Anyone still repeating the “Uighur genocide” conspiracy theory in this day and age - long after the western media has backed away from it, independent bodies have found no evidence, Isreal demonstrating that you can’t ‘secretly’ genocide a population without evidence getting out, and all the original proponents of the conspiracy now one hundred percent on board for the genocide of Palestinians - is either knowingly lying or terminally propagandized.
A KGB spy and a CIA agent meet up in a bar for a friendly drink.
“I have to admit, I’m always so impressed by Soviet propaganda. You really know how to get people worked up,” the CIA agent says.
“Thank you,” the KGB says. “We do our best but truly, it’s nothing compared to American propaganda. Your people believe everything your state media tells them.”
The CIA agent drops his drink in shock and disgust. “Thank you friend, but you must be confused… There’s no propaganda in America.”
I hate how it’s always done like this too. When a genocide has been lied about it should be just as televised as when the lying was happening. Mostly because now instead of getting apologies from all of my friends for calling me a genocide denier they’ll just still think it was a genocide and I’ll just never talk to them about it again or else I’ll have to come across as smug.
And resisting urges like that is the only reason I still have any friends in the first place.
My comments still get deleted on lemmy.world. Most Lemmy instances are all-in for Five Eyes propaganda. You’d think they’d be better than corporate social media platforms, but not so much.
The standards are part of RAND’s ongoing project on “truth decay”: a phenomenon that RAND researchers describe as “the diminishing role that facts, data, and analysis play in our political and civic discourse.”
The funny thing about it is that news is no more or less truthful than it’s always been, it’s just more upfront about it. People are tribal, and they’ve been told that their tribe is flawless while the other tribe is flawed.
If you think about this for a second and apply some basic game theory, you’d realize what the natural steady state is.
I know that’s true in the US, specifically. The FCC abandoned the Fairness doctrine, and Citizens United v. FEC removed even the semblance of a barrier between the capitalist class and the political machine. Now most corporate media outlets pretty nakedly align themselves with one of the two political parties. But since both parties always ultimately answer to the capitalist class, these changes are largely cosmetic. It’s still a bunch of kayfabe in a rigged game.
@[email protected] I agree, all we can do is highlight that this is happening, but we shouldn’t be surprised that most instances won’t be far from political mainstream in the west
Even two and a half years ago, AP news - one of the leading proponents of the genocide theory - was already walking back their claims from genocides to just nebulous oppression (and even saying that was over, so don’t ask for current evidence).
Can you find many examples of mainstream media from the last 6 months still claiming an ongoing genocide?
asks for evidence that mainstream media has backed away from genocide claims.
Gets given an example of one of the most gung-ho on the genocide theory outlets already backing away from the claim years ago, instead falling back to nebulous claims of conveniently hard to demonstrate oppression.
“Well that just proves there is a genocide!”
Least bad faith sinophobe. How about you provide recent sources like I asked.
IMHO, if there’s smoke, there’s fire.
Big believer in the white genocide in South Africa then? Found those WMDs in Iraq?
Subjugation like… By applying the same standard to ethnic minorities that they do to the Han majority? People don’t realize how far affirmative action in China used to go. There were protests against it. Weibo kept exploding complaining about it.
There is no evidence linking the activity to the Chinese government
Mr. Zenz, who is now based in the U.S., said the letters are fraudulent and called the activity a smear campaign to try to discredit him. He said he has never received funding from Mr. Rubio or Mr. Bannon, and that he doesn’t accept money from politicians.
Thank you for this article. I love reading wsj and other western cope. Here’s the unpaywalled article for others to enjoy https://archive.md/6cRwr
Nowhere in the article is the “smear campaign” debunked. It’s only described. Nowhere it’s debunked that Zenz actually does speak mandarin and nowhere is debunked that he isn’t actually part of a fundamental christian rapture sect https://www.amazon.com/Worthy-Escape-Believers-Raptured-Tribulation/dp/144976908X - that is outlawed in China (based) - and thus has an interest in negatively portraying China.
Along with his “mission” against China, heavenly guidance has apparently prompted Zenz to denounce homosexuality, gender equality, and the banning of physical punishment against children as threats to Christianity.
Imagine citing nothing and thinking it’s better than wikipedia’s readily available citations. You’d get laughed out of any context, academic or otherwise.
You realise that Wikipedia is not one iota more credible than a lemmy comment right? You won’t believe people here, but funnyguy1234 (actual name of one that articles writers) is a font of academic rigor? Also lol at well sourced - you never bothered to check them, if you did you wouldn’t say that. Here’s a challenge; what were the pieces of primary evidence that convinced you?
Once when I compared the Uyghur genocide conspiracy to WMDs in Iraq, I had a Lemmy Worlder unironically reply “They’re completely different! WMDs in Iraq was just a claim from the Bush admin, but we have satellite pictures of the Uyghur genocide!”.
They are completely different and this is a dumbass comment.
Just because a massive organization made up of millions of people lied once doesn’t mean everything else they ever say is a lie. That’s dumbass child level reasoning. Present sourced evidence that contradicts the sourced infromation in the wikipedia article or don’t bother commenting.
Perhaps you’re unaware of many of the US’s atrocities, because many are hidden or distorted through the above methods. Nobody lies like the imperial core propaganda machine.
a few of the journal articles, though many of the reports from human rights groups, and the sheer volume of independent reports from different new outlets (big and small) is also rather compelling (as well as bellingcat’s reporting):
That article is a masterclass in laundering false information to make propaganda palatable to impressionable people. From the very first paragraph it regurgitates false information. The funny thing is that the claim that more than one million Uyghers are interned does have a source, but they didn’t specify it. Probably because the source’s reliability has been dismantled and they think leaving it out is less blatant. Garbage journalistic standards either way, and obvious dishonest propagandizing. For the rest of the article, we already know the media spread misinformation about Xinjiang. Compiling it in a Wikipedia article does not make it any more legitimate or convincing.
Listen man, even in the shitty college I went to we weren’t allowed to use Wikipedia as a source. Why? Because it’s often laced with misinformation and has no standards for its citations.
Also when you’re trying to argue against a genocide being CIA propaganda, you cannot site literally the lowest effort citation that the CIA could ever hope for if they wanted to spread propaganda for any given thing.
Listen man, even in the shitty college I went to we weren’t allowed to use Wikipedia as a source. Why? Because it’s often laced with misinformation and has no standards for its citations.
Listen man, even in the very good college that I went to, everyone starts at Wikipedia and then uses it’s sources since if they’re good sources then they’ll be a helpful jumping off point.
Also when you’re trying to argue against a genocide being CIA propaganda, you cannot site literally the lowest effort citation that the CIA could ever hope for if they wanted to spread propaganda for any given thing.
Peer reviewed journal articles are not the lowest effort citation that the CIA could manipulate. Again, the wiki article has numerous sources (which I’ve read through), do you have any sources to contradict the information that they contain?
You do realize that… The peer review process is not, inherently, robust, right?
There’s a reason different publication venues have different levels of prestige. Nature and Science? Very prestigious. The Lancet? Very prestigious. NeurIPS? Very prestigious. The Journal of Genocide Research? Not so prestigious.
Anyone still repeating the “Uighur genocide” conspiracy theory in this day and age - long after the western media has backed away from it, independent bodies have found no evidence, Isreal demonstrating that you can’t ‘secretly’ genocide a population without evidence getting out, and all the original proponents of the conspiracy now one hundred percent on board for the genocide of Palestinians - is either knowingly lying or terminally propagandized.
Sadly, I think most of the time it is the second case.
A KGB spy and a CIA agent meet up in a bar for a friendly drink.
“I have to admit, I’m always so impressed by Soviet propaganda. You really know how to get people worked up,” the CIA agent says.
“Thank you,” the KGB says. “We do our best but truly, it’s nothing compared to American propaganda. Your people believe everything your state media tells them.”
The CIA agent drops his drink in shock and disgust. “Thank you friend, but you must be confused… There’s no propaganda in America.”
I hate how it’s always done like this too. When a genocide has been lied about it should be just as televised as when the lying was happening. Mostly because now instead of getting apologies from all of my friends for calling me a genocide denier they’ll just still think it was a genocide and I’ll just never talk to them about it again or else I’ll have to come across as smug.
And resisting urges like that is the only reason I still have any friends in the first place.
In defense of your friends, you are a genocide denier.
We really are genocide deniers. We deny the CIA’s fake genocide narrative.
My comments still get deleted on lemmy.world. Most Lemmy instances are all-in for Five Eyes propaganda. You’d think they’d be better than corporate social media platforms, but not so much.
https://lemmy.world/c/modabuse
I think it’s a systemic issue that can’t be addressed in terms of individual mods.
Most instances are admined by Anglosphere labor aristocrats of the imperial core, who have little to no class consciousness.
They also have an underdeveloped media literacy while believing they have exemplary media literacy. Search for “media bias” and you’ll find tons of bullshit media horseshoe theory charts like the one below, which conflate enlightened centrism with factualness. Look at [email protected] which uses Media Bias/Fact Check as their North star,
which is run by a member of the Council on Foreign Relations[not the same person after all].They subscribe to the new post-Trump, “post-truth” media literacy curriculum, a curriculum that was paid for and crafted by the US military-industrial complex: New Media Literacy Standards Aim to Combat ‘Truth Decay’
Few of these people have read Inventing Reality or Manufacturing Consent. They tend to stay within the Global North corporate Overton window, not recognizing the bubble they’re in.
The funny thing about it is that news is no more or less truthful than it’s always been, it’s just more upfront about it. People are tribal, and they’ve been told that their tribe is flawless while the other tribe is flawed.
If you think about this for a second and apply some basic game theory, you’d realize what the natural steady state is.
I know that’s true in the US, specifically. The FCC abandoned the Fairness doctrine, and Citizens United v. FEC removed even the semblance of a barrier between the capitalist class and the political machine. Now most corporate media outlets pretty nakedly align themselves with one of the two political parties. But since both parties always ultimately answer to the capitalist class, these changes are largely cosmetic. It’s still a bunch of kayfabe in a rigged game.
we can name-and-shame. i don’ think there is a systemic fix.
@[email protected] I agree, all we can do is highlight that this is happening, but we shouldn’t be surprised that most instances won’t be far from political mainstream in the west
Not sure if post-edit CCs work, so upthread ⬆️ @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected] @[email protected]
Hi there! Your text contains links to other Lemmy communities, here are correct links for Lemmy users: [email protected]
Can you provide a source for your claim that “western media has backed away from the claim of Uighur genocide”?
Even two and a half years ago, AP news - one of the leading proponents of the genocide theory - was already walking back their claims from genocides to just nebulous oppression (and even saying that was over, so don’t ask for current evidence).
Can you find many examples of mainstream media from the last 6 months still claiming an ongoing genocide?
This article seems to say that China has shifted to subtler methods of subjugation, possibly due to Western sanctions. Not that it was fabricated.
I’m not here to argue about the definition of genocide. IMHO, if there’s smoke, there’s fire.
Least bad faith sinophobe. How about you provide recent sources like I asked.
Big believer in the white genocide in South Africa then? Found those WMDs in Iraq?
Subjugation like… By applying the same standard to ethnic minorities that they do to the Han majority? People don’t realize how far affirmative action in China used to go. There were protests against it. Weibo kept exploding complaining about it.
Can you provide a source that a genocide is actually happening?
Inb4 ASPI, Zenz, Abbas, Radio Free, NED
https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/xinjiang
For the uninformed, Radio Free Asia is literally US state propaganda (a holdover from the first Cold War), the NED is a CIA cut-out, and Adrian Zenz is a joke.
I think there is a [smear campaign against Adrian Zenz])https://www.wsj.com/articles/pro-beijing-online-campaign-targets-u-s-based-xinjiang-researcher-cybersecurity-firm-says-11659607252), more here.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/articles/2021/chinas-disappeared-uyghurs-what-satellite-images-reveal.html and https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/24/china-imprisoning-uighurs-satellite-images-xinjiang are other sources based on what can be learned from satellite imagery. There are also interviews with escapees, e.g. https://www.theatlantic.com/podcasts/archive/2021/08/uyghur-genocide-china-us-immigrant/619806/ https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2018/9/10/escape-from-xinjiang-muslim-uighurs-speak-of-china-persecution https://thewire.in/rights/china-uighurs-xinjiang-camps-human-rights.
Thank you for this article. I love reading wsj and other western cope. Here’s the unpaywalled article for others to enjoy https://archive.md/6cRwr
Nowhere in the article is the “smear campaign” debunked. It’s only described. Nowhere it’s debunked that Zenz actually does speak mandarin and nowhere is debunked that he isn’t actually part of a fundamental christian rapture sect https://www.amazon.com/Worthy-Escape-Believers-Raptured-Tribulation/dp/144976908X - that is outlawed in China (based) - and thus has an interest in negatively portraying China.
Satellite Images like they had from WMD in Iraq? I wonder why these are always so blurry in 2020?
Also RAND lol https://www.rand.org/about/how-we-are-funded.html Check out how theyre funded
Anectodes. If you want to see what a genocide looks like look to gaza
Zenz is a born-again Christian who lectures at the European School of Culture and Theology. This anodyne-sounding campus is actually the German base of Columbia International University, a US-based evangelical Christian seminary which considers the “Bible to be the ultimate foundation and the final truth in every aspect of our lives,” and whose mission is to “educate people from a biblical worldview to impact the nations with the message of Christ.”
Zenz’s work on China is inspired by this biblical worldview, as he recently explained in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. “I feel very clearly led by God to do this,” he said. “I can put it that way. I’m not afraid to say that. With Xinjiang, things really changed. It became like a mission, or a ministry.”.
Along with his “mission” against China, heavenly guidance has apparently prompted Zenz to denounce homosexuality, gender equality, and the banning of physical punishment against children as threats to Christianity.
Zenz outlined these views in a book he co-authored in 2012, titled Worthy to Escape: Why All Believers Will Not Be Raptured Before the Tribulation. In the tome, Zenz discussed the return of Jesus Christ, the coming wrath of God, and the rise of the Antichrist.
Who do I believe, a random smug lemmier, or a well sourced wikipedia article?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide
Imagine citing Wikipedia lmao
You’d get laughed out of any academic context in a heartbeat
Imagine citing nothing and thinking it’s better than wikipedia’s readily available citations. You’d get laughed out of any context, academic or otherwise.
You spelled NATOpedia wrong.
Lmao go back to Russia you fucking troll.
deleted by creator
Is there any reason to think wikipedia is reliable?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
You realise that Wikipedia is not one iota more credible than a lemmy comment right? You won’t believe people here, but funnyguy1234 (actual name of one that articles writers) is a font of academic rigor? Also lol at well sourced - you never bothered to check them, if you did you wouldn’t say that. Here’s a challenge; what were the pieces of primary evidence that convinced you?
I was convinced by this Bell¿ncat satellite image of a concentration camp interning over a million people: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=31.416944&lon=34.365234&z=11&m=w
Once when I compared the Uyghur genocide conspiracy to WMDs in Iraq, I had a Lemmy Worlder unironically reply “They’re completely different! WMDs in Iraq was just a claim from the Bush admin, but we have satellite pictures of the Uyghur genocide!”.
They are completely different and this is a dumbass comment.
Just because a massive organization made up of millions of people lied once doesn’t mean everything else they ever say is a lie. That’s dumbass child level reasoning. Present sourced evidence that contradicts the sourced infromation in the wikipedia article or don’t bother commenting.
It seems you are unaware that these kinds of lies are rampant and have been documented for decades, to the point where reliable patterns have emerged:
A five minute primer: Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine
.
Perhaps you’re unaware of many of the US’s atrocities, because many are hidden or distorted through the above methods. Nobody lies like the imperial core propaganda machine.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Noam Chomsky - The 5 Filters of the Mass Media Machine
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Uh yeah it is, it sources it’s information
Yeah, and those sources are often dog shit.
They’re better than yours, the ones in that article link to journal articles, you’ve provided absolutely nothing.
Which journal articles did you find compelling?
a few of the journal articles, though many of the reports from human rights groups, and the sheer volume of independent reports from different new outlets (big and small) is also rather compelling (as well as bellingcat’s reporting):
Ctrl+F Zenz
22 matches
Lol, this one is straight up written by Zenz
Behind a paywall
Your failure to provide a reliable source for your claims is not my problem.
If you cannot provide a reliable source of your claims, your claim will be dismissed.
That article is a masterclass in laundering false information to make propaganda palatable to impressionable people. From the very first paragraph it regurgitates false information. The funny thing is that the claim that more than one million Uyghers are interned does have a source, but they didn’t specify it. Probably because the source’s reliability has been dismantled and they think leaving it out is less blatant. Garbage journalistic standards either way, and obvious dishonest propagandizing. For the rest of the article, we already know the media spread misinformation about Xinjiang. Compiling it in a Wikipedia article does not make it any more legitimate or convincing.
Let’s see a source for your argument? The wiki links to journal articles to back up it’s claims, what do you have?
The burden of proof is on you to prove that a genocide is actually happening. (One can’t prove a negative)
There is a chinese context to it though: https://www.qiaocollective.com/education/xinjiang
What the fuck are you taking about? It’s sourced directly to a journal article.
Kindly present alternate SOURCES, or shut the fuck up.
Lmfao, provide a source or shut up.
Listen man, even in the shitty college I went to we weren’t allowed to use Wikipedia as a source. Why? Because it’s often laced with misinformation and has no standards for its citations.
Also when you’re trying to argue against a genocide being CIA propaganda, you cannot site literally the lowest effort citation that the CIA could ever hope for if they wanted to spread propaganda for any given thing.
Listen man, even in the very good college that I went to, everyone starts at Wikipedia and then uses it’s sources since if they’re good sources then they’ll be a helpful jumping off point.
Peer reviewed journal articles are not the lowest effort citation that the CIA could manipulate. Again, the wiki article has numerous sources (which I’ve read through), do you have any sources to contradict the information that they contain?
Bro it too late to get your money back from that college?
You do realize that… The peer review process is not, inherently, robust, right?
There’s a reason different publication venues have different levels of prestige. Nature and Science? Very prestigious. The Lancet? Very prestigious. NeurIPS? Very prestigious. The Journal of Genocide Research? Not so prestigious.