China: Xinjiang's CCP official admits to cultural genocide in the region

[Roadvirus]

Not even pretending they aren't committing cultural genocide anymore.

BEIJING, March 7 (Reuters) - Xinjiang's top Communist Party official said on Thursday that the "Sinicisation" of Islam in the Muslim-majority region in northwestern China, where Beijing is accused of human rights abuses, is "inevitable".


"Everyone knows that Islam in Xinjiang needs to be Sinicised, this is an inevitable trend," regional party chief Ma Xingrui told reporters at a largely scripted briefing on the sidelines of China's annual parliamentary sessions in Beijing.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/top-official-chinas-xinjiang-says-sinicisation-islam-inevitable-2024-03-07/

 

[Phys251]

Not even pretending they aren't committing cultural genocide anymore.

The worst part is that there is very little that can be done about this.

 

[Gozaburo]

Not even pretending they aren't committing cultural genocide anymore.

What exactly is "cultural genocide" and how can it be meaningfully separated from something like a mass migration resulting in the subversion of a native culture?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

What exactly is "cultural genocide" and how can it be meaningfully separated from something like a mass migration resulting in the subversion of a native culture?

Well, lets see.

One is a authoritarian government carrying out a war on its own people to erase their history/language/traditions through violence and repression.

The other is the natural result of hundreds of years of humans finding love, making families, and intermingling with other people.

I'm sure I could think of a few other differences.

 

[Gozaburo]

Well, lets see.

One is a authoritarian government carrying out a war on its own people to erase their history/language/traditions through violence and repression.

The other is the natural result of hundreds of years of humans finding love, making families, and intermingling with other people.

I'm sure I could think of a few other differences.

But just to be clear - you believe a distinct people has a right to preserve their own culture and heritage and that right extends beyond the authority of the state or the sovereign?

I've genuinely never heard of the term "cultural genocide", I wasn't being obtuse intentionally.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

But just to be clear - you believe a distinct people has a right to preserve their own culture and heritage and that right extends beyond the authority of the state or the sovereign?

I've genuinely never heard of the term "cultural genocide", I wasn't being obtuse intentionally.

Cultural genocide is just a state intentionally trying to erase a culture. While this can go hand-in-hand with actual genocide, it doesn't have to.

For example the US forced Native Americans to send all their kids away to government run schools where they were forbidden from speaking their language or practicing their religion.

I think everyone should have a right to free expression which obviously protects people's ability to practice their cultural beliefs.

 

[Gozaburo]

Cultural genocide is just a state intentionally trying to erase a culture. While this can go hand-in-hand with actual genocide, it doesn't have to.

For example the US forced Native Americans to send all their kids away to government run schools where they were forbidden from speaking their language or practicing their religion.

I think everyone should have a right to free expression which obviously protects people's ability to practice their cultural beliefs.

So if, for instance, millions of Han Chinese were migrated into ethnic enclaves in China, resulting in the erosion of local culture then that is okay?

But if the state enforces some kind of state education which is favorable to Han Chinese culture, that is a genocide?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

So if, for instance, millions of Han Chinese were migrated into ethnic enclaves in China, resulting in the erosion of local culture then that is okay?

Yes? Nobody is stopping the people who lived there before from continuing to practice their cultural beliefs. Their culture isn't being erased at all they just aren't a majority culture.

Do you not think that is ok?

But if the state enforces some kind of state education which is favorable to Han Chinese culture, that is a genocide?

It isn't "favorable to Han culture". They are rounding people up into actual reeducation camps and surprise raiding their homes inspecting them for forbidden items significant to them like the Torah.

 

[Gozaburo]

Yes? Nobody is stopping the people who lived there before from continuing to practice their cultural beliefs. Their culture isn't being erased at all they just aren't a majority culture.

Do you not think that is ok?

I'm just curious how there is a meaningful difference between the two. In this instance, a large ethnic group is moving into an area (potentially against the will of the natives) and once their culture becomes hegemonic it will necessarily lead to the erosion and disappearance of the previous native culture. How fast this happens is dependent on just how much migration there is.

It isn't "favorable to Han culture". They are rounding people up into actual reeducation camps and surprise raiding their homes inspecting them for forbidden items significant to them like the Torah.

I guess I don't see the meaningful difference between something like this and something like mass migration. Both would result in the erosion or outright destruction of a culture.

I understand reeducation camps and home invasions are certainly more forced, but presumably you would support the mass migration of Han Chinese into these ethnic enclaves and you might not even be opposed to normal state education where all of the future generations are subsumed into the greater Chinese Confucian nationalist culture.

To me this just sounds like, "It is okay to erode or outright destroy cultures, but it must be done LEGALLY within the parameters of what I interpret is moral or good."

 

[Nomad4Ever]

To me this just sounds like, "It is okay to erode or outright destroy cultures, but it must be done LEGALLY within the parameters of what I interpret is moral or good."

Yeah, that's exactly what it is. Two people falling in love, having a kid, and passing down different parts of their culture to that kid eventually leading to a new culture over generations is morally good.

Breaking up families, arresting people for their cultural beliefs, banning languages, banning religious practices, etc are morally bad.

I don't care about law. I never said anything about it needing to be legally done. Hell as far as I know all the repression and arrests China is carrying out is completely within their laws. I said arresting people and sending them to reeducation camps was reprehensible.

I don't give a shit about protecting cultures. Most cultures that have ever existed don't exist anymore and the people that care about them are dead. I care about the people alive now and their wants and their freedoms.

 

[Allan]

But just to be clear - you believe a distinct people has a right to preserve their own culture and heritage and that right extends beyond the authority of the state or the sovereign?

Yes. Religious rights and all that.

I've genuinely never heard of the term "cultural genocide", I wasn't being obtuse intentionally.

Think indigenous boarding schools.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Not even pretending they aren't committing cultural genocide anymore.

Do you believe English should be the official language of the US?

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Yes. Religious rights and all that.

Think indigenous boarding schools.

A few questions



The US and Canada among other countries trying to change the culture of Afghanistan, change the way Islam is practiced in Afghanistan " among other countries. To change woman's rights in Afghanistan. The involved countries spent 20 years using violence to try to change the culture of Afghanistan ( specifically the Taliban and Pashtun). Would that count as an attempt at cultural genocide, if not why not?

 

[Allan]

A few questions



The US and Canada among other countries trying to change the culture of Afghanistan, change the way Islam is practiced in Afghanistan " among other countries. To change woman's rights in Afghanistan. The involved countries spent 20 years using violence to try to change the culture of Afghanistan ( specifically the Taliban and Pashtun). Would that count as an attempt at cultural genocide, if not why not?

Good question, a bit difficult to answer.

My perspective on this type of thing is that countries advance (including human rights & democratic institutions) on their own timeline.

Although we in the west might call for improvements in human rights, trying to force it along is generally an impossible undertaking.

Not only does the needle not move, but sometimes it goes backwards (Iran, Iraq et al).

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Good question, a bit difficult to answer.

My perspective on this type of thing is that countries advance (including human rights & democratic institutions) on their own timeline.

Although we in the west might call for improvements in human rights, trying to force it along is generally an impossible undertaking.

Not only does the needle not move, but sometimes it goes backwards (Iran, Iraq et al).

That sort of sidesteps the question


Given that part of the justification for staying so long in Afghanistan was basically to change the culture of Afghanistan ( from an enforced strict version of Islam to a more " liberal " version"), would that count as an attempt as cultural genocide?

Remember we used force, bombing, airstrikes, assassinations etc as part of that process. That involved destroying towns etc, creating refugees etc.

If it does not count as an attempt at" cultural genocide " why not?

I fully understand that Afghanistans culture has changed over time, in the 1950s to 1970s the cities at least were relatively liberal, then in the 1980s the promotion of radical Islam as a means to counter the Soviets was promoted ( US and Saudi Arabia). To now where significant parts are under strict Islamic rule.

 

[Allan]

That sort of sidesteps the question

Perhaps, and I can see I'm not going to get away with it.

Given that part of the justification for staying so long in Afghanistan was basically to change the culture of Afghanistan ( from an enforced strict version of Islam to a more " liberal " version"), would that count as an attempt as cultural genocide?

If an attempt was made to eliminate Islam then it would be easier to define as a cultural genocide.

But moderating the more extreme aspects of that religion by installing a more liberal government doesn't meet the criteria imo.

An example I would use would be an Afghani immigrant to Canada. If he was from a region that routinely stoned women for the misfortune of being raped, or murdered homosexuals, he'd not be allowed to do that here.

That is an curtailment of a cultural practice, but not cultural genocide.

So what the west attempted to do was closer to my example. Not cultural genocide imo.

 

[Roadvirus]

Do you believe English should be the official language of the US?

Wanting English as America's official language is 1000x different compared to what China is doing.

The Chinese state sets standards for Uighur Muslims as to what Islamic traditions they can practice. No traditional Islamic names, gov't approved mosques only (like they do with Christians) and they are sent to "re-education" camps. Then there is rape, torture, forced birth control/abortions/sterilizations...and of course death. And there's rumors they take their kids away too like Russia's doing in occupied areas of Ukraine (which tells you where Russia got that idea).

 

[Roadvirus]

A few questions



The US and Canada among other countries trying to change the culture of Afghanistan, change the way Islam is practiced in Afghanistan " among other countries. To change woman's rights in Afghanistan. The involved countries spent 20 years using violence to try to change the culture of Afghanistan ( specifically the Taliban and Pashtun). Would that count as an attempt at cultural genocide, if not why not?

Another bad example

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Another bad example

why are they bad?

Many Americans want minorities to adopt mainstream American culture and English. There are quite a few movements in the US to have Christianity put into the schools and government.

Non Christians would have other religions forced on them.


The US attempted to change the culture of Afghanistan, why would that not be cultural genocide

 

[Roadvirus]

why are they bad?

Many Americans want minorities to adopt mainstream American culture and English. There are quite a few movements in the US to have Christianity put into the schools and government.

Non Christians would have other religions forced on them.


The US attempted to change the culture of Afghanistan, why would that not be cultural genocide

How is insisting Afghan muslims treat women as equals "cultural genocide"?
That's basic human rights stuff.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

How is insisting Afghan muslims treat women as equals "cultural genocide"?
That's basic human rights stuff.

You were forcing cultural change at the barrel of a gun

 

[volitleaire]

What exactly is "cultural genocide" and how can it be meaningfully separated from something like a mass migration resulting in the subversion of a native culture?

Raphael Lemkin first defined genocide in his book, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe. Within it, he describes various aspect of genocide, many of which were put into policy by Germany. He says that genocide is an action, or a group of actions, that destroy the foundation of a nation, ethnicity, or culture. He denotes various techniques used to achieve this goal: Political, Social, Economic, Cultural, biological, and physical. On the topic of the cultural aspect of genocide, Lemsky writes that the banning of language, destruction or banning of art and literature, the promotion of the oppressor’s culture through propaganda and forced education, as well as political indoctrination starting at the age of 6.

In essence, a cultural genocide is distinct from mass migration by the intention of genocide. The above policies are not something done during mass migration, nor during cultural exchange. Cultural genocide is the subversion of a people’s culture through purposeful censorship, propaganda, and indoctrination (re-education).

 

[volitleaire]

why are they bad?

Many Americans want minorities to adopt mainstream American culture and English. There are quite a few movements in the US to have Christianity put into the schools and government.

Non Christians would have other religions forced on them.


The US attempted to change the culture of Afghanistan, why would that not be cultural genocide

Many Americans want minorities to “naturalize”, yes. Please point to a current policy that bans the speaking of a language in school, reading certain cultural material, or other genocidal policy (see my other response).

The first amendment clearly defines a separation of church and state. Anyone who has Christianity forced on them in a public school would be able to sue.

What policies did the U.S. adapt in Afghanistan that could be considered cultural genocide? Was it US policy to ban any native languages, force religious conversion, censor art or literature, or forcibly re-educate the populace?

 

[Hamish Howl]

But just to be clear - you believe a distinct people has a right to preserve their own culture and heritage and that right extends beyond the authority of the state or the sovereign?

Here comes the white nationalism

 

[volitleaire]

I'm just curious how there is a meaningful difference between the two. In this instance, a large ethnic group is moving into an area (potentially against the will of the natives) and once their culture becomes hegemonic it will necessarily lead to the erosion and disappearance of the previous native culture. How fast this happens is dependent on just how much migration there is.



I guess I don't see the meaningful difference between something like this and something like mass migration. Both would result in the erosion or outright destruction of a culture.

I understand reeducation camps and home invasions are certainly more forced, but presumably you would support the mass migration of Han Chinese into these ethnic enclaves and you might not even be opposed to normal state education where all of the future generations are subsumed into the greater Chinese Confucian nationalist culture.

To me this just sounds like, "It is okay to erode or outright destroy cultures, but it must be done LEGALLY within the parameters of what I interpret is moral or good."

If by “mass migration” you mean the “migration” of Germans to Poland in the 30’s