But only if these dictators have interests that are aligned with the USA's corporate elite.

Otherwise, they're thugs and should be overthrown. :eyes:

[amandabeech]

12. True. n/t

[David__77]

13. This was already illegal.

Separatist speech was already illegal.