With federal funding paused to USAID, pro-Western media outlets from Ukraine to Nicaragua are panhandling for donations, and a multi-billion dollar regime change apparatus is in panic mode. Among the flurry of executive orders issued by President Donald Trump in the first days of his administration, perhaps the most consequential to date is one titled, “reevaluating and realigning US foreign aid.” Under this order, a 90-day pause was instantly enforced on all US foreign development assistance across the globe – […]
Removed by mod
It indicates no such thing, unless the extent of your media analysis is
“What are the vibes of this article? Did the author use third person or first person?”
Which is no better at telling you logic or facts than consulting chicken entrails.
You don’t see emotive writing in academic papers because that’s the standard enforced in journals, not because it’s better.
Using quotes that accurately presents the current of state of mind of the subjects the author is writing about equals “emotion rather than logic” Huh??? Do you even know what you’re saying? So quotations is bad and inherently “emotive”, but taking all your ques from a dishonest website that obscures its political leanings to present a facade of objectivity is logical?
Oh no, they’re right about everything, how terrible
Removed by mod
Media Fact Check Bias is a website designed to stop you from thinking. Its successfully got you to be dismissive of good analysis of the implications of funding being halted. Even I’d you don’t agree its a good thing, even if you think Georgia needs democracy this article is telling you something you’re not getting from the NYT or Jacobin.
Removed by mod
I don’t think your issue is that the article is biased, it seems like the outlet is just not sufficiently deferential to the ideological line of the US Intelligence and Defense communities and that’s enough to get you to dismiss it outright.
That’d be from all the communists you’re surrounded by.
everyone is biased. including you. you should appreciate when people make their biases clear instead of hiding them.
The kind of guy who’d post “FaCtS DoN’t CaRe AbOuT YoUr FeElInGs” unironically is a rare breed these days, it’s funny to see one around.
Trying to push the Uyghur genocide conspiracy still, when we’ve all seen what an industrial scale genocide’s causes and results really look like, is nothing short off genuinely just genocide denial. Cheapening genocide just for your own sinophobic kicks, I don’t exaggerate when I say it’s a disgusting and weasel-like thing to do.
Find issues with the Grayzone, there are many, but get off your high horse cracker
Jacobin are not considered “reputable” here. They’re deeply suspicious sheepdogs who sided with the US state dept on issues like Venezuela and Bolivia until it was clear the entire rest of the left disagreed with them then they delete articles that make them look bad historically.
Removed by mod
You live up to that 71% literacy rate america has as your reading comprehension is dogshit, I said literally nothing about grayzone, my comment was about Jacobin being dogshit.
I do find it interesting just how much you’re trying to appeal-to-authority though. You don’t actually read things and make your own mind up based on critically reading and taking on board information, you defer your analysis to the amount of “reputability” that you give to whatever media institution. You base your entire belief system on prestige instead of educated analysis and the ability to critically think for yourself about information regardless of source. You simply dismiss information if it’s not from prestigious institutions and you accept information if it is, you’ve trained yourself not to think and it makes you extremely easy for these media institutions to manipulate you as a result. You are not immune to propaganda.
Damn that second paragraph is going to get some copy-paste action from me. It’s perfect to describe so many libs I’ve interacted with
One of the key differences between us and liberals is that we don’t actually trust any source and critically analyse the contents for ourselves whereas the libs defer their own critical thinking to lib media because they’re lazy and having independent thoughts actually requires some degree of effort.
The entirety of liberal media is a circlejerk of liberal institutions giving each other awards for being liberal enough and if you do this enough times for enough years you’re “prestigious” now and beyond reproach, everything you say is trustworthy and automatically better than anything those people outside the ideology say. Also there are no prestigious media outside the liberal media therefore there is nothing worth listening to or trusting outside it. Everything is thus easily dismissable.
Removed by mod
Was it factual reporting when CNN, by all accounts a reputable American media outlet, lied to the entire world and claimed that their own employees had personally seen Venezuelan security forces burn an aid truck? An aid truck that was later proven to have been burned by an anti-government protester when cell phone video footage of the event was released to the public?
You respect media outlets that the people who run our society want you to respect and you disregard the ones they don’t want you to trust. Your feelings about which ones are reliable have absolutely nothing to do with which ones tell the truth.
Saddam threw people into a shredder. The Western media wouldn’t just lie about something like that.
Wow, nice redditism! Love to imply that people I disagree with are mentally ill.
Removed by mod
“It’s not that ableism, it’s the other kind of ableism.”
For your second reply, I suggest a
(also if you’re gonna be a pedantic grammar nazi in addition to being a regular nazi you should learn how to use a comma)
Lmao how is Pete being CIA a conspiracy theory he doesn’t even hide that he worked for them
drown in piss you embarrassing little worm
Mayo Pete has a sus enough history that I think it’s possible he’s a CIA asset. Has Grayzone run an article blaming Gates for COVID? Honestly my opinion of that site has taken a dive because of Max Blumenthal’s anti-vaccine crankery.
Mfw im tryna hold back the gallons of cum i just drank and somebody walks up with another bucket of cum
(Edit: OP comment removed so my reply will look very strange without context, OP included a reaction ‘holding back laughter’ emojj that looked like it had full cheeks and there was spittle coming out of its mouth)
Removed by mod
Yeah nice one
You keep throwing around misogynistic slurs at women, too, bucko
spoiler
Removed by mod
Then why are you using a misogynistic slur to insult a bot you’re still a reactionary shithead and I hope you get your teeth kicked in
Removed by mod
Eat shit and die pig
The Uyghurs in Xinjiang
Anti-Communists and Sinophobes claim that there is an ongoing genocide-- a modern-day holocaust, even-- happening right now in China. They say that Uyghur Muslims are being mass incarcerated; they are indoctrinated with propaganda in concentration camps; their organs are being harvested; they are being force-sterilized. These comically villainous allegations have little basis in reality and omit key context.
Background
Xinjiang, officially the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, is a province located in the northwest of China. It is the largest province in China, covering an area of over 1.6 million square kilometers, and shares borders with eight other countries including Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Mongolia, India, and Pakistan.
Xinjiang is a diverse region with a population of over 25 million people, made up of various ethnic groups including the Uyghur, Han Chinese, Kazakhs, Tajiks, and many others. The largest ethnic group in Xinjiang is the Uyghur who are predominantly Muslim and speak a Turkic language. It is also home to the ancient Silk Road cities of Kashgar and Turpan.
In the aftermath of the Cold War, several factors contributed to a resurgence of separatist sentiment among Uyghur nationalists in Xinjiang. Since the early 2000s, there have been a number of violent incidents attributed to extremist Uyghur groups in Xinjiang including bombings, shootings, and knife attacks. Some high-profile examples include:
In 2014-2016, the Chinese government launched a “Strike Hard” campaign to crack down on terrorism in Xinjiang, implementing strict security measures and detaining thousands of Uyghurs. In 2017, reports of human rights abuses in Xinjiang including mass detentions and forced labor, began to emerge.
The Material Conditions Necessary for Terrorism and Extremism
As materialists, we understand that terrorists don’t magically appear out of thin air. There are material reasons for people resorting to such extreme measures. In order to combat the threat of rising extremism, these reasons must be indentified and resolved. One of the main causes is economic marginalization. When people are economically disadvantaged or excluded from mainstream economic activity, they may be more likely to turn to extremism as a way to address their grievances and gain a sense of purpose. Generally speaking, people who feel like they have a bright future do not resort to terrorism. It is only when people feel hopeless or trapped that they resort to such measures.
If the issue is that the Uyghurs were disenfranchised, and that is the reason they were susceptible to religious fundamentalism and resorting to terrorism, then surely the solution is to enfranchise them to remove that material condition. This is what the Strike Hard campaign ultimately sought to accomplish.
Counterpoints
There is only flimsy evidence for the most egregious of the allegations being made about what China is doing in Xinjiang, it should be an easy matter to dismiss. Normally, the burden of evidence lies with the party making the claims. However, Western media is happy to spread rumours and present the allegations as having merit because it serves America’s imperialist interests. Additionally, given the severity of the allegations and the gravity of the crimes China is being accused of, this issue has been taken very seriously by the international community, especially the international Muslim community.
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second largest organization after the United Nations with a membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The OIC released Resolutions on Muslim Communities and Muslim Minorities in the non-OIC Member States in 2019 which:
In this same document, the OIC expressed much greater concern about the Rohingya Muslim Community in Myanmar, which the West was relatively silent on.
Over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations) signed a letter (A/HRC/41/G/17) to the UN Human Rights Commission approving of the de-radicalization efforts in Xinjiang:
The World Bank sent a team to investigate in 2019 and found that, “The review did not substantiate the allegations.” (See: World Bank Statement on Review of Project in Xinjiang, China)
Even if you believe the deradicalization efforts are wholly unjustified, and that the mass detention of Uyghur’s amounts to a crime against humanity, it’s still not genocide. Even the U.S. State Department’s legal experts admit as much:
A Comparative Analysis: The War on Terror
China is not the only country to have faced faced a challenge of this nature. The United States, in the wake of “9/11”, saw the threat of terrorism and violent extremism due to religious fundamentalism as a matter of national security. They invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks, with the goal of ousting the Taliban government that was harbouring Al-Qaeda. The US also launched the Iraq War in March 2003, which was justified by the Bush administration as a response to Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction and links to terrorism. However, these claims turned out to be unfounded.
According to a report by Brown University’s Costs of War project, at least 897,000 people, including civilians, militants, and security forces, have been killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, and other countries. Other estimates place the total number of deaths at over one million. The report estimated that many more may have died from indirect effects of war such as water loss and disease. The war has also resulted in the displacement of tens of millions of people, with estimates ranging from 37 million to over 59 million.
The War on Terror also popularized such novel concepts as the “Military-Aged Male” which allowed the US military to exclude civilians killed by drone strikes from collateral damage statistics. (See: ‘Military Age Males’ in US Drone Strikes)
In summary:
Which one of those responses sounds genocidal?
Side note: It is practically impossible to actually charge the U.S. with war crimes, because of the Hague Invasion Act.
Who is driving the Uyghur genocide narrative?
Let’s review some of the people and organizations involved in strongly promoting this narrative.
One of the main proponents of these narratives is Adrian Zenz, a German far-right fundamentalist Christian and Senior Fellow and Director in China Studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, who believes he is “led by God” on a “mission” against China has driven much of the narrative. His anti-Communist and anti-China stances influence his work and makes him selective in his use of data. He relies heavily on limited and questionable data sources, particularly from anonymous and unverified Uyghur sources, coming up with estimates based on assumptions which are not supported by concrete evidence. He also ignores the broader historical and political context of the situation in Xinjiang, such as the history of separatist movements and terrorism in the region.
The World Uyghur Congress, headquartered in Germany, is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) which is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, using funding to support organizations that promote American interests rather than the interests of the local communities they claim to represent.
Radio Free Asia (RFA) is part of a larger project of U.S. imperialism in Asia, one that seeks to control the flow of information, undermine independent media, and advance American geopolitical interests in the region. Rather than providing an objective and impartial news source, RFA is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, one that seeks to shape the narrative in Asia in ways that serve the interests of the U.S. government and its allies.
The first country to call the treatment of Uyghurs a genocide was the United States of America. In 2021, the Secretary of State declared that China’s treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang constitutes “genocide” and “crimes against humanity.” Both the Trump and Biden administrations upheld this line.
Why is this narrative being promoted?
As materialists, we should always look first to the economic base for insight into issues occurring in the superstructure. In this case, there is a compelling material reason for the US the promote a narrative of a genocide occurring in Xinjiang.
The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive Chinese infrastructure development project that aims to build economic corridors, ports, highways, railways, and other infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. The project has been described as a new Silk Road, connecting China with its neighboring countries and expanding trade and economic ties with the rest of the world.
The BRI includes plans for major infrastructure projects in Xinjiang. These projects aim to improve connectivity and facilitate trade between China and countries in Central Asia and beyond. The Xinjiang region is critical part of the Belt.
For the United States, the BRI is a threat to its economic and political dominance. For one, the BRI could undermine US efforts to promote “free trade” agreements, which have often been used to lock in economic reforms and policies that benefit American corporations. The BRI also threatens to undermine US influence in key regions of the world, particularly in Asia and Africa, by providing countries with an alternative source of financing and investment that is not tied to US-led institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
Moreover, the BRI could help to shift the global balance of power away from the United States and towards China. By expanding its economic influence and deepening its ties with other countries, China could emerge as a more formidable competitor to the United States in the global arena.
Promoting the Uyghur genocide narrative harms China and benefits the US in several ways. It portrays China as a human rights violator which could damage China’s reputation in the international community and which could lead to economic sanctions against China; this would harm China’s economy and give American an economic advantage in competing with China. It could also lead to more protests and violence in Xinjiang, which could further destabilize the region and threaten the longterm success of the BRI.
Additional Resources
Video Essays:
Books, Articles, or Essays:
Social Media Resources, Threads, and Masterposts:
I found YouTube links in your comment. Here are links to the same videos on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Link 1:
Link 2:
Link 3:
Removed by mod
Let me guess, you’re one of those pro-NATO “anarchists”?
Removed by mod
Sure as hell sound like one.
5 million people have been killed since the US launched its “war on terror”, in all that time it has never shown an ounce of concern or remorse for the deaths of millions, and routinely to this day uses apocalyptic, totalizing, racialized and Christian extremist language to justify its policies, it legally qualifies as genocide
That’s not even accounting for the recent genocide in Gaza or the two million Iraqis who died from sanctions in the 90s or the colonialist aggression and white terrors the US helped inflict on scores of muslim countries during the Cold War
The idea you would even dare assert China is a worse violator of muslim rights is laughable on it’s face
Removed by mod
I genuinely wish it was legal for me to kill you
Removed by mod
Someone didn’t read the UN report
Lol was it to long for you to read? I get the feeling you didnt read.
Removed by mod
Jacobin is CIA/state department media. It has zero legitimacy.
Lmao posting jakkkobin
Removed by mod
https://lemmy.ml/comment/57988