appreciate the distant history is imperfect, but there are so many worse “progroms” and minority dominance stories in history
Distant history? All of this is modern history… The vast majority nof the immigration to the region happened in the 00’s.
Just because there are worse examples of government sanctioned abuse towards minorities, does not mean we should defend or deny any kind of abuse. Should we not condemn the genocide in Gaza because at one point the Israeli experienced a greater genocide? What is the logic of this way of thinking?
this as yet another politicization of history for warmongering ammunition,
This is just history…attempting to rewrite or cover up historical events is the politicization of history.
the goal with zero consideration for peace and prosperity and contentment achieved by recent approach.
By this logic the genocide and assimilation of the native American population is entirely valid.
Your edit may be the most ethically devoid statement I’ve ever seen on this site. I think you really need to examine your moral compass.
By this logic the genocide and assimilation of the native American population is entirely valid.
I wouldn’t say native Americans have done as well as Uyghur, or received as much investment and job creation. I would say that giving them all US land ownership is not an option to undo injustice.
wouldn’t say native Americans have done as well as Uyghur, or received as much investment and job creation.
First of all, I think you are ignoring the actual abuse of human rights that occurred.
Secondly, you haven’t established that the Uyghur have received any actual benefit, you’ve just given statistics about the region, which they are no longer the majority ethnic group. I’ve already established that Han immigrants are the main benefactors of the government’s investment in the region.
Lastly utilizing job creation is not a metric for determining human rights abuse. Technically more natives have “employment” as we typically define it today, because there weren’t jobs before. That doesn’t mean the abuse is valid.
I would say that giving them all US land ownership is not an option to undo injustice
And no one made that claim… I was using it as an example of how illogical your claim was.
Addressing your editorializing.
Distant history? All of this is modern history… The vast majority nof the immigration to the region happened in the 00’s.
Just because there are worse examples of government sanctioned abuse towards minorities, does not mean we should defend or deny any kind of abuse. Should we not condemn the genocide in Gaza because at one point the Israeli experienced a greater genocide? What is the logic of this way of thinking?
This is just history…attempting to rewrite or cover up historical events is the politicization of history.
By this logic the genocide and assimilation of the native American population is entirely valid.
Your edit may be the most ethically devoid statement I’ve ever seen on this site. I think you really need to examine your moral compass.
I wouldn’t say native Americans have done as well as Uyghur, or received as much investment and job creation. I would say that giving them all US land ownership is not an option to undo injustice.
First of all, I think you are ignoring the actual abuse of human rights that occurred. Secondly, you haven’t established that the Uyghur have received any actual benefit, you’ve just given statistics about the region, which they are no longer the majority ethnic group. I’ve already established that Han immigrants are the main benefactors of the government’s investment in the region. Lastly utilizing job creation is not a metric for determining human rights abuse. Technically more natives have “employment” as we typically define it today, because there weren’t jobs before. That doesn’t mean the abuse is valid.
And no one made that claim… I was using it as an example of how illogical your claim was.