If that's how you choose to perceive my comment, then sure. I would not consider what I said to be "enlightened centrism" simply because I didn't immediately bend a knee to either side. There are plenty of opinions on the situation, mine is that the Uighur are just another ball of yarn being played with by China and the US.
Is there no larger opinion on the situation to be gained?
I honestly don't understand the need for one; the constant need on the left to be enlightened about Syria or North Korea or the Soviet Union or China or any other of a dozen places that the person has never been always struck me as an intellectual affectation.
I don't need to have the right conclusion about North Korea, because North Korea is so far removed from my ability to affect the material world that it may as well not exist.
What material difference does it make to be wrong or right about the Chinese reeducation camps? What material difference did it make to be right about Iraqi WMD's at the time?
What material difference does it make to be wrong or right about the Chinese reeducation camps? What material difference did it make to be right about Iraqi WMD’s at the time?
This presumes that we are all passive observers to history. That's not the case. We can work to expose the imperialist myths about China, build power, and prevent genocide in China. The fact that we failed to accomplish this in the build-up to Iraq is irrelevant.
Your post sounds both ignorant & defeatist. "Oh, there's no way we can actually understand the world."
This presumes that we are all passive observers to history.
History isn't a thing to interact with or not. We can interact with the world but are ability to interact with the world is fundamentally limited by the amount of power we wield within it.
We can work to expose the imperialist myths about China
Words words words words words
build power
Yeah that'd be good.
prevent genocide in China
And/or start one.
The fact that we failed to accomplish this in the build-up to Iraq
Yeah because the focus was on being right as opposed to actually being relevant.
I am ignorant. That's the point. And no amount of new information about this will meaningfully resolve that ignorance because the situation is too far removed for me to get a verifiably uncurated view. It's not defeatist to acknowledge that power and relevance will come before unfettered access to information and will actually give us the ability to act on that information as opposed to just culturally signify how intellectual we are.
Yeah because the focus was on being right as opposed to actually being relevant.
The largest & most successful movement within the anti-war movement was the ANSWER Coalition. They were also the ones most willing to call out the imperialist lies about WMDs. "Being right" and "being relevant" aren't contradictory, they're complimentary.
I am ignorant.
I know. There is countless resources on the situation in Xinjiang you need to familiarize yourself with. Several have already been linked in this thread. The "Uighur concentration camp" myth is as absurd as the "Iraqi WMD" myth, and people need to understand that.
I know. There is countless resources on the situation in Xinjiang you need to familiarize yourself with.
Imagining yourself not ignorant of a situation several thousand miles from you because you've spent 2 hours reading articles and applying an (often useful) heuristic of "US bad" is the geopolitical equivalent of antivaxxer mindset.
Yes. Every effort to prevent the war failed. Still seems like we should move in the direction of the movement's most successful aspects. No one remembers Kerry's limp-dicked criticism of the war. People do remember the WMD lie.
you’ve spent 2 hours reading articles and applying an (often useful) heuristic
And we've made it to the projection step of anti-intellectualism.
I haven't read any articles actually. Why would I read articles on this when I cant verify their content or materially engage with the subject matter.
Unless I wanted to take the opportunity to preen of course.
There were no successful aspects of the antiwar movement. Not if we're measuring the movement by is (ostensible) intended purpose. ANSWER may have been successful in making you feel popular or smart. But that's not what I care about.
deleted by creator
If that's how you choose to perceive my comment, then sure. I would not consider what I said to be "enlightened centrism" simply because I didn't immediately bend a knee to either side. There are plenty of opinions on the situation, mine is that the Uighur are just another ball of yarn being played with by China and the US.
I honestly don't understand the need for one; the constant need on the left to be enlightened about Syria or North Korea or the Soviet Union or China or any other of a dozen places that the person has never been always struck me as an intellectual affectation.
I don't need to have the right conclusion about North Korea, because North Korea is so far removed from my ability to affect the material world that it may as well not exist.
What material difference does it make to be wrong or right about the Chinese reeducation camps? What material difference did it make to be right about Iraqi WMD's at the time?
This presumes that we are all passive observers to history. That's not the case. We can work to expose the imperialist myths about China, build power, and prevent genocide in China. The fact that we failed to accomplish this in the build-up to Iraq is irrelevant.
Your post sounds both ignorant & defeatist. "Oh, there's no way we can actually understand the world."
History isn't a thing to interact with or not. We can interact with the world but are ability to interact with the world is fundamentally limited by the amount of power we wield within it.
Words words words words words
Yeah that'd be good.
And/or start one.
Yeah because the focus was on being right as opposed to actually being relevant.
I am ignorant. That's the point. And no amount of new information about this will meaningfully resolve that ignorance because the situation is too far removed for me to get a verifiably uncurated view. It's not defeatist to acknowledge that power and relevance will come before unfettered access to information and will actually give us the ability to act on that information as opposed to just culturally signify how intellectual we are.
The largest & most successful movement within the anti-war movement was the ANSWER Coalition. They were also the ones most willing to call out the imperialist lies about WMDs. "Being right" and "being relevant" aren't contradictory, they're complimentary.
I know. There is countless resources on the situation in Xinjiang you need to familiarize yourself with. Several have already been linked in this thread. The "Uighur concentration camp" myth is as absurd as the "Iraqi WMD" myth, and people need to understand that.
lol
Imagining yourself not ignorant of a situation several thousand miles from you because you've spent 2 hours reading articles and applying an (often useful) heuristic of "US bad" is the geopolitical equivalent of antivaxxer mindset.
Yes. Every effort to prevent the war failed. Still seems like we should move in the direction of the movement's most successful aspects. No one remembers Kerry's limp-dicked criticism of the war. People do remember the WMD lie.
And we've made it to the projection step of anti-intellectualism.
deleted by creator
I haven't read any articles actually. Why would I read articles on this when I cant verify their content or materially engage with the subject matter.
Unless I wanted to take the opportunity to preen of course.
There were no successful aspects of the antiwar movement. Not if we're measuring the movement by is (ostensible) intended purpose. ANSWER may have been successful in making you feel popular or smart. But that's not what I care about.
lol
This incidentally, is the same mentality that is going to get us all killed via climate change.
What mentality is causing climate change lol
A few banks own the military & the oil industry. It's not a matter of "mentality."
Greenhouse gas emissions are causing climate change actually. Not banks or oil.
That's you. That's what you sound like.
No. I'm describing the actual social power which prevents change from happening. It's not a "mentality."
Reification intensifies
Using marxist terms while denying the reality of the state under finance capital lol
goo goo gah gah
Other reification pal.
Even worse. Go learn about history & development of both finance capital & the US state.
You've definitely refuted my original premise that you're just in this for the intellectual preening.