Please Support me on Patreon!: patreon.com/KnowwaynohowHere's a video showing my recent trip 5 day to Xinjiang. With so much controversy around the region I ...
In this entire thread, you’ve provided a podcast from The Economist, a British Propaganda outlet explicitly promoting free-market liberalism and demonizing any country that goes against Western Hegemony, not just China. You should slow down and actually respond to comments, if you can’t dignify questions with a proper response, then you can just not respond. Refraining from speaking on a subject you know less about is better than digging a deeper hole for yourself.
I repeat, it is better to not respond at all than it is to give a half-assed response. If your goal is to change people’s minds or show onlookers better arguments, providing weak and unsubstantial, unsourced arguments hurts both of those goals. Again, it is okay to not speak on subjects you aren’t educated on. Maybe use it as an opportunity to learn more yourself.
You haven’t sourced any of your “facts,” while you’ve been given many sources countering your claims. Extreme claims, such as claims of genocide, require proper evidence and sourcing, not just gesturing. Linking a podcast from a British propaganda outlet isn’t going to cut it, not only can people say quite literally whatever they want to in an interview, but podcasts are a time commitment when articles and direct sources can be parsed much quicker and more effectively.
I suggest you take a break, find some actual sources, and if you can’t, concede and use it as an opportunity for growth.
You provided a single podcast from a British propaganda outlet. Why not link the sources the podcast references, unless there are none? Is the podcast just a testemonial from 2 people, or does it contain a list of genuine sources that you can pull from?
Every other figure you’ve provided has gone unsourced, either you “heard it yourself” or claim it’s “from the government” without linking to the documents or statements these numbers must have come from, if you didn’t make them up.
There are numbers you can and should source properly of people in the Uyghur re-education program. You need to link these numbers if you wish to use them as a source.
You doubt that the numbers are accurate. You need to provide meaningful evidence to support why you are skeptical, and provide evidence supporting higher numbers.
You have the idea of the Chinese government being accused of fabrication a lot. By who, though, for what reasons, and with which evidence?
Do you see my point, here? Rather than having 20 conversations with no merit whatsoever due to lack of sourcing, why not pick one or two conversations and try to honestly engage with them, sourcing every argument, and refraining from speculation without accompanying sources for such speculation?
Rather than having 20 conversations with no merit whatsoever due to lack of sourcing, why not pick one or two conversations and try to honestly engage with them, sourcing every argument, and refraining from speculation without accompanying sources for such speculation?
Because they’re more interested in wallowing in the rancid mental fog of liberalism where the liberal’s correctness is axiomatic and the facts melt away into irrelevance.
there have been a lot of questions, I’ve supplied sources to the direct questions.
you may have missed them in the flurry of comments.
In this entire thread, you’ve provided a podcast from The Economist, a British Propaganda outlet explicitly promoting free-market liberalism and demonizing any country that goes against Western Hegemony, not just China. You should slow down and actually respond to comments, if you can’t dignify questions with a proper response, then you can just not respond. Refraining from speaking on a subject you know less about is better than digging a deeper hole for yourself.
I’m responding to all of your comments.
you are asserting that basic facts and interviews are propaganda.
I don’t see facts that way.
I repeat, it is better to not respond at all than it is to give a half-assed response. If your goal is to change people’s minds or show onlookers better arguments, providing weak and unsubstantial, unsourced arguments hurts both of those goals. Again, it is okay to not speak on subjects you aren’t educated on. Maybe use it as an opportunity to learn more yourself.
You haven’t sourced any of your “facts,” while you’ve been given many sources countering your claims. Extreme claims, such as claims of genocide, require proper evidence and sourcing, not just gesturing. Linking a podcast from a British propaganda outlet isn’t going to cut it, not only can people say quite literally whatever they want to in an interview, but podcasts are a time commitment when articles and direct sources can be parsed much quicker and more effectively.
I suggest you take a break, find some actual sources, and if you can’t, concede and use it as an opportunity for growth.
that’s why I’m providing corroborated, firsthand sources.
they’re probably in the other comments if you haven’t seen them yet.
if you need other sources for something specific in one of my comments, let me know.
You provided a single podcast from a British propaganda outlet. Why not link the sources the podcast references, unless there are none? Is the podcast just a testemonial from 2 people, or does it contain a list of genuine sources that you can pull from?
Every other figure you’ve provided has gone unsourced, either you “heard it yourself” or claim it’s “from the government” without linking to the documents or statements these numbers must have come from, if you didn’t make them up.
some of the uyghur detainee numbers are probably low, the Chinese government gets accused of fabrication a lot.
Alright, let’s walk through this.
There are numbers you can and should source properly of people in the Uyghur re-education program. You need to link these numbers if you wish to use them as a source.
You doubt that the numbers are accurate. You need to provide meaningful evidence to support why you are skeptical, and provide evidence supporting higher numbers.
You have the idea of the Chinese government being accused of fabrication a lot. By who, though, for what reasons, and with which evidence?
Do you see my point, here? Rather than having 20 conversations with no merit whatsoever due to lack of sourcing, why not pick one or two conversations and try to honestly engage with them, sourcing every argument, and refraining from speculation without accompanying sources for such speculation?
Because they’re more interested in wallowing in the rancid mental fog of liberalism where the liberal’s correctness is axiomatic and the facts melt away into irrelevance.
your speculation doesn’t change the nature of any official figures or sources.
if there are other sources you are specifically curious about regarding my comments, I’m happy to provide then.
You haven’t shown a single corroborated anything and are huffily lying about it because you’re too scared to learn.
all of my facts are clearly sourced above.
-He whined, still lying and not sourcing
don’t whine, just ask questions and you shall receive. or read.
Anything’s possible when you make shit up