Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
official numbers from China have half a million detainees listed, until they stopped publishing detainee information; most estimates agree that the number of uyghur detainees in total is closer to 2 million.
12 million uyghyrs / 2 million uyghur detainees, ~1 in 6 uyghurs have been or are still detained.
Close to everyone here has been asking you for sources. If you’re going to provide numbers, you need to provide sources. People like @RedWizard@hexbear.net have given you large, well-sourced and thoroughly documented comments, if you respond with “sources” like “it’s widely known” people are going to rightfully dismiss your claims.
In this entire thread, you’ve provided a podcast from The Economist, a British Propaganda outlet explicitly promoting free-market liberalism and demonizing any country that goes against Western Hegemony, not just China. You should slow down and actually respond to comments, if you can’t dignify questions with a proper response, then you can just not respond. Refraining from speaking on a subject you know less about is better than digging a deeper hole for yourself.
I repeat, it is better to not respond at all than it is to give a half-assed response. If your goal is to change people’s minds or show onlookers better arguments, providing weak and unsubstantial, unsourced arguments hurts both of those goals. Again, it is okay to not speak on subjects you aren’t educated on. Maybe use it as an opportunity to learn more yourself.
You haven’t sourced any of your “facts,” while you’ve been given many sources countering your claims. Extreme claims, such as claims of genocide, require proper evidence and sourcing, not just gesturing. Linking a podcast from a British propaganda outlet isn’t going to cut it, not only can people say quite literally whatever they want to in an interview, but podcasts are a time commitment when articles and direct sources can be parsed much quicker and more effectively.
I suggest you take a break, find some actual sources, and if you can’t, concede and use it as an opportunity for growth.
Clicking through a few links eventually leads to this, which does appear to actually cite Chinese authorities. It shows arrests in Xinjiang spiking to around 230K in 2017. The paper is from 2018, so that’s the most recent data it has.
No data on how many arrests resulted in convictions, what kind of sentences were handed down, conditions of confinement, or anything that would take “they arrested a lot of people” to “they are doing a genocide.”
Cool story
not really, they’re indefinite detainees whose families are scared for them.
like 1 in 6 people in the region.
it’s not very cool.
Anything’s possible when you make shit up
where did you get this 1 in 6 number?
official numbers from China have half a million detainees listed, until they stopped publishing detainee information; most estimates agree that the number of uyghur detainees in total is closer to 2 million.
12 million uyghyrs / 2 million uyghur detainees, ~1 in 6 uyghurs have been or are still detained.
Close to everyone here has been asking you for sources. If you’re going to provide numbers, you need to provide sources. People like @RedWizard@hexbear.net have given you large, well-sourced and thoroughly documented comments, if you respond with “sources” like “it’s widely known” people are going to rightfully dismiss your claims.
there have been a lot of questions, I’ve supplied sources to the direct questions.
you may have missed them in the flurry of comments.
In this entire thread, you’ve provided a podcast from The Economist, a British Propaganda outlet explicitly promoting free-market liberalism and demonizing any country that goes against Western Hegemony, not just China. You should slow down and actually respond to comments, if you can’t dignify questions with a proper response, then you can just not respond. Refraining from speaking on a subject you know less about is better than digging a deeper hole for yourself.
I’m responding to all of your comments.
you are asserting that basic facts and interviews are propaganda.
I don’t see facts that way.
I repeat, it is better to not respond at all than it is to give a half-assed response. If your goal is to change people’s minds or show onlookers better arguments, providing weak and unsubstantial, unsourced arguments hurts both of those goals. Again, it is okay to not speak on subjects you aren’t educated on. Maybe use it as an opportunity to learn more yourself.
You haven’t sourced any of your “facts,” while you’ve been given many sources countering your claims. Extreme claims, such as claims of genocide, require proper evidence and sourcing, not just gesturing. Linking a podcast from a British propaganda outlet isn’t going to cut it, not only can people say quite literally whatever they want to in an interview, but podcasts are a time commitment when articles and direct sources can be parsed much quicker and more effectively.
I suggest you take a break, find some actual sources, and if you can’t, concede and use it as an opportunity for growth.
Source?
Source?
Xinjiang High people’s protectorate:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/09/14/china-xinjiang-official-figures-reveal-higher-prisoner-count
You seem to have posted the wrong link, that goes to the western NGO, HRW, not the Xinjiang High people’s protectorate
I would also like a source on:
Clicking through a few links eventually leads to this, which does appear to actually cite Chinese authorities. It shows arrests in Xinjiang spiking to around 230K in 2017. The paper is from 2018, so that’s the most recent data it has.
No data on how many arrests resulted in convictions, what kind of sentences were handed down, conditions of confinement, or anything that would take “they arrested a lot of people” to “they are doing a genocide.”
So the source doesn’t’ remotely back up their claim?
That’s where they got the number, from the high people’s protectorate.
Not that I can find in the article. could you please quote the section?
I would also like a source on:
They’re saying you need to provide evidence of that claim. All you have here is a photo of a guy in custody.
people got so excited that the sources are kind of spread out in all of their comments by this point.
that photo isn’t all of the sources I’ve listed, it’s just the first piece of evidence in this thread.
The only source for your propaganda in this entire thread is a podcast from the Economist.
I don’t have any propaganda, but I also have provided more sources than that one podcast.
to be fair, so many people are excited about those sources that they might be spread across multiple comments.
Anything’s possible when you make shit up