Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Kafir-kun, Jul 22, 2019.
Bill Clinton bombed Serbia to deflect from the blowjob scandal. prove me wrong.
It's mostly Han Chinese, the Uyghur are a minority there. The Chinese government encourages migration of Han Chinese to Turkestan, Turkic genocide.
First apologist for radical islamic terrorists detected.
Not even just migration, I have heard that they give Han Chinese men tax breaks for marrying Uighur women.
Yeah. I mean it's up to them. And it all depends on the situation. In the case of China, there is definitely a case to be made for civic separatism.
China's ethnic and cultural composition certainly is not a recipe for long-term stability. I tend to agree with your professor. I say wait until China fully collapses (economically, and militarily) before waiving a new flag though, because that government is ruthless. IMO China is perfectly capable of doing anything the Nazis did if it means preserving power.
Well, I mean we are talking about Asian Muslims (peaceful, quiet, hard-working, good at math, etc.) Maybe violence is not in the Uihgur's nature.
So you want East Turkestan to be like Hong Kong or Macau? That would be nice. I don't think China can resist imposing itself in the long term, or even short term (I doubt Hong Kong maintains its current semiautonomy until 2047). After all, we're talking about a government with grandiose imperial ambitions. And like you said, China would probably never allow it in the first place.
When it comes to disputes like this, I don't see the point in moralizing. In the modern USA, we like to talk about history in terms of whether it's "right" or "wrong," because it's ingrained into our psyche (you might even say we are "privileged" to see the world that way). But nations are not moral actors. China certainly is not a moral actor. Should China "allow[ ] culturally distinct regions some level of autonomy"? Is it a "fair middle ground?" Yeah, I guess. If it were up to me, sure. But if history teaches us anything, it's that the laws of conquest care nothing for morality. "Kill the men, rape the women, enslave the children, and pillage the villages." Those are the rules, always have been. The winners write the history books, and they are the heroes. The losers die, and are usually forgotten. If they're lucky, they'll be written about as valiant warriors who fought to the death, like the Carthaginians. If they're really lucky, they live long enough to complain about their history being erased, like the American Indians or Hawaiians.
And that's why I think the Uihgurs have a tough choice to make. Living under Chinese rule is probably bad, but is it that bad? Is it worse than giving up their history / culture? Is it worse than not existing? Only if they can answer "YES" should they follow through on this separatism thing. Otherwise, it's just not worth it.
I've heard the US government warehouses aliens in Area 51.
I doubt the Chinese are encouraging this since it would exacerbate tensions and the Chinese think of themselves as superior. If you have a source for this I'd honestly like to see it. They have been providing economic incentives to encourage Han migration though.
These aren't East Asians. They are ethnically distinct from Han Chinese. They aren't good at math or business or much else which is why Xinjiang is an underdeveloped, backwater shithole.
China has numerous splintered ethnic groups but they wield very little power.
Compare with their population density map:
All the power belongs to the Han.
What are their average IQ scores?
I met a couple of "Wiggers" in Beijing when I studied abroad. They have very good food.
It turned out to be pretty high quality.
They're a mix of white-asian, so probably somewhere in the middle
Uyghurs are a turkic group of the steppes. The steppes were inhabited by Turks(east asian), Indo-Europeans(white) and Mongols. The Turks became the dominant group west of Mongolia but that's just a linguistic classification. Just as Obama is a Germanic language speaker.
Most Turkic people have some Indo-European admixture.
By the way, all these steppe peoples were nomad raiders that lived off sacking civilized people like the Chinese. They're not saints or some uncontacted amazonian tribe living peacefully with nature.
That's pretty much what the "Han Chinese" have done for the last century or so, just completely take over a country that was once rather divided between different cultural/ethnic groups.
If nothing else, China has proven that a cultural and eventual ethnic "death" by immigration, is certainly possible, provided that an entire federation's might and resources, are invested behind the project.
At the end of the day though, when you become a subject under federal rule, as "multi-cultural" and "tolerant" as that federation might pretend to be, this is one of the possibilities that ought to be taken into account, long-term. Ultimately all systems prioritize social cohesion and stability, after all (otherwise they do not last very long), and the homogenization of a population is the shortest road to achieving that. Which is why I personally prefer the "ethno-state" model, for each distinct ethnicity. Guarantees the long-term survival of a distinct cultural/ethnic group, for as long as the people remain worthy of survival, that is. Helps retain the world as a "richer" and "more diverse" place for atleast a while, until we all become a part of the faceless, gray mob, as the Chinese have become.
What happened to you praising him for not knowing what Rohingya is? I thought keeping our nose out of things was a positive.
They haven't been able to live like that since firearms entered the military meta so kind of a long ass time ago really.
IIRC, while Han is the dominate ethnic group.. in more recent years many people claim to be Han Chinese while being only partially or not even Han at all.
I didn't mean to imply China isn't that bad..
Just that it's understandable from their perspective to balk at complaints of human rights abuses by countries like the United States and Russia.
Well, to be fair it wasn't firearms but modern repeating firearms and radio, late 19th century that doomed them against western powers like Russia but they were still a threat in China until the early 20th century.
Han Chinese is like White American, a very broad term that include many ethnicities that after living together for a while are now pretty similar, it has a lot to do with self identification too.
I see your point but here I don't think its that valid given the gulf between what China is doing and what the US is doing.
Separate names with a comma.