Chinese state continues pushing conspiracy blaming US for coronavirus

Watch
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#61
Report 5 days ago
#61
(Original post by comradev)
If it was a preventative measure, then the same measures as the sinicization in other Chinese regions would be applied. They were detaining those that were deemed to have a high chance of already being extremists.
So they assumed guilt of the men imprisoned? Doesn't sound like a free and fair democracy to mr
0
reply
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#62
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#62
(Original post by comradev)
Mere 'thought' is not an immediate threat, and you can deal with it without detaining people (which is what sinicization in other parts of China is for). When extremists are already regularly killing people, you can't just deal with it through attempting to reform the local religion, much like when an epidemic is already spreading you can't just deal with it by putting up posters telling people to wash their hands and allowing life to go on as normal.
So again your line of reasoning is fully consistent with the idea of rounding up entire Chinese communities who have engaged in certain cultural practices such as wet markets and eating certain animals that has directly led to this deadly crisis around the world.

After all, blatantly no other "peaceful" method has worked from the previous SARS epidemic in the country, leading to this latest pandemic.
0
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#63
Report 5 days ago
#63
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
So they assumed guilt of the men imprisoned? Doesn't sound like a free and fair democracy to mr
Well, if the alternative is just letting religious extremism spread and pretty much starting a war in the region, it's not like they have much choice.
0
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#64
Report 5 days ago
#64
(Original post by Ascend)
So again your line of reasoning is fully consistent with the idea of rounding up entire Chinese communities who have engaged in certain cultural practices such as wet markets and eating certain animals that has directly led to this deadly crisis around the world.

After all, blatantly no other "peaceful" method has worked from the previous SARS epidemic in the country, leading to this latest pandemic.
As I said, that is still not an immediate threat. A religion can be reformed to prevent extremists in the future, peacefully convincing an ISIS soldier that killing people is not good is more difficult. Dealing with the cause is different from dealing with the effect.
Last edited by comradev; 5 days ago
0
reply
Ascend
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#65
Report Thread starter 5 days ago
#65
(Original post by comradev)
As I said, that is still not an immediate threat. A religion can be reformed to prevent extremists in the future, peacefully convincing an ISIS soldier that killing people is not good is more difficult. Dealing with the cause is different from dealing with the effect.
So then we're back again at your support for mass incarceration of a majority who are not extremists. What you're saying now doesn't line up with that as they, too, are not an "immediate threat" unlike individual extremists.
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#66
Report 5 days ago
#66
(Original post by comradev)
Well, if the alternative is just letting religious extremism spread and pretty much starting a war in the region, it's not like they have much choice.
Except they have quite a clear choice, not to that but rather place mass survalence like they have on every single other "free" citizen
0
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#67
Report 5 days ago
#67
(Original post by Ascend)
So then we're back again at your support for mass incarceration of a majority who are not extremists. What you're saying now doesn't line up with that as they, too, are not an "immediate threat" unlike individual extremists.
They are an immediate threat because there is no way to know for certain if they are or are not extremists, but there is a sufficiently high probability that they are. For example, if someone is suspected of having the plague but doctors are not 100% certain, the safest thing to do is to send them to hospital as if they do have the plague.

Since you seem so opposed to China's current approach to tackling religious extremism, what would you say they should do instead?
0
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#68
Report 5 days ago
#68
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
Except they have quite a clear choice, not to that but rather place mass survalence like they have on every single other "free" citizen
Wouldn't removing mass surveillance just make it easier for the extremists to organise and spread their beliefs?
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#69
Report 5 days ago
#69
(Original post by comradev)
Wouldn't removing mass surveillance just make it easier for the extremists to organise and spread their beliefs?
That wasn't the point of the post and you know it
0
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#70
Report 5 days ago
#70
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
That wasn't the point of the post and you know it
what was the point then?

edit: did you mean just expanding their current mass surveillance system instead of using re-education? because they are also doing that, and using evidence gathered from it to decide who to detain
Last edited by comradev; 5 days ago
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#71
Report 5 days ago
#71
(Original post by comradev)
what was the point then?

edit: did you mean just expanding their current mass surveillance system instead of using re-education? because they are also doing that, and using evidence gathered from it to decide who to detain
You see, as much as I hate mass surveillance. I prefer it over mass incarceration without free trial. Shame China isn't a free country though, doesn't matter how much you want to believe it does.
0
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#72
Report 5 days ago
#72
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
You see, as much as I hate mass surveillance. I prefer it over mass incarceration without free trial. Shame China isn't a free country though, doesn't matter how much you want to believe it does.
I don't believe China is a free country, I just don't make a subjective factor like freedom the number one issue by which I decide which countries are better or worse. And, imo, Chinese "freedom" is way better than American """freedom""".
But sure, whatever. You prefer the option with more freedom, I prefer the option where less people will die.
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#73
Report 5 days ago
#73
(Original post by comradev)
I don't believe China is a free country, I just don't make a subjective factor like freedom the number one issue by which I decide which countries are better or worse. And, imo, Chinese "freedom" is way better than American """freedom""".
But sure, whatever. You prefer the option with more freedom, I prefer the option where less people will die.
I prefer the option where innocent people aren't held captive against their will, and taken away from their families. Try talking to them about the bigger picture. Do you support killing all of them? Would cut down on terrorism after all, and if not, why do you support mass incarceration but not execution.
0
reply
_epoh_
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#74
Report 5 days ago
#74
(Original post by comradev)
I don't believe China is a free country, I just don't make a subjective factor like freedom the number one issue by which I decide which countries are better or worse. And, imo, Chinese "freedom" is way better than American """freedom""".
But sure, whatever. You prefer the option with more freedom, I prefer the option where less people will die.
China is a communist state, they don't have freedom as we know it in the west. We're free to talk negatively or protest our government, Chinese citizens aren't.

Protesters are captured, tortured and sometimes killed.

In America, you can pretty much say whatever you like about anyone, it's the 1st amendment right to free speech. You're also free to bare arms to protect your family from an intruder in to your home. In UK we don't have that. In fact, there are many cases where the protector is arrested for stopping the intruder because it's deemed to be excessive force. If someone bbreaks in to my home and my wife and child are there, the last thing I'm going to be thinking is, I don't want to hurt this random stranger in my home.

When you talk about the option where less people die, I'm assuming you're talking about America? Unless you didn't know about the infanticide in China under the single child policy? They only recently announced in 2015 that it was to end in 2016 and that families were now allowed 2 children.

You may or may not know, the media in China is state controlled, so they only share what they want people to know. Anything else are leaks, usually the people leaking information put their lives in danger.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#75
Report 5 days ago
#75
(Original post by comradev)
"What, you don't believe that the Chinese eat babies and commit genocide for fun? You must be a member of the CCP! The credible CIA man told me so!"
No.
Yes, it is literally state policy to Hanify (sure that must be a word somewhere) the country.
The fact you're going off on one about the CIA of all people rather demonstrated the credulatiy of your far left wing clap trap though.
I swear you right-wingers think the world is some kind of Harry Potter novel, where the 'evil' countries do 'evil' things for no reason and the 'good' countries always do 'good' things. [/quote]
Who said i'm right wing? :rofl: and what are you blabbering on about harry potter for?

No, I doubt all of them, or even a majority, were religious extremists. However, a sufficiently large part of them likely were for mass deradicalisation to be justified. Tell me, if religious extremism wasn't a problem in the region, why would China bother with tackling it?
An appeal to authority is hardly a good debating point. Especially given it is a widely know cast iron fact that the CCP hate any and all religions with a firey passion.
And what evidence do you have that the area was not but swarming with terrorists?
Equally, extremism in the region is entirely their fault. Note how it has progressively gotten worse as the Hans have progressively enacted their culture extermination campaign.

I would suggest you do some research on China's domestic policy - especially in the Xinjiang, where it quite obvious to see that initial Chinese actions necessitated the violent response. Just like in every other colonial possession of China - with Tibet being the other example par excellence.
1
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#76
Report 5 days ago
#76
(Original post by Napp)
No.
Yes, it is literally state policy to Hanify (sure that must be a word somewhere) the country.
The fact you're going off on one about the CIA of all people rather demonstrated the credulatiy of your far left wing clap trap though.
Still not a genocide. Reforming a culture ≠ ethnic cleansing.
However, what some of the Uyghur extremists seek is indeed a genocide of Han and Hui Chinese.

The reason I was talking about the CIA is because pretty much every Western source on Xinjiang is financed or had prior links to the CIA.


(Original post by Napp;undefined)
Who said i'm right wing?
Oh, what are you then? Third-way fascist? Because you are definitely not left wing.


(Original post by Napp;undefined)
and what are you blabbering on about harry potter for?
Is "where the 'evil' countries do 'evil' things for no reason and the 'good' countries always do 'good' things" not clear enough for you? You are accusing China of committing atrocities without suggesting any reason why they commit those atrocities, as if we live in some kind of teenage fantasy novel. Does their ideology require a scapegoat to blame for their failures, for example?


(Original post by Napp;undefined)
it is a widely know cast iron fact that the CCP hate any and all religions with a firey passion
Yes, they are officially atheists. But saying that they 'hate religion with a fiery passion' is a ridiculous overstatement: why are there over 39,000 mosques in China if that is the case?



(Original post by Napp;undefined)
And what evidence do you have that the area was not but swarming with terrorists?
Exactly, the area was swarming with religious extremists.



(Original post by Napp;undefined)
Equally, extremism in the region is entirely their fault.
Does that matter when those extremists are murdering people? ISIS in Iraq was also the fault of the United States.



(Original post by Napp;undefined)
with Tibet being the other example par excellence.
Mhm, theocracy good, country with red flag bad.
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#77
Report 5 days ago
#77
(Original post by comradev)
Still not a genocide. Reforming a culture ≠ ethnic cleansing.
However, what some of the Uyghur extremists seek is indeed a genocide of Han and Hui Chinese.

The reason I was talking about the CIA is because pretty much every Western source on Xinjiang is financed or had prior links to the CIA.




Oh, what are you then? Third-way fascist? Because you are definitely not left wing.




Is "where the 'evil' countries do 'evil' things for no reason and the 'good' countries always do 'good' things" not clear enough for you? You are accusing China of committing atrocities without suggesting any reason why they commit those atrocities, as if we live in some kind of teenage fantasy novel. Does their ideology require a scapegoat to blame for their failures, for example?



Yes, they are officially atheists. But saying that they 'hate religion with a fiery passion' is a ridiculous overstatement: why are there over 39,000 mosques in China if that is the case?




Exactly, the area was swarming with religious extremists.




Does that matter when those extremists are murdering people? ISIS in Iraq was also the fault of the United States.




Mhm, theocracy good, country with red flag bad.
That link says there was 5 terrorists? Is that it?
0
reply
comradev
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#78
Report 5 days ago
#78
(Original post by AnonymousNoMore)
That link says there was 5 terrorists? Is that it?
I actually had four links there next to each other, but I am willing to provide more once I finish answering the other comments.
0
reply
AnonymousNoMore
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#79
Report 5 days ago
#79
(Original post by comradev)
I actually had four links there next to each other, but I am willing to provide more once I finish answering the other comments.
For me, to justify the mass incarceration there needs to be proof that over 50% of those incarcerated are extremists. What number does the links say?
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#80
Report 5 days ago
#80
(Original post by comradev)
Still not a genocide. Reforming a culture ≠ ethnic cleansing.
Obliterating a culutre comes uber the rubric of genocide.
However, what some of the Uyghur extremists seek is indeed a genocide of Han and Hui Chinese.
Not to get into 'they did it first' but the Chinese did it first. A reaction is to be rather expected.
The reason I was talking about the CIA is because pretty much every Western source on Xinjiang is financed or had prior links to the CIA.
Like?
Oh, what are you then? Third-way fascist? Because you are definitely not left wing.
None of your business what my politics are
And neither are you, more of a credulous Chinese stooge to be frank.



Is "where the 'evil' countries do 'evil' things for no reason and the 'good' countries always do 'good' things" not clear enough for you? You are accusing China of committing atrocities without suggesting any reason why they commit those atrocities, as if we live in some kind of teenage fantasy novel. Does their ideology require a scapegoat to blame for their failures, for example?
You really are spewing utter garbage :lol: If you don't know the basic history of China and its political doctrine i have no idea why im even debating this with you :lol:

Yes, they are officially atheists. But saying that they 'hate religion with a fiery passion' is a ridiculous overstatement: why are there over 39,000 mosques in China if that is the case?
Are you really trying to present the state co-opted clones of "religions" as proof of it being religiously tolerant? Oh dear, don't be so silly.



Exactly, the area was swarming with religious extremists.
Why are you presenting the article but lying about its content? A bit of a silly move.
Does that matter when those extremists are murdering people? ISIS in Iraq was also the fault of the United States.
You betray your ignorance of what happens in China by comparing it to ISIS



Mhm, theocracy good, country with red flag bad.
You really havent any idea on what you speak do you?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

With HE fairs postponed, would a virtual HE fair be useful?

Yes (45)
60%
No (30)
40%

Watched Threads

View All