1044·
6 months agoThey’re not the good guys browser wise, they’re just slightly less shitty than Google, which was (still is probably?) their biggest customer.
- 0 Posts
- 24 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 5th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Are you talking about the claim that he endangered CIA agents? That was just some bullshit they cooked up to get him on, and I don’t think anybody even claimed that somebody actually died.
Imagine thinking exposing the CIA should be a crime, because the poor small beans CIA agents need protection. Who wouldn’t want to protect imperial blackmailers, hit men, weapons smugglers and death squad commanders?
You are the traitor for siding with the oppressor.
No he hasn’t. The management of the old x.com (the one that got bought by paypal) threatened to walk if Elon wasn’t removed from the office. He was always this incompetent.
How is that supposed to work?
This will happen and marginalized groups like illegal immigrants, the homeless, and the disabled will be effectively excluded. Poor people are going to have their finances controlled even more. This will cause deaths.
You’d think the libs at Harvard would mention this. How do you think this actually works?
Better explanation: China has lifted 800 million out of poverty over 40 years, and quality of life has improved massively for almost everyone (also things that are confirmed by western institutions). Why would they not approve of the government?
My impression was that the forced sterilization claim was made up, or at least the evidence was not convincing.
If by “reputable” you mean pro-Western.
deleted by creator
Racism comes naturally the Anglo brainpan.
Edit: My apologies to my Anglo brothers and sisters still fighting the good fight and blowing up US government property.
There’s plenty of evidence of China trying to improve the living conditions for Uyghurs in Xinjiang and in the rest of China (poverty alleviation, affirmative action programs for university students, the crackdown against hate speech on social media, …). So imprisoning some people based on some vague “extremism score” and then seemingly releasing them after some months doesn’t show intent to impose living conditions in order to destroy a group. It shows intent on crushing separatism.
Preventing births is true for everybody in China, how does that show an intent to destroy a particular group? It doesn’t.
So we’re left with “serious bodily or mental harm”, which can be explained just as well by an intent to suppress separatism and religious extremism. Literally every war causes some nationality “serious bodily or mental harm” far worse than what China is doing, and we don’t call every war a genocide, do we?
Two years ago, that shit used to be in German newspapers every month or so. Haven’t seen anything in like a year now. Also, pretty sure the UN report didn’t allege genocide, which is what the media here was claiming back then.
Heck I remember one of my friends was under the impression that there was ethnic cleansing and some major refugee movements, despite the media never actually alleging that. But when they hear the word “genocide” over and over, that’s what people imagine.
It’s a western study! Is Harvard part of a communist conspiracy or what’s your point?
Goal post shifting much?
You: It’s just Chinese propaganda with no source!
Me: provides source
You: Well it’s not a Harvard study!
Me: It definitely is.
You: Well that study sucks anyway!
Me: 🙄
Yeah but have you seen what they used to write?
There’s this passage:
Uyghur activists abroad accuse the Chinese government of genocide, pointing to plunging birthrates and the mass detentions. The authorities say their goal is not to eliminate Uyghurs but to integrate them, and that harsh measures are necessary to curb extremism.
Regardless of intent […]
They’re actually doing the false balance thing. When was the last time the western press was fence sitting this much about this issue?
China eased up on their crackdown, which is good, but the western press went so far above what they could prove, they’re now walking back. Actually more like dropping the story: When was the last time you saw a new article about Xinjiang and not some social media echo?
Let’s see how the western press thinks things are going:
The panic that gripped the region a few years ago has subsided considerably, and a sense of normality is creeping back in.
Best bit:
Behind him, a drunk Uyghur man was yelling. Alcohol is forbidden for practicing Muslims, especially in the holy month of Ramadan.
“I’ve been drinking alcohol, I’m a little drunk, but that’s no problem. We can drink as we want now!” he shouted. “We can do what we want! Things are great now!”
Cheers!
“Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, formerly known as the Ash Institute, was established in 2003 and is part of the Harvard Kennedy School at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the United States.”
You were saying?
“China’s Orwellian Social Credit Score Isn’t Real”
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/16/chinas-orwellian-social-credit-score-isnt-real/
“China’s Social Credit System Is Actually Quite Boring – A supposedly Orwellian system is fragmented, localized, and mostly targeted at businesses”
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/15/china-social-credit-system-authoritarian/
In 2016, the last year the survey was conducted, 95.5 percent of respondents were either “relatively satisfied” or “highly satisfied” with Beijing. In contrast to these findings, Gallup reported in January of this year that their latest polling on U.S. citizen satisfaction with the American federal government revealed only 38 percent of respondents were satisfied with the federal government.
Googling this took me a couple of seconds. Less time than writing a comment.
What