…says the guy on Lemmy criticizing the U.S. government and not getting thrown in jail for it.
You do understand that free speech that doesn’t threaten the government is tolerated everywhere, right? Us having more free speech here is just a function of the US government feeling more secure in its power, you can still find examples of free speech being punished in the US when it has threatened its power.
Then China must feel real threatened. According to this, it’s against the law in China to even say you don’t agree with the law.
“A citizen, when exercising the right of freedom of the press, shall abide by the Constitution and the law, and shall not oppose the basic principles established by the Constitution or damage the interests of the State, the society or the collective, or the lawful freedom and rights of other citizens.”
A million Uyghurs, whose only apparent crime is being Muslim, have been sent to labor camps and undergone forced sterilization.
Tiananmen Square started out as people peacefully protesting government corruption, and ended in the state murdering them.
With respect to free speech, there’s not even a comparison there with respect to America. It’s not “potato potato”.
A million Uyghurs, whose only apparent crime is being Muslim, have been sent to labor camps and undergone forced sterilization.
The US tried to foment division in China by funding and organizing terrorist cells in Xinjiang, and once those efforts failed, it concocted and promoted a genocide narrative. Antony Blinken is still pushing this slop.
- The Xinjiang Genocide Allegations Are Unjustified
- The Uyghur Human Rights Project is a product of the National Endowment for Democracy, which is the American government’s main regime change NGO.
- Uyghur genocide allegations
- American Debunks All Major Western Propaganda on Uyghurs and Xinjiang
- US-Funded Uyghur Activists Train as Soldiers of Empire
- A Reddit AMA Claiming To Be A Uyghur Quickly Exposes A CIA Asset Slandering China
The “forced sterilization” nonsense is especially silly when even NATOpedia says otherwise. As part of China’s affirmative action policies, the Uyghurs and other ethic minorities were excepted from the One-Child policy, and in Xinjiang they have grown in numbers relative to Hans as a result, and this happened similarly with other ethnic minorities.
.
The blueprint of regime change operationsWe see here for example the evolution of public opinion in regards to China. In 2019, the ‘Uyghur genocide’ was broken by the media (Buzzfeed, of all outlets). In this story, we saw the machine I described up until now move in real time. Suddenly, newspapers, TV, websites were all flooded with stories about the ‘genocide’, all day, every day. People whom we’d never heard of before were brought in as experts — Adrian Zenz, to name just one; a man who does not even speak a word of Chinese.
Organizations were suddenly becoming very active and important. The World Uyghur Congress, a very serious-sounding NGO, is actually an NED Front operating out of Germany […]. From their official website, they declare themselves to be the sole legitimate representative of all Uyghurs — presumably not having asked Uyghurs in Xinjiang what they thought about that.
The WUC also has ties to the Grey Wolves, a fascist paramilitary group in Turkey, through the father of their founder, Isa Yusuf Alptekin.
Documents came out from NGOs to further legitimize the media reporting. This is how a report from the very professional-sounding China Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) came to exist. They claimed ‘up to 1.3 million’ Uyghurs were imprisoned in camps. What they didn’t say was how they got this number: they interviewed a total of 10 people from rural Xinjiang and asked them to estimate how many people might have been taken away. They then extrapolated the guesstimates they got and arrived at the 1.3 million figure.
Sanctions were enacted against China — Xinjiang cotton for example had trouble finding buyers after Western companies were pressured into boycotting it. Instead of helping fight against the purported genocide, this act actually made life more difficult for the people of Xinjiang who depend on this trade for their livelihood (as we all do depend on our skills to make a livelihood).
Any attempt China made to defend itself was met with more suspicion. They invited a UN delegation which was blocked by the US. The delegation eventually made it there, but three years later. The Arab League also visited Xinjiang and actually commended China on their policies — aimed at reducing terrorism through education and social integration, not through bombing like we tend to do in the West.
Tiananmen Square started out as people peacefully protesting government corruption, and ended in the state murdering them.
- The Tian’anmen Square ‘Massacre’: The West’s Most Persuasive, Most Pervasive Lie.
- Columbia Journalism Review: The Myth of Tiananmen
- 1989 Tian’anmen Square riots
- A Note on the Tiananmen Protests
- Images from Tiananmen 1989 the West never shows (NSFW / CW: violence and death)
- Tank Man video footage. Tiananmen Square, Beijing, 1989
- How psy-ops warriors fooled me about Tiananmen Square: a warning
- [Carl Zha’s] Memories of Tiananmen Protest
You can make that exact same argument about dropping bombs.
When countries are threatened and dropping bombs relieves that threat instead of increases it, then they do. It’s just that right now violent escalation doesn’t benefit China, so it stays in the realm of sabre rattling
Sure, if you know literally nothing about the military industrial complex and government capture and its role in creating war, and you want to buy into the propaganda that the US only attacks when it feels threatened.
When countries are threatened and dropping bombs relieves that threat instead of increases it, then they do.
Settler-brained-as-fuck idea about how conflict works
This was not a defense of the USA you braindead idiot. I did not offer “feeling threatened” as an excuse for the USAs behaviour. The USA is threatened by the mere existence of successful countries that are not hypercapitalist (although tbf the tool used in this case is usually a coup, rather than bombs).
Not all countries consider the same things to be threats.
