honestly baffled that an antifascist network is citing human rights watch and the bbc as credible sources on the prc. certainly i think there needs to be some nuance in this topic, it’s not like the prc is a paradise without flaws and i think it’s perfectly likely that the uighurs face discrimination and whatnot, but the claims of genocide do seem to be mostly unsubstantiated and overstated. as the other anon briefly mentioned, most of the actual supposed material evidence does come back to studies performed by adrian zenz, who is a german christianist who believes it’s his god-given mission to destroy socialism and the prc. on the topic of eyewitness accounts it’s not like i think they should just be flat out dismissed, but without actual material evidence to corroborate those accounts their validity has to be questioned. we know from experience that american-aligned media routinely uses false eyewitness accounts of supposed attrocities to justify imperialism against other countries, this has been the case with cuba, iraq, venezuela, north korea, vietnam, etc. our analysis has to be based in material conditions, otherwise organisations such as hrw will surely hijack and exploit our morality for their own ends. if you look at the board members of organisations such as hrw, you’ll find that the vast majority of them are high-ranking american businessmen, financiers and bankers, lawyers, and the like, with only a handful of tokenised actual third world human rights activist board members. i really think there is a need for some more critical thinking here. if there were millions of uighurs in concentration camps, there would be evidence of it.
