Typical British reptile, too much of a bloodless coward to admit he's an imperialist:
In response to some people responding to this quite bizarrely claiming that I supported the West's war in Libya - no, I did not
You posted it the day after the bombing started.
https://twitter.com/bot_nabq/status/1352409294357090309
Hi! I opposed the Western war on Libya, well done on finding a tweet supporting the initial uprising though!
If Gaddafi was a "savage dictator", the rebels the West helped were good and them overthrowing Gadaffi was something to be desired, it made no sense to oppose the West assisting their effort. Half the arguments in that article could just as easily be arguments for more interventions
here's an article about these class traitors: https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2021-01-22/lessons-iraq-libya-syria-cheer-war/
How is that ad hominem? I'm just pointing out that you shared a very biased article while claiming that it's neutral...
I didn't say it was neutral, there's no such thing. Of course there is going to be some bias as there is in all journalism, I'm willing to have a discussion about what biases may exist and we can use it to color our understanding of the author's viewpoint, but the conversation doesn't seem to be heading that way. I didn't see anything in the article that would make me want to throw it in the bin, and your post isn't particularly convincing to me
You're making an attempt to discredit the author/publication without tying it back to the actual content of the article. It just comes across as low effort, as though you read the domain, headline, and byline and started working from there.
The author brings up good points, but argues from a position that the camps are what western "researchers" say they are. At best this could be useful for reframing the current narrative without totally undermining it, but it's not a realisting look at the reasoning behind the re-education centers and their actual operation.
The criticisms of Chinese industrialists exploiting the people of Xinjiang is good, but that's a problem wholly removed from the CPCs re-edication program. If anything, the current involvement of the CPC in Xinjiang is lessening the power those capitalists hold over the region by developing infrastructure and allowing for locals to seek work elsewhere. Ideally they'd just shut down or nationalize the offending factories (as they have done in some cases).
There's also the claim of the CPC being Islamophobic and repressing religion in the region, but if you look up videos of people in the region, there are mosques and calls to prayer everywhere. It doesn't look like a region that's being repressed religiously.
I really want to know what they think should be done. Should the CPC not have gotten involved after ETIM tried to assert control over the region? Should the CPC not gotten involved in trying to expand transportation and education infrastructure in the region and allowed the capitalists who had settled there to continue exploiting the people?
The situation is messy of course, but it always is. Nothing is going to be perfect, but you can tell that the CPC is genuinely trying to improve living standards in the region. Improving those standards will inevitably come with a cultural shift, this isn't some enigma or forced thing, it's just how culture works. As material conditions change, culture will shift with it.