KiaKaha

I have two skills -it’s non-monogamy and speaking publicly, okay? Do some fucking research!

This is a pretty slick line

I don’t think I can support the direction that Kim Jong un has taken North Korea in

Which part? The isolation is imposed by the world, not them. Likewise with the poverty.

The nukes are a nice shield from future bombings, and once China and Russia get an alternative to SWIFT set up for global transactions, we can expect to see the DPRK open up more.

The hereditary thing isn’t great long term, but it gets way too much shit for it. Cuba’s still got the Castro family as the head of state, and you almost never hear leftists go on about that.

Then we need to consider the alternatives. If it were to unilaterally reunite with the South, under the South’s rule, you’d see the same sort of horrendous economic collapse that the GDR suffered. Probably worse, given the greater wealth disparities.

Juche gang’s a fun meme, but in reality, the DPRK’s just our generation’s Cuba, with all the atrocity porn that comes with it.

I see your TumblrInAction and raise you KotakuInAction

I envy you

Discord for those who want it.

Lemmy for all.

I figured ‘use various measures to target people prone to far right extremism, teach them why that’s wrong, then provide employment, while investing in the region to address the material conditions that led to the unrest’ was the nuanced approach.

I’m sure there are ways it can be improved, and I’m sure their approach has its excesses. I’m just so far unconvinced that there’s any better historic approach to draw upon.

If you know of any, please let me know.

Imagine you could go back in time and have an actual state power in Iraq, instead of the hollow shell US contractors left it with, and implement adequate deradicalisation programmes.

Would you do so? Or would you wait a few years, then bomb Raqqa to rubble?

Approximately 50% of what you hear is outright propaganda, as we know the CIA’s affiliates churn out. We also see CIA assets pushing narratives on Reddit. The next 25% is poorly researched speculation by an evangelical end-timer, and the final 25% is an accurate description of the PRC’s response to far right, religious terrorism and separatism.

First, let’s just establish using safe, American sources that a bunch of Uyghur people went to fight with ISIS in Syria, then returned. Let’s also establish that there have been consistent terrorist attacks with significant casualties and that the CIA and CIA front-groups have funded and stoked Islamic extremism across the world for geopolitical gain.

Now, we need to consider potential responses.

The CPC could give up and surrender Xinjiang to ISIS. This option condemns millions of people to living under a fundamentalist Islamic State, including many non-Muslims and non-extreme Muslims. This option creates a CIA-aligned state on the border, and jeopardises a key part of the Belt and Road initiative, which is designed to connect landlocked countries for development and geopolitical positioning. This option also threatens the CPC’s legitimacy, as keeping China together is a historical signifier of the Mandate of Heaven.

The next option is the American option. Drone strike, black-site, or otherwise liquidate anyone who could be associated with Islamic extremism. Be liberal in doing so. Make children fear blue skies because of drones. When the orphaned young children grow up, do it all again. You can also throw a literal man-made famine in there if you want.

The final option is the Chinese option. Mass surveillance. Use AI to liberally target anyone who may be at risk of radicalisation for re-education. Teach them the lingua franca of China, Mandarin. Pump money into the region for development. When people finish their time in re-education, set them up with state jobs. Keep the surveillance up. Allow and even celebrate local religious customs, but make sure the leaders are on-side with the party.

Let’s take a moment to distinguish that last approach from that of Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany wanted to exterminate the undesirables. Initially it was internment in concentration camps with the outcome up in the air, with a vague hope of shipping them to Madagascar or palestine, but it later morphed into full extermination. All throughout, Nazi Germany was pushing strong rhetoric of antisemitism and stoking ethnic hatred in the public sphere.

There’s no evidence, including from leaked papers, that the goal of the deradicalisation programme is permanent internment or annihilation of Islam. In fact, the leaked papers have Xi explicitly saying Islam should not be annihilated from China:

Mr. Xi also told officials to not discriminate against Uighurs and to respect their right to worship. He warned against overreacting to natural friction between Uighurs and Han Chinese, the nation’s dominant ethnic group, and rejected proposals to try to eliminate Islam entirely in China.

“In light of separatist and terrorist forces under the banner of Islam, some people have argued that Islam should be restricted or even eradicated,” he said during the Beijing conference. He called that view “biased, even wrong.”

As for permanent internment, we know from leaks that the minimum duration of detention is one year — though accounts from ex-detainees suggest that some are released sooner.

Unlike Nazi Germany, there’s no stoking of inter-ethnic hatred or elimination of a specific culture; the CPC actively censors footage from terrorist attacks in China to avoid such an outcome. Xi doesn’t go on TV calling any ethnicity rapists or murderers. Uighur culture is actively celebrated in the media and via tourism. Xinjiang has 24,400 mosques, one per 530 Muslims. That’s three mosques per capita more than their western peers.

Could China’s approach be done better? Almost certainly. Is it the most humane response to extremism we’ve seen so far? That’s for you to decide.

(Reposted from here )

Yeah. We are all very anxious.