I've been wondering how I could bring this up with the mainland Chinese I know. It's particularly difficult, because for some of them I'm in a supervisory/managerial role, but I don't want to put pressure on them, which would raise all sort of other ethical dilemmas and would likely not be effective. Anyone else can share experiences?
In a workplace environment, it is completely inappropriate.
Second of all, why? What do you wish to discuss? What would you like to happen? What do these people have to do with it?
If you're in the U.S., do you have anything useful to discuss regarding Guantanamo Bay and the many other U.S. black sites or the Mexican concentration camps run at the border? Do you think those are appropriate conversation pieces to bring up if they don't occur naturally? How would you feel if someone brought them up as if to teach you or make you aware of them as if you didn't know or had any affect whatsoever on their existence?
There is a comparable situation with Americans, many people are unaware of the Tulsa massacre, and the reaction I've seen from people first hearing about it is mostly anger at it not being taught.
Personally I'd be thankful to know of censored history, particularly if it is occurring and being censored right now, in a democracy.
Don't do that. Both are bad. The existence of one does not prevent the discussion of the other. Please do not try to derail or distract the discussion.
What? I learned about the Tulsa massacre, and another similar situation that I can’t remember (maybe in Florida?), in high school. How is it being censored?
I grew up in what would be called a progressive part of the US and was never taught about it. I felt angry and supremely let down by our education system that I only found out about this last week.
I've never met a single person who was not taught about that in school a decade or two ago, from a very conservative area. That is just my experience of course, but I do find it perplexing. Was this many decades ago that it was not taught, or in a specific area?
There are two outcomes:
1: They really will not know what you're talking about and think you're crazy and just hate Chinese people (this is common).
2: They will somewhat know what you're talking about, and have a massive list of bad things your country has done/is still doing, and you won't be happy (this is also common, but slightly less common)
If you were good friends, you can mention this and drop it and try to move on. If you're doing this at work, it won't end well for anyone involved, and it'll be doubly bad if you're in an authority position.
The outcomes will also give them a heightened sense of nationalism and feed into the idea that the West is just out to get China and Chinese people, which the media plays up quite a bit.
As an American, sitting down next to a European on vacation for more than a few minutes is never fun. Once they inevitably ask "Where are you from?", they follow it up with a lecture on American politics before I can even finish my sentence. It's tedious and it's nothing new.
It's probably way more frustrating for people having to listen to their boss lecture them at work about how screwed up a country they've never been to but you've lived your whole life in is. You're not in a position to just politely say "bye" and never see them ever again without any consequence. You certainly can't speak up against them because they're in a position of authority.
That's my worry too. A lot of us are very defensive now even to be reasonable. However it is hard to buy these videos if you were born and raised in China, simply because you understand the culture around it. For example there are a lot of Vloggers in Xinjiang https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRXnF42z1oMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3VGz4HFs_A
If you understand the language and culture the locals talk a similar way to the responses from the BBC video. And in the Vice video the locals even spoke for the secret journalists.
Also for mainland china everyone refers people from any ethnic background from Xinjiang a 'Xinjianger' not a singled out 维族人. I'm sure there are a lot of injustice but ethnic minorities are known to entitle a few 'privileges' such as carrying knives and not subject to one-child policy. Hence the cause of the inevitable unfair treatment and conflict (to be honest many policies are not up to modern liberal views). I'm not defending ccp ever, but I'm also shocked people knew very little about everything else.
I think this is an important point. Even if GP "open the eyes" of coworkers on the matter, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will side with the Western point of view. For a variety of reasons they might approve the government action, which will cause additional tension to an already rude situation, as explained by other posters.
> As an American, sitting down next to a European on vacation for more than a few minutes is never fun. Once they inevitably ask "Where are you from?", they follow it up with a lecture on American politics before I can even finish my sentence. It's tedious and it's nothing new.
Counter-anecdotally; I've never experienced this and in my workplace at least, the people who never stop talking politics are all American.
I think your argument here amounts to a form of internalized oppression and a bunch of unintentional sophistry that tries to legitimize it. Considering the history of computer science as a consequence of the Enlightenment, it is quite ironic how working programmers have had to become.
> They will somewhat know what you're talking about, and have a massive list of bad things your country has done/is still doing, and you won't be happy
Ignoring the "at work" part, you can then both realize that you should acknowledge and fight against any country doing bad things and that these bad things are not excused because other countries (or people) are also doing bad things. Two wrongs don't make a right.
If someone came up to an American abroad and demanded they attest for the detention centers on the border people would call that ridiculous. The idea this person is entertaining the idea of doing the same for Chinese people who work with them is just as much so.
Why would you want to bring that up with them specifically?
Not advocating that people should look the other way, but I wouldn't like superiors associating me with the deeds of the government of China.
It might have been a good idea to actually support the protests for freedom in Hong Kong, but the "west" looked extremely weak here, laden with its own problems.
edit: Just to clarify, I wouldn't bring up Hong Kong either...
In my experience a lot of the population is very anti-Uighur and they wouldn't care that much. In the run up to this people have been conditioned by images of violent protests in the region. They have been demonized as religious fanatics. Religion in of itself is a big no-no in China. You combine that with anti-Muslim sentiment and a different ethnicity and it's pretty easy to demonize a group.
To convince them you'd really have to go into details and explain just how unjust the whole ordeal is. Most pro-govt people's default assumption will be they're doing a good job taking care of bad people.
Even the notion that someone of a different religion and ethnicity who might not speak the language should be rightfully considered a Chinese citizen deserving all the same freedoms is a tough sell.
From a moral perspective, that's maybe one thing. From a legal it might be another - you might be construed as discriminating against them or harassing them based on their ethnicity, which is in fact valid; if they weren't chinese you wouldn't be discussing it with them. So in that sense I really would think carefully. In fact, don't.
If they bring it up themselves, for or against that slightly changes things but frankly if they're supportive of the oppression then doing anything other than telling them "keep that opinion to yourself" is a minefield. Taking them on will most likely blow up in your face. (edit: no 'most likely' about it. It will).
If they are against it and wish to discuss it with you and what to do, it's still a danger (I can't say why, more a feeling) and I'd advise them to contact/join an external group, or their MP/representative etc. and leave it at that. Shit like this discussed at work is bad news, I don't see how doing it can make things better.
Anyone who disagrees and can make a better suggestion, I'm very willing to learn from.
Edit: to those downvoters, I'm NOT saying don't discuss it, I'm saying don't do so at work. It is deeply unlikely anything helpful will come of for anyone, but it is very likely to damage your reputation or even lose you your job.
Speak up! Sure, but in the right place and to those whose job it is to make a difference.
What does it have to do with ethnicity? He said "mainland Chinese", which is a form of citizenship. I think that all sides would agree that a good fraction of people from Taiwan are ethnically Chinese. As far as I know, citizenship is not a protected class (outside of certain treaties).
As for it being a good idea... nope. I wouldn't put myself in a situation where the Chinese government calls my employer and politely asks them to reassign me to the Antarctic branch. It's not a democracy, normal citizens have no power, and expecting your coworkers to do so is putting them and yourself in danger.
It's still construable as an ethnicity, even in in fact it's just citizenship (but nice distinction). It doesn't have to be what is, only what can be construed in an unfriendly tribunal or court situation.
These are some of the thoughts I've been having as well. On the other hand I'm actually generally interested in how this situation is communicated in China? How much and what do they know about it (note that they left China some years ago).
I have to say I also find it chilling to say we can't discuss topics which have political implications for fear of it being construed of harassment. I have been frequently asked about political events/situations in Germany (where I come from), without it feeling like harassment at all.
"Just not at work" always sounds strange to me, a lot of people know all their friends and acquaintance exclusively from work, so when people is recommended to avoid talking about those issues with coworkers many times the result is for all practical purposes they are being told to avoid talking about the issue at all. I'm not sure what the solution is but "just not at work" doesn't seem to be it.
Work is for talking about work, not anything else. A few cordial off-topic comments here and there are fine, but if I have time to discuss politics at work that's time that I could have spent doing my job, and likely and subsequently more of my free time will be taken finishing up projects.
Talking politics == my free time, and I don't want to exchange my leisure hours for talking politics with my co-workers. The entire rest of your life can be talking about politics with your friends, your life shouldn't just be work.
It seems the real problem is too much of people's lives is work and so they think they have no time to talk politics.
> a lot of people know all their friends and acquaintance exclusively from work
What country is such a workers' paradise? De Tocqueville wrote that the US was a nation whose social life was composed of overlapping circles of voluntary associations, which sounds much more like the situation here than that (to my eyes) dystopic description (of a world where one's only relations are not only by a single path, but that path is tied to the economic), so I'm assuming you're living elsewhere.
Pro-life/anti-abortion people believe that they are fighting for human rights. Let’s say they start talking to people at work about it. If the conversation stays civilized, no big deal. But they don’t want to limit it to talking. This is about human rights how can you just sit there and do nothing? You’re complicit!
Now people are avoiding that person. Team cohesion suffers. People are calling in sick to avoid the stress of it all. Management is dealing with shit from both sides.
What would you do if you were running the company?
If you want to let people talk politics at work, you can’t just limit it to the politics you agree with.
XJ is interpreted as a counter-terrorism / COIN operation in China - aka War on Terror. Go look up Uyghur terrorism attacks in China on Global Terrorism DB, there's 100+ that stopped abruptly after XJ security architecture / Strike Hard campaign. Spreading to interior provinces including TianAnMen. Western MSM will report 2009 minority riots and probably stop there, but it was ongoing for until 2017s. Generally, you won't find much mainstream sympathy because Uyghurs were already getting massive affirmative action privileges, and the ones outside of XJ has reputation (right or wrongly) of being Chinese gypsies. You'll find more sympathy from Han in XJ, because they have to deal with apartheid, but even this sympathy is declining due to increased nationalism and domestic propaganda. Overall, average Chinese will find re-education strategy much more humane and western forever wars. And really like... 1-2 million is ~0.1% of the Chinese population. Statistically it's hard to convince them it's a big deal compared to US prison industrial complex. Sure it's whataboutism, but it's also math. The average Chinese is focused on covid recovery, and before that pork prices. XJ/Tibet is just not something on the radar, and there's enough domestic propaganda to counter western propaganda.
The bigger unsaid issue is US/Pompeo/China hawks has zero moral credibility in China. For Chinese, the XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly is seen both as a "fairer" minority policy and more effective COIN model. As long as the west jails minorities disproportionately, and dropping bombs on weddings, there's no argument or propaganda to convince Chinese they're not making the better moral choice.
E: The even bigger unsaid issue, which every expert musing about the global implication of surveillance authoritarianism but won't publicly entertain is: what if XJ works? There's a reason China has 2X support of the XJ program than US can gather against, from majority Islamic countries no less. It's not just lol-debt trap. There are many parties interested in XJ model working. 80% of the world are flawed democracies or worse, and the overall trajectory is illiberal decline and increased geopolitical instability. There are more rulers who is invested in XJ working than not. The even larger issue than that? West doesn't have a alternative model, we've been flirting with incremental improvements over decade scales whenever our own "contradictions" force our hands, i.e. BLM. That's just not good enough.
Amazing hot take. Ethnically cleansing millions of people is A-OK as long as your country's population is large enough. That is prime wumaodang logic.
> XJ model - integrating Uighur rapidly
The Chinese model of "ethnocide" -- eradicating the religion, culture and written language of successive minority groups from Manchu to Tibetan, Uighur, Hlai, Zhuang, Oirat Mongols and hundreds of other groups -- is successful in creating a monolithic mass of resource and people subservient to the CCP, to better enrich the CCP Beijing princelings. So understandably it is heavily pushed by media domestically and by the wumao abroad. Nonetheless ethnocide is frowned upon as a crime against humanity these days in the rest of the world (and before you go whatabout on me, yes lots of other countries did it hundreds of years ago).
> [Muslim country support for Uighur genocide is] not just lol-debt trap
It's also lol-sanctions, lol-trade-war and lol-UN-veto-power, not to speak of the CCP siccing their asymmetric warfare units on you. Muslim countries don't mind pissing off EU or US because those don't bother to get into a pissing match these days (unlike in the cold war era). Mainland Chinese politicians however, are incredibly insecure, thin skinned and obsessed with "face", so any perceived insult and they fund some rival warlord or prince to coup you off the throne...
Good luck getting any population to care about repressing 0.1% for national security. Math education is good in China, people understand per-capita and more importantly understand the terrorism stopped. Nothing else matters. It doesn't hurt their geopolitical adversary jails more in relative if not absolute terms. This "world" of yours is 23 who signed a letter against XJ versus 54 who supports XJ. Reeducation narrative has firm lead. There's about 100 countries who just don't care. And ultimately only 1 whose doing anything about it, but for geopolitics, and not because it cares.
>ME fear CCP
What is this, opposite day? Muslim countries fear China's zero military experience and zero force projection ability versus actual bombs being dropped in ME right now by west? Authoritarian countries likes what China wants to sell. A global order where authoritarianism is seen as a valid alternative governance model, a raising power who actually doesn't sanction or regime change over human rights. About the only Chinese "win-win" benefit most parties unironically believe in. Oh, also China used the Veto least.
>Chinese politicians however, are incredibly insecure
At this point I don't know if you're writing to debate or writing to cope.
Understanding CCP Resilience: Surveying Chinese Public Opinion Through Time. July 2020
>We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. https://ash.harvard.edu/files/ash/files/final_policy_brief_7...
Sinicizating XJ will be mostly cultural genocide, which of course is immoral. Though many Uighurs will still remain Islamic but with Chinese characteristics - promoting religion is key Chinese foreign policy to connect with OBOR cultures. No, I'm not blind to it, nor to dumb western media spins, i.e. mass sterilization = 2 child policy. You can ask 1.3 billion Han how immoral one child policy and family planning was for the last 40 years. Hint: very.
The original question is how the situation is communicated and discussed in China. And I answered. You know how the west can talk about lots of issues like actual wars where we're aggressors, systemic racism that kept minority down or in jails etc with nuance? That happens in China on various topics too. At the end of the day, just like the west, many don't give a shit. Unlike the west, they can't really protest if they do. But even if they could, most probably wouldn't, because people irrationally and massively overreact to terrorism.
Hint: You didn't read the link. It has nothing to do with the N child policy. Here:
"The Chinese government has deployed a mass sterilization campaign against Muslim ethnic minorities in the country's western provinces, according to a new report, which argues the tactics could amount to genocide."
"Those camps are used as a form of threat and punishment, with officials detaining women and families who fail to comply with pregnancy checks or forced intrauterine contraceptive devices -- more commonly known as IUDs -- sterilizations, and even abortions."
> The original question is how the situation is communicated and discussed in China
I was responding to your delightful comment...
> what if XJ works?
And I pointed out your hideously lack of morality which is the point. So let's ask, how would you like it if your wife was sterilised against her will or had a forced abortion?
ANSWER THAT QUESTION PLEASE. Because that is what morality is about. If you don't like it, don't do it to others.
I did and I know much more bout the subject than you. China removing family planning policy exemptions for minorities like Uighurs started back in 2017 [1]. The policy was proposed back in 2014 [2] and was thoroughly discussed China watching circles. This is not a new policy change, and one Zenz should be aware of for at least 5+ years. I know I was. I also know this move is in context of new, 2nd gen minority policy and applies to all 55 minority groups. But he's only now conveniently claiming it's meeting the UN definition for genocide. By his definition 1.3B han has been going through more extreme one-child policy genocide for the past 40 years. To be blunt, it's another retarded Zenz hit piece coordinated with US sanctions, build up to magnitskying XPCC (2.5M paramilitary governing XJ) a few days ago.
I think family planning is necessary evil for China and new 2 child policy, i.e. replacement level is a good compromise for demographic and environmental stability. Ultimately China wants to settle at <1B ppl, which is a responsible position. I have no issue with uniform quota for everyone - minorities previously had +1 child. Where the world is heading, I'd rather cultures concede to population control than vice versa.
E: Apparently applying too fast. It should make the CCP look the same way it did for the last 40 years of one-child policy. Only ones that look bad are useful idiots believing Trump + Pompeo uncritically. I wouldn't have 2 children if the family planning policy is to have 2 children. I would be in a partnership with someone that accepts that. And to be extra clear: necessary evil = I endorse.
My suggestion is that you shouldn't bother. The Chinese people would not believe the Western media narrative on Xinjiang (XJ), which also doesn't really have credible sources if look deeper into their "facts" [0]. And it is increasingly clear that the XJ narrative is a US-backed propaganda rather than factual reporting [1]. Most of us would consider the western people being brainwashed into believing whatever the media puts out about XJ, just as much as the English speaking westerners think about us. Please ponder about this: can I, as a Chinese, easily change your media-fed opinion on XJ? Yet I am trying my best here (because I procrastinate).
The video shown by the BBC about the official visit to the vocational training center implants a subliminal message of "bad things are happening here" with eerie BGM and horror-movie-like filter. Your system 1, i.e. your fast, instinctive and emotional mind [2] would also be tricked by that too. Regardless of what's happening there, do you really think this is the way of objective, bias-free reporting?
Personally, I do not like the way they train these people. Westerners would never understand this culturally. But when compared to the war effort instigated by the US against Islamic nations, vocational training is IMHO a much better alternative against terrorism. XJ used to have a terrorism problem, and it's now much safer.
I would suggest you guys to travel in XJ after opening up, if possible, it is an incredible place to visit. If not then there are plenty of local people on youtube vlogging their daily lifes.
People here need to be able to express their views and respect each other, even across broad national/ethnic/ideological gaps. Someone disagreeing with you about China is not evidence that they're a communist agent or anything of that nature, and it's poisonous, degrading, and frankly dumb to make posts to that effect.
Rather, what's going on is that this community is large, diverse, and full of people with different backgrounds. We need to hear each other, not abuse each other.
If you'd like more explanation, I've written about this extensively:
No, this is not because I'm secretly a communist. It's because you can't attack others like this on HN. For plenty of past explanation see these links:
Well I'm Chinese and have positive personal experiences in China, so I'm pro-China.
If you're going to base your questions on the premises that I do not agree with, and do not give your reasonings, then there is no way to engage in productive conversation.
Tip: you don't have to be pro-CCP to realize that (mainstream) Western reporting on China is frequently very focused on a handful of stories and discards a lot of information that doesn't fit.
Don't. There's nothing they can do about it. The CCP will disappear them if they try. Don't put them at risk by even talking to them about it.
This is a problem to be handled at the diplomatic level between govts, by govts concerned about human rights abuses using various forms economic and diplomatic leverage and pressure to effect change. You can pressure your own govt to do that if want.
It's a losing battle. Without going into workplace relationships, the public perception of the Chinese population to their government is overwhelmingly positive. I've experienced it in my own friends and relatives, even those who have gone to university in North America for degrees like law. For an outsider without cultural understanding, it's nearly impossible.
It's hard to change minds when the education system doesn't support free thinking that challenges authority, when identity is caught up with national pride and the us vs them mentality. That's why it's important to use language like CCP instead of China to separate the people from the government.
The most common defense is whataboutism. Talk about Uigher camps in Xingjiang or the Hong Kong protests? "But America has racism, and police beatdowns." The argument against democracy is that the people aren't educated enough to handle voting, for example and bring up covid cases in the US.
I had a conversation a while back with my cousin, who didn't like Morey's (NBA GM) comments about Hong Kong and supported the Rockets ban.
me: "But it's his personal opinions, can't he say what he wants?"
cousin: "No, because he's a known person. It's like Xi saying California isn't a part of the US."
cousin: "That's fine, because everybody knows it's not true. We'll just think he's dumb."
cousin (jokingly): "that's just the cultural difference between east and west"
Unfortunately, it's hard to bring up any real nuanced conversation, and especially hard to change any minds. (i.e. like how none of the HK protestors key demands were to actually separate, something many people in China thought)
On one extreme, you don't know if they tend to distrust Western media while trusting Chinese state media. If it is important not to compromise your relationship with them, don't pass off any of the news as your opinion, but report about the Western reporting on the Uighurs, trying also not to signal that you trust these reports or these media outlets.
I think it’s perfectly normal in companies to share news and whatnot in various group chats. We often share news related to Xinjiang, Hong Kong, the virus, BLM, Trump, etc. We don’t all share the same political views, but we’re all adults.
