This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Let's say the government takes "13/52" seriously and decides that Black culture is the reason for Black crime. To lower crime rates, it imposes the following restrictions on all Blacks:
Anyone who is caught doing something outlawed is arrested and transferred to a reeducation camp, which is like a regular prison, except you are forced to learn a trade and to act White, pregnancies of single mothers are terminated, children of single mothers are confiscated and placed in residential schools. Repeat offenders, both mothers and fathers, are sterilized. Anyone caught talking AAVE instead of General American or wearing saggy pants is punished. You can only leave the camp when you show that you've learned a useful trade, consume only media that promotes responsible lifestyles, speak General American and want to get married before having children. Then you get a job offer and released. If you relapse or associate with the wrong people, back to the camp you go.
In return, you get to live in a clean neighborhood that has no crime and features family-friendly Black culture, like mom-and-pop soul food restaurants, rap radio stations that play songs about having a steady job and a stable family, breakdancing competitions (it's an Olympic sport, after all!) and other stuff like that. And a national guard post on every corner.
This is what's happening to the Uyghurs. Is it a genocide?
Leaving aside the points brought up by @HonoreDB and @Folamh3, yes, forced abortions and sterilisations on a mass scale employed with ethnic selectivity are literal genocide ("the killing of genes/races").
More options
Context Copy link
Not a lawyer, but I think that would meet the legal definition of genocide, which is maybe why the U.S. uses that word for it. But all of that just sounds like the CCP version of what's happening, not what refugees and defectors are saying. And see links and Folamh3's reply on the forcible organ harvesting analyses.
More options
Context Copy link
You missed the part where Chinese doctors have privately admitted to harvesting the organs of Uyghurs in these camps; that numerous Chinese people have given testimony that they were told they would be able to receive a vital organ transplant on a specific day (only possible if the surgeons in question knew that a specific person with a viable organ would die on that day i.e. it's impossible that the organ came from an unforeseen traffic accident); that the rate at which China conducts organ transplants is far in excess of the number of people who have signed up to the voluntary donor list; and that even the number of people China executes every year is insufficient to explain the shortfall (even assuming that any transplanted organs came from people who had been executed - not a doctor and open to correction, but I imagine a lethal dose of sodium thiopental would probably irreparably destroy a heart or liver).
I don't think the usual injection regimen (anaesthetic/muscle relaxant/potassium chloride) destroys organs - certainly not to the degree that most natural toxins like amanitin, diphtheria toxin or ricin do. The cause of death from lethal injection is failure to get oxygen to the brain, not cytotoxicity, and the brain is far more sensitive to that than any other organ. Obviously, the organs of a clinically-dead body die if not removed relatively quickly, regardless of cause of death, but when you're doing a planned execution that's pretty trivial to avoid. They do also execute people by shooting them, and a shot to the head is about the ideal scenario for a transplant assuming you have the equipment on hand.
With death by firing squad, aren't riflemen typically instructed to aim for the heart rather than the head?
WP says it's not actually a firing squad; it's a single point-blank shot, apparently usually an assault-rifle hollowpoint to the head (which, credit where it's due, is about as reliably painless as executions get).
That's fair. Assuming this is the preferred method of execution in China, they're probably a source of some of the organs transplanted.
Apparently most of them these days are lethal injection rather than the bullet to the head, but as I said I think the organs from the former would still be usable anyway.
Googling this, one of the first results was an NPR article, which is mostly about the damage that lethal injections inflicts on the lungs (it certainly sounds like lungs wouldn't be viable for transplant after a lethal injection, and China carries out 250 such transplants a year), but also mentions the effect on the heart in passing:
WRT lungs: huh, TIL.
WRT heart: my understanding is that KCl does exactly that: stop the heart. There's a difference between cardiac arrest (the heart is not beating) and cardiac necrosis (the heart muscle cells are dying); AFAIK KCl does the former but not the latter. Obviously, both of these do tend to cause the other over time, but my guess is that if you took the heart out reasonably fast it wouldn't actually die.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I imagine it's more like "pistol shot in the back of the head while walking them down the hallway".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link