DeletedUser
Nope, thread stays open.
Denisero said:If you could would you go back in time and assassinate Hitler in 1933 to stop the Holocaust or would you sit and try to talk him out of it. How long would you talk to him and urge him to change his policies before realizing it was an utter failure. How many people would have to die before you would decide that enough was enough and talking was not the answer.
Denisero said:I really don't know much of what is going on in China.
You only skimmed through everything and you can't get the whole picture. I don't want to waste my time with you guys discussing a topic which doesn't really interest you. Otherwise you would read through and point out, not making claims.
You think my arguments are bad? It's your right to do that, to have different opinions. But please give reasons. It's not "eloquent" to just make statements without substantiations.
I don't see that the Hitler question is relevant to this topic. Han-Chinese are not Hitlers. If you think so, then you do them a great wrong. How much do you know about them? You can justify the killing an insane despot, but you can't justify killing people from an ethnicity with the same reasons.
If you really don't know, then get to know something, but from various sources. Please not from only one kind of source, otherwise you won't get the complete picture. Then, you can talk to someone who has lived and walked around in that particular country for years.
If you don't want to get informed, then there is no point in discussing. The topic doesn't interest anyone anyway.
Parcific said:Ps.: I don't want to dogde the Hitler question and I have once the same discussion about that topic with another group. I disagree with assassinating Hitler in 1933, because the Germans could have got rid of Hitler and the Nazis by other ways more effectively at that time. the Nazis never had the majority of the German people, but there was just no organized opposition, because the Germans were too split up. In 1933 the best way to deafeat the Nazis was to assemble together, storm into the Nazi buildings and arrest all Nazi officials. However, the German majority didn't realize, that Hitler will do so much crime in the next ten years, even though everything what Hitler wanted were stated in "Mein Kampf". And the Germans wanted to have war, because they felt hummiliated by the defeat in the WWI. If Hitler has only been assassinated, the German people would still get blindfolded by the Nazi propaganda and Himmler, Goebbles or some person like that would have been the successor.
Around 1943 the situation was different. There was no other way to end the war, because Hitler wanted to fight it to the end. Any other attempt to stop the Nazi couldn't work anymore, because the German people had become too weak to turn against the Nazis or had become absorbed by the Nazis due to all these propaganda. Then, the assassination, the last resort, is justified, because it will end the war and prevent the death of millions of people.
I actually think that you are defelcting the main topic by asking the Hitler question. You have to differentiate the assassionation of a lunatic despot with a conflict between ethnic groups, created by prejudices, history, political and religious ideas and so on. With the assassination of Hitler, you have good prospect to end a war and same millions' life. But with a group of people injuring people from another ethnicity, that will sooner or later turn awry and become war or terrorism/city-guerrilla-like warfare, which will claim lifes of thousands of people, and if it escalates, even life of millions.
So are you really about to say "Because the Germans are justified to kill Hitler, people from one ethnicity are also justified to kill people from another ethnicity to reach political goals"? If so, I'll not agree with you, because these are two totally different situations.
I have nothing against them "fighting" for their ideals, but I think the way they do it is wrong.
Parcific said:I have sympathy with the minority groups too, but I don't think they can reach anything with injuring people. That's only a good way to let out anger, but a bad way to win political goals. It's obvious, that the Chinese government is well prepared for riots and even foreign sanctions. The only weak point of them is the sentiments of their people, which, sometimes, can really put pressure on them. But right now, with ravaging minority groups, it has quite good control of the sentiments of their people and thus gain their support, even when it incarcerates so many people.
So I believe, creating faith between the minority groups and the majority Chinese and then putting pressure on the government has a higher chance of success than injuring civilians in order to put pressure on the Chinese government.
Besides, I don't like the idea of people from one ethnicity fighting against people from another ethnicity. That's a huge conflict, but there's nothing idealistic about that for me.
Denisero said:It seems you are saying that if talking isn't enough then everybody should just shut up and deal with it (just look at your post regarding Native Americans)
There were 42 attempts on Hitler's life. They all failed. They didn't come from just Germans but from other nationalities as well. Why? Because of his evil policies and because diplomacy did not work. Read up on your history please.So are you really about to say "Because the Germans are justified to kill Hitler, people from one ethnicity are also justified to kill people from another ethnicity to reach political goals"? If so, I'll not agree with you, because these are two totally different situations.
Yes, I see this is more of your shut up and take it line. Of course the Chinese government has control over the minority. Why is the minority fighting back? Do you think they are just sitting around going, oh...gee...I think today is a good time to die for no reason. Obviously something is going on that they feel is worth risking their lives to take a stand for.So I believe, creating faith between the minority groups and the majority Chinese and then putting pressure on the government has a higher chance of success than injuring civilians in order to put pressure on the Chinese government.
Nice try. You don't make sense...ever. You say one thing. Then you backtrack and say another. Then you turn around and avoid questions. Then you turn around and try to point fingers elsewhere. You ended up looking like a fool in this thread and want to wish it all awayI see no point in discussing with people, who don't really read through my post seriously and give clear and relevant answers. So I requested the lock.
Denisero said:If there are problems between different ethnic groups and one or both have leaders that are hell bent on destroying the other and diplomacy has run it's course then most likely there will be violence. That is just how it goes. Does it make it right? It does not.
Denisero said:If the only means they have available to them are rising up with pitchforks and stones in hand then they do so, even when the other side has machine guns. Why? Because all people are of equal worth and treating one group like they are sub-humans causes primal instincts of survival. Personal survival, tribe survival, etc. It is not wrong to fight back.
Denisero said:Obviously something is going on that they feel is worth risking their lives to take a stand for.
What Indian question. I answered the question you asked me. If you had another one in your pitiful wall of failed arguments please point it out. Answer my question as well.You didn't resond to the Indian quesiton.
Once again I will explain to you that I don't know what is going on in China. I have not claimed to know nor have I tried to assert my position regarding the situation in China. I am rebutting your blanket statements by giving you situations in history that you are ignoring.The leaders are hell bent, but what about the people, that might want to live in peace? Not all from the minority groups are hating the han-Chinese, because the Chinese has spent a lot of money to improve the life of the people in the desert like region. Anyway, life in peace time is definetly better than in war time. Denisero, you're reaised in a prospering land with peace, but don't underestimate its value. Other people living in other regions want to have peace too.
Are you tired of looking up to see all the things that go over your head?Cool down, Denisero! Ask your reason, not your sentiments. If they do that, they won't survive. You need to do what gives you a high chance of success and not what follows your primal instincts.
Yeah, it's obvious that they want to have indepence, because they are a nation of their own. It's nationalism that drives them to kill Chinese civilians. You mentioned that the Chinese live like royalties, but in it is only a blank statement. The Chinese people living in the XingJian province are only people looking for jobs there or trying to create their own busness, because everything is cheaper there (as it is a quite isolated land, which has desert-like landscapes. You do have geographical knowledge on the matter, do you?).
If you have watched the news carefully, then you would have noticed that it mentioned quite briefly, that more than hundred people have died and some couple of hundreds injured.
These are all harmless Chinese civilians. I don't think they deserve to die, so their deaths become a tool to make pressure on their government. How will the Chinese government react to this kind of method? Definetely not granting them indepence.
The leaders are hell bent, but what about the people, that might want to live in peace? Not all from the minority groups are hating the han-Chinese, because the Chinese has spent a lot of money to improve the life of the people in the desert like region. Anyway, life in peace time is definetly better than in war time. Denisero, you're reaised in a prospering land with peace, but don't underestimate its value. Other people living in other regions want to have peace too.
Cool down, Denisero! Ask your reason, not your sentiments. If they do that, they won't survive. You need to do what gives you a high chance of success and not what follows your primal instincts.
Yeah, it's obvious that they want to have indepence, because they are a nation of their own. It's nationalism that drives them to kill Chinese civilians. You mentioned that the Chinese live like royalties, but in it is only a blank statement. The Chinese people living in the XingJian province are only people looking for jobs there or trying to create their own busness, because everything is cheaper there
(as it is a quite isolated land, which has desert-like landscapes. You do have geographical knowledge on the matter, do you?).
How will the Chinese government react to this kind of method? Definetely not granting them indepence.
What do you really think the minority group will reach? How is your idealistic scenario? But please be realistic.
Denisero said:Please quote me where I said the Chinese live like royalty.
Yep. If I was being oppressed and my children were being oppressed I would die in the hopes of giving them a better future. If my people were being starved, executed at random, tortured, denied basic human rights and treated worse than animals while the ruling class lived like royalty I would fight back. If you wouldn't fight back that makes you a coward or an idiot. To sit back and accept such behavior teaches your children they have no worth. Attitudes like yours helped Hitler get away with what he did; As long as it isn't happening to 'me' then it's best to just keep my head down and hope for the best. That attitude disgusts me.
Edit: On a side note I really can't wait til Divest pops back up on the board.
Denisero said:I really don't know much of what is going on in China.
Denisero said:Once again I will explain to you that I don't know what is going on in China. I have not claimed to know nor have I tried to assert my position regarding the situation in China.
Oh really? This is a topic just about China? Funny then how you started the thread, chose to call it Ethnic Minorities and didn't mention China at all in your first post. In fact, you didn't mention China until your 11th post (post 41 in the thread). Aren't your contradictions biting you in the ass now?You say, that all these is relevant to our topic, which concerns China.
By these statements, you've stated, that the Uigurs are being starved, executed and denied basic rights. You also said, that the "ruling class", if there really is one, live like royalties. You mean the Han-Chinese, but they are not some kind of "ruling class", slavemaster or something like that.
And when I say that I don't support the riots, you compare the situation with Nazis and Hitler, saying again and again that it's relevant (to our topic which greatly concern China). It's evident that you think the situation in China is like that under Hitler. Otherwise you won't think that killing Hitler and killing Han Chinese is the same thing.
With your judgemental statements, you really seem to be an insider China expert.
And later you state several time, that you know little to nothing about China, its situation and its people by saying:
I bet you'll disagree with me somehow, again. But being honest, aren't your contradictions evident?
Don't know if people have though about it. But it has something to do with The West, as it also concerns Indians, who get defeated by the White and become an ethnic minority:sad:.
In most big countries there are ethnic minorities. Sometimes they want to create a country of their own. Mostly they only get some adventages, or in bad cases even disadventages.
So should these ethnic minorities create a nation of their own, in expense of the current nations, which get land reductions. And should ethnic minorities get favourable policies or treated like everyone else. Our is it like a kind racism to differentiate people in many ethnic minorities.
What do you think?
I have managed to stay out of this thread for quite a while now, because the nonsense being spouted was getting further and further off topic. If you want to return to the discussion of the Uyghur people and their demands for independance perhaps you should answer my assertion that these are not the actions of radical nationalists, but a people who have been disenfranchised by the state.Yeah, it's obvious that they want to have indepence, because they are a nation of their own. It's nationalism that drives them to kill Chinese civilians. You mentioned that the Chinese live like royalties, but in it is only a blank statement. The Chinese people living in the XingJian province are only people looking for jobs there or trying to create their own busness, because everything is cheaper there (as it is a quite isolated land, which has desert-like landscapes. You do have geographical knowledge on the matter, do you?).
If you have watched the news carefully, then you would have noticed that it mentioned quite briefly, that more than hundred people have died and some couple of hundreds injured.
These are all harmless Chinese civilians. I don't think they deserve to die, so their deaths become a tool to make pressure on their government. How will the Chinese government react to this kind of method? Definetely not granting them indepence.
What do you really think the minority group will reach by using your methods of "primal instincts"? How is your idealistic scenario? But please be realistic.
George Hurst said:The Uyghur people have been prevented from following their moslem faith by the Chinese government for over 50 years
Georg Hurst said:...they are discriminated against in terms of education and employment opportunities.
Denisero said:Have you ever been to the US? Nobody has to give up their own language. If they want to send their children to school then they are expected to know English because that is what is taught in school. They are not forbidden to speak their own language.
Go to any large city in the US and you'll find a Chinatown and sections of the city completely inhabited by different ethnic groups in a cluster. Italians with Italians, Vietnamese with Vietnamese, etc. Their culture thrives in these areas and I would assume for those not living in large metropolitan areas that traditions are carried on within families and at home.
Georg Hurst said:Many Han chinese have emigrated into their homeland
Georg Hurst said:There are also significant oil reserves in Xinjiang, which yeild no benefits to the traditional landholders, only the ruling Han.
Georg Hurst said:Many Uyghur people have been killed by government security forces and Han vigilantes.
Georg Hurst said:...it is a desperate fight for rights by a people who have been oppressed by their government and denied any other recourse.
Denisero said:Edit: Parcific, I love how you are going back and editing your posts to try to make me look like I said something I didn't. The edit you did above adding the line
Originally Posted by Denisero
Please quote me where I said the Chinese live like royalty.
and then quoting me to make it look like I said that is pathetic.
Denisero said:Now you are just acting like a kid that is trying to cheat to win a point in a debate you are failing at. Silly boy.
Denisero said:Oh really? This is a topic just about China? Funny then how you started the thread, chose to call it Ethnic Minorities and didn't mention China at all in your first post. In fact, you didn't mention China until your 11th post (post 41 in the thread).
Parcific said:OK, currently I live in China. And I've heard recently that there are riots among the Uigur people, which is an ethinic group in one of the provinces. They want to create their own country, because they feel dominated by the major Chinese ethnic, which is Han. This reminds me of the riots last year in Tibet. I know from the media that many people have sympathy with these minorities and support them. But I, somehow, compare them in my mind with native Indians, conquered by the settlers. So if you support the Uigur and Tibetan, do you also support Indians, if they assumedly want to turn their reservoires into souvereign countries? Then other minorities would want souvereignity too and the world would be chopped in small pieces. That's why I don't like these riots. But I know many people will disagree and thus I want to initiate a discussion, starting with discussing ethnic groups in general and then dig a little bit deeper into these recent clashes.
Denisero said:What you quoted me on was a reply to a post in which you were talking about MLK and the Civil Rights Movement and not one word of China was mentioned.