• aleph@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It depends how you’re using the term ‘genocide’.

    While the CCP might not necessarily be intentionally mass-killing ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang region, there is very strong evidence that they are doing their utmost to stamp out Uyghur culture and forcibly assimilate them. In the process, people are being incarcerated, tortured, and raped, amongst other things.

    It could be argued that this is a crime under international law, where the definition of genocide includes

    intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group".

    Or you could argue it is ethnic cleansing instead. Either way, it’s a lot more serious than just overzealous “counter-terrorism” measures.

    • Carrolade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think the term ethnic cleansing is underused. It’s a strong term with a clear, unambiguous meaning that people can still stand against. It does not run afoul of the fact that when many people hear “genocide”, they don’t think of formal definitions, they think of WW2, trains and gas chambers, and attempts at thorough extermination at a large scale.

      Ethnic cleansing, on the other hand, begs simple questions, like, what is the ethnicity being cleansed from? Simple answer: their land. How are they being cleansed? Killed, driven away or assimilated into another culture. What, exactly, is being cleansed? That group of distinct people right there, their name is whatever.

      It’s clear, concise, and very hard to argue with from any sort of semantic position.