The best part of this comment is how it implies that people from China, Cuba, or Vietnam are just one big unit that all think and act the same, all while baselessly accusing davel of orientalism.

You should try to set your own bar at basic honesty and see how it works out for you.

I am not speculating, I am actually informed about Uyghur culture. You were speculating by extrapolating from your personal circumstances.

Anyways, I don’t think I was unclear that I’m no longer interested in talking to you. You’re on your own to do self-improvement now. Most people will not be as patient as I have been.

The knee-jerk assignment of never drinking alcohol is an actual islamophobic trope and is used by people unaware of the diversity of thought I described that goes far beyond a handful of past leaders.

I’m bored with your selective and bad faith responses. Please do self-criticism on how to be honest in conversation, as you are not responsive when I point it out.

Silk road cultures often made wine, much of the region is arid and carefully cultivated through shared ancient techniques, often from Persia. Not all muslims avoid alcohol, including those from grapes, if that is what you are thinking. In fact, among islamophobes in the West, a presumption of complete avoidance is used to bully and harass muslims. Of course those islamophobes deserve any bad things that come their way.

You may be familiar with Shiraz, for example. This is a Persian style of wine whose production has been banned since the revolution, but the entire eastern area from Iean and beyond has often made and drank wine, including muslims. Though it was not just Persia where muslims in the middle east produced and consumed wine. Many scholars wrote of doing so and of leaders partaking.

Many people know only modern Maghreb and western Middle Eastern cultural practices but these are not all universal for muslims.

the fact that you think Taliban and Salafism are related is being uninformed.

I noted them as two different things present in Afghanistan, actially. The Taliban and Salafists fought one another in recent history. The Taliban won, but there are still Salafist elements present in Afghanistan. You have simply misunderstood, perhaps being too eager to fight rather than seek understanding. I am giving you many, many opportunities to seek understanding.

Note that you ignored essentially everything else I said, only focusing on whete you thought you had caught me being wrong. So eager to lecture and dismiss! But where is the rest? Like I said, please be direct and honest.

Also Taliban expelled both USSR and USA, both were colonialists to the people of Afghanistan.

Not really true for either case. The USSR provided support to an incompetent socialist Afghan state on its border that asked for help. The US funded the proto-Taliban and others to make this more costly for the USSR at the expense of Afghan lives and prolonged war. They left after it was clear the incompetent socialist state would fall. There was no colonization by the USSR whatsoever.

Later, the US invaded as part of ita pretextual response to 9/11, which was reallt just islamophobic imperialism. It did not actually do any collaborative, it neither extracted much from Adghanistan nor built anything there. It just occupied and killed, leaving Afghanistan on a constant low boil of war for two decades.

While ISIS only ever fought against Muslims (their first enemy was The Free Syrian Army which was actually close to ending the conflict in Syria years ago). Aren’t you now putting labels on people cuz they look similar

I haven’t said anything about Daesh so I have no idea what you are talking about. Maybe it is because they are Salafists? They are not the only ones. Your attempted point here is fairly ironic.

and I ask for source, doing simple search for “Uyghur weddings” brings me to this project: https://www.youtube.com/@uyghurmeshrepproject8697/video , and I don’t see an example of coed dancing. In my view you see people dancing together and you think “yeah they’re treating them well, building some integration for the individual”, but I see only shame, humiliation and erasure of culture in that, almost like a scene from the manga that I mentioned.

Uyghur weddings are often segregated in seating, then later when dancing starts they begin dancing along those same lines. Then, later, it is not incommon for the larger group to dance together. You should note that the channel you posted is from Kazkhstan and Uyghur practice varies even within Xinjaing, and of course between countries.

You seem to have (awkwardly) asked for a source od Uyghur coed danxing, possinly. It is honestly not clear. But I’ll give you an example from just one day ago by a popular travel blogger who constantly shows regular people living their lives: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IciipByFPoE.

Note that it progresses exactly how I described: segregated seating, then separate dancing, then people come together and keep dancing and having a nice time. There are also more traditional Uyghur dance performances that are coed, usually performed by peolle who train - dancers, amateur or professional. And of course other eventa where people dance.

I don’t know.

The question I asked is related to what I had said just before. I said you were wrong about something and explained how. You should ask how you arrived at not just false beliefa but ones you are willing to share and argue about.

It is not unnecessarily aggressive, it is honest and challenging. When did I insult you? Challenging you to be consistent and forthcoming and to question what you have said is not an insult.

What sources would you want? You are perfectly capable of asking for sources if you are curious.

Regarding muslim dancing behavior, you may want to inform itself about the variety of Islamic practices in Central Asia. Afghanistan even internally pretty different practices that include Kazakhs and Turkmens, not just the freshly imported Salafism and the Talaban and so on.

Islam is not monolithic and treatments of the meanings in the Quran and how Hadith are considered vary. Surely you are aware of this, everyone knows the salient distinction made between Sunni and Shia and how they understand these things. I have already explained that Uyghurs have traditional coed dancing traditions as well as segregated. You can easily verify this if you would like. So, given that you were completely wrong about this fact, what do you think about how you described the video? Were you using strong information or guessing to look for a negative interpretation in line with the spirit of the narrator? Are you immune to propaganda? What is the right and honest way to handle this?

I don’t know. You didn’t answer my questions.

The problem is not with the editing. The problem is that men and women dancing and singing together in happiness is literally just appealing to westerners, being of similar culture to Uyghurs I’d only be part of this practice as a humiliation ritual.

Uyghurs traditionally do both coed and segregated dancing depending on the event, the locale, the families, etc. Trying to shoehorn them based on your claims about your aculture is a form of tokenization, projection, and even islamophobia, given how you characterize this as universally muslim, whereas islamic practice is actually rich with cultural variety over geography and time.

Perhaps you should recognize your own ignorance in this matter. Are you here asking questions about people in a large and populous region with which you are unfamiliar, or are you here to lecture others about it? Does your culture promote speaking authoritatively about things you do not understand, to the detriment of others?

Another thing that went passive but is really huge is when the guy at 00:32 was asked how often he prays and he answered with the playbook “China’s laws define schools as public places. And in public places religious activities are not allowed”.

Suddenly you are familiar with “the playbook”? How long have you known this “playbook”?

But really, you started by saying it is not editing, but at 00:32 there is literally a jump cut between question and answer, with an entirely different camera angle for the presented answer. Do you know what was said before and after, or is 5 seconds of selective BBC editing enough? What has given you this confidence?

The worst part is that the officials basically admitted that they took these people based on predictions ? Like even if we ignore the ethical dilemma, you want me to believe that statistics&probability predicts which person will commit crime with ? That’s like a book example of bad math imo.

The worst part is that the officials basically admitted that they took these people based on predictions ? Like even if we ignore the ethical dilemma, you want me to believe that statistics&probability predicts which person will commit crime with ? That’s like a book example of bad math imo.

If you listen to the answers and not the narrator, you wipl find they sound exactly like progressives in the West trying to use preventative approaches and actually describe rehabikitating people who have committed minor crimes. Like the one literally says they want to rehabilitate those who commit minor crimes. You have come away with the impression that it is some claim about Minority Report-esque precog crimes because the narrator told you this, but not the the interviewees.

This is actually a fairly rosy picture. As I have already explained, social networks also led to people being required to attend these facilities. It is true that radicalizatikn is more frequent within social networks, it is literally a method used by all competent organizers to grow their impact. That does not mean it is good or right for a state to use this to coerce or punish (though they are not prisons), of course. But one must have perspective. What did the US and its friends do to muslim-majority nations after 9/11? Surely building skills and competency is a much less bad thing to coerce than death and disposession.

How did they rule out COVID or the flu? Most tests that US doctors use are not very good at ruling out either, just confirming. They can do true positives but are not as good at true negatives. Also, to be blunt, many people are in denial about COVID and fib to themselves and others about it. “They ruled it out” might really mean, “we downplayed some of our symptoms and the doctor said that might mean COVID is unlikely”.

But there are many respiratory illnesses aside from COVID and the flu and ones that cause a scratchy throat aside from strep throat, which is caused by just one type of bacteria.

I recommend masking in shared indoor spaces to protect yourself. This will also make you better able to help them if needed. And wash your hands + avoid touching your face when around them.

You are trying to now tell me that your warning is to be wary because people who are particilating in this thread are… participating in this thread?

You say you are confused but I have already explained. Feel free to directly respond to what I said if you don’t understand my point.

Saying “certain people” is a good example of the passive aggression I’m noting.

Just share your actual opinion or acknowledge that you’re afraid to do so.

Nonpartisan. Though there are not really movements against this, just small nations that ban parties.

I will push back on your opinions, though. “Division” is not a moral or political quantity. It is not itself good nor bad. Trans people were universally oppressed for centuries. Now they have some protections. This is a consequence of struggle against transphobia, that struggle is inherently a division. There are transphobes and pro-trans people. The pro-trans group should win. For them to win we need to support them materially and in as effectively as possible, which means through organized work. Progress against oppression only occurs through division and struggle. And the best vehicles for this are organizations - basically parties or very similar apparatuses.

The two-party system is a symptom of deeper problems and they shouldn’t be summarized as division. The two-party system is really just a very effective way for the ruling class (business owners) to achieve their ends while still providing a venue for “the political”, often struggles and oppressions that they personally exacerbated. For example, some of the earliest institutional racism in what would become the US emerged due to worker solidarity and struggle. The ruling class decided to divide and conquer: they created a race-based system, defining a new class corresponding to “black”, who would be the most exploited, and exploiting everyone ekse skightly left. This is not theater, as the oppressed are facing actual oppression, but it is cynical: it’s really about profit maximization and controlling workers. The two-party system makes this kind of thing a constant endeavor, you can spend all of your time invested in struggles imposed by the ruling class and exemplified in the parties, and in doing so never focus on the underlying system that creates it. But of course not every oppression makes its way into this attempt at distraction, as when the oppression is bipartisan (no division in that case but still bad!). For example, both parties are in favor of the genocide of Palestinians and both actively ensure that it happens. A few decades ago both were purely transphobic and did nit evdn exhibit today’s liberal cooption of the struggle (notice that it has slowed down).

Most importantly, the two-party system prevents popular politics that runs counter to ruling class interests. Their greatest opponents are the left, so the US political system prevents left parties from functioning abd becoming popular. Want to run as a third party? Well the Dems will gladly do a last-minute change to how many signatures you need to gather to get on the ballot. They can meet the number because they will pay people to collect them, but you have to have already prepared a horde of volunteers. Organize a socialist party? They might just plain kill you.

It is not the existence of parties that is the problem, but the stifling of left parties, of those that can challenge the systemic causes of oppression.

Being direct and honest with your actual opinions, of course. Issuing vague warnings rather than actually engaging. These are cowardly behaviors.

This is a propaganda video where most of the “erie” parys are just video editing and commentary, not demonstrated through evidence or interviews. It is a good example for developing your own media criticism skills. I’ll make note of one outright falsehood and invite you to critically analyze the video further.

They lied when they said those attending didn’t go home. They literally show them arriving and going home on buses multiple times. Rather than note their own inconsistency in narrative, they try to characterize this as erie and scary as well. Oh people line up to get on buses! Follow that bus! Oh it just goes to a “government facility” and they leave to do whatever they want to afterwards? What government facility? They say they are “processed” first. Where is the evidence of this? All they show is people leaving while the bus they were on is stopped.

The BBC has a history of pushing this kind of bad faith propaganda. They even do things like get down into ditches to make “scary” angles for boring things and desaturate the videos like it’s reality TV and you need to emotionally manipulated to know what the bad things are.

If cowering in fear were a comment.

Generally speaking people on a forum can only give you breadcrumbs. Rather than spend time polling libs that know nothing but propaganda and memes, it would be a better use of time for you to personally critically research the claims made, those who made them, and exercise media criticism in doing so. Check sourcing, funding, affiliations, and loaded language and content.

I mean, you certainly can poll the libs, but you will just hear things that you will need to later unlearn, and it is easier to build understanding by doing things in the opposite order: learn the material and then hear (and spot) the BS.

That’s not what I asked and you ignored what I wrote to you. If you aren’t prepared for these conversations then stop sharing and defending unsupportable and counterproductive opinions.

I didn’t bring this into the conversion and start throwing racist ignorance around. You clearly don’t know anything about North Korea outside of absurd propaganda and are now deflecting from that ignorance, ignoring everything I wrote to you.

Take responsibility for your actions or stop commenting nonsense.

If this only happened once it may be a coincidence.

If you did in any way visit another page with this term then it is still possible for Google to embed trackers in pages and use your IP and fingerprinting techniques to gather data and use it for recommendations. Note that using a VPN and cromite does not prevent all means of fingerprinting. But if you did not visit any pages other than the search engine then either that privacy-focused search engine is sharing your searches with Google or it was a coincidence.

North Korea survived a genocidal bombing campaign by the same imperialists that back the Zionist entity doing the current salient genocide. 20% of the population killed, primarily civilians. Every population center bombed to dust and wreckage. All to keep a homegrown organized left from achieving national liberation after Japanese occupation. They economically and socially outperformed the military dictatorship that was occupied South Korea. Then, following the fall of the USSR, nearly all of their trade was cut off (US-backed sanctions have killed at least 20 million in the last few decades per a recent Lancet study). They faced an externally-imposed fuel crisis that killed industrialized agriculture, inducing famine conditions. Maximum pressure on the entire population.

They focused on self-reliance, a doctrine known as Juche, due tot hese very real and material circumstances, and ignorant Westerners have been eating up absurd lies about how the country functions for decades, revealing that they are actually far more propagandized than your typical North Korean.

Please try to keep orientalist anticommunism out of your advocacy for Palestine.