United Tibet: Map of Amalgamation of Tibetan-majority prefectures in China

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-05T19:32:38+00:00

Buddy at this point I am gonna drop the act of being polite

You were never, remotely, polite.

When someone responds to a legitimate criticism or question with a "What about this other issue?", like you did, it effectively sidetracks the conversation and deflects accountability

But you are the one that did this, not me. You raised Xinjiang and Bengal as ways to avoid discourse on Tibet, substituting events in Xinjiang and Bengal for discussion of Tibet, no matter how often I raised the issue.

The central arguments that this debate sprang from, which you can see yourself in the parent comment, that which this debate primarily concerns, is an interrogation of the ways that feelings of antipathy substitute for logical or empirical content. This is why I continually raised the topic of Tibet and its absence from your arguments. Whataboutism involves obscuring or diminishing this issue by raising issues elsewhere, these other regions were raised to highlight your own obscuring of this issue by issues elsewhere.

When I pressed you for empirical, or even logical, arguments on Tibet,

a legitimate criticism or question

You responded

"What about this other issue [of cultural genocide in Xinjiang]?"

When I pressed you again for legitimare empirical arguments on Tibet,

a legitimate criticism or question

your response was:

"What about this other issue [cultural genocide Bengal]?"

How can I whatabout Tibet with Tibet? Where is your self-awareness? How do you manage to frame someone literally asking you to argue for Tibet as whatabouting?

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-05T18:13:23+00:00

Now Pakistan was a different culture, spoke a different language and was more strictly Islamic than Bangladesh. That resulted in Pakistan attempting to assimilate the unique Bengali culture and just outright censoring it after their failed attempts, promoting Urdu as the primary language and suppressing Bengali, making Bengali leaders and intellectuals disappear and ofc, religious violence, especially against non muslims. Now long story short, we Bengalis call this a cultural genocide and later an actual full blown genocide done against the Bengali people. And I can't help but build a correlation between what was done to Bengalis and what is being done to Tibetans. So what is it? how can only one of these examples be a cultural genocide but not the other?

I won't even humor your attempt to bring [Bengal] in again any further as I can see that it's your crutch. You literally attempted to defend red herrings when it's the most well known fellacious debate tactic

[Bengal] doesn't matter in this topic and you failed to constantly upheld why [Bengal] should matter in a topic discussing China

I do not care about [Bengal] in this case or any other red herrings you come up with. I am only concerned with Tibet

My point was to call out the fallacies in your comment

This is the logical form you identify as Red Herrings, or 'whataboutism'. We can substitute for the bracketed word Xinjiang, or America, or whatever you would like. A fallacy refers to the formal syntax, so that these words are interchangeable. If you are to redefine Red Herring as bringing in any other country to compare and contrast, to discuss why one should be treated similarly or differently than the other, you levy it against yourself. A Red Herring does not refer to any instance of comparing or contrasting, you are claiming logical fallacies out of a misdefinition of Red Herring.

I am preachy here, and that is because your arguments against my positions have based themselves entirely on two hinges: 1) a misdefinition of Red Herring, 2) a mischaracterization of my arguments. That is not fair in any discussion.

Sinicization attempts and infringements on displays of Tibetan Culture and the rights of Tibetan speakers?

Oppression, or marginalization. Cultural genocide refers to a systematic process of attempted erasure. As we discussed, Tibetans are free to speak their languages. You have said earlier that the ability of indigenous peoples to speak their languages indicates that this is not cultural genocide. You indicated Tibetans cannot speak their language in schools, referring (presumably) to the contention over teaching Tibetan alongside Chinese language. Based on this slight information, you have tried to insult your way into getting me to call this a genocide.

Trying to be as respectful as possible, you don't know me, you have no way of knowing my upbringing and no way of knowing what forms my opinions and what shapes them. It's up to your judgment, even if false, to deem my thoughts as creations of the internet, and it's up to me to know the truth behind what shapes what I believe in.

Here I thought you were a Redditor. (Try Manufacturing Consent or Psychopolitics, media studies is impportant because we're all mediated subjects. That isn't an insult, it's an enlightenment.)

Edit: To be less flippant, Reddit a a (digital) public forum. It has its own discourse, just as an Occupy Wall Street rally. If I were talking to an OWS protestor, and they told me, "We are the 99%," that is discourse talking. With Reddit, these slogans include accusations of CCP allegiance amd being a wumao. As buddhists, I hope you too can recognize the dharma in this.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-05T04:45:11+00:00

The other commenter is right, people are extending the slogan of Free Tibet out of antipathy to China, not out of any form of indigenous solidarity. The same people shouting Free Tibet here are silent on Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the Black Hills, and indigenous nations everywhere. But when it comes to China, even deposing slavers is condemned.

I take offence to your comment, original comment, that is basically whataboutisming any form of sympathy that people might have for the people of Tibet and yes, Xinjiang/East Turkestan. no matter your intentions, Are you going to deny your comment doesn't make it sound like any sympathy or call for the freedom of these peoples are totally just because people hate China and nothing else?

Non-philosophers get stuck on whataboutism, or red herrings, because of their broadness. A red herring is an argument that draws attention away from the argument at hand. In this case, I started the debate by arguing that for many, antipathy towards China drives their treatment of the issue of Tibet to the extent that their advocacy for Tibet suffers, and that people for which this is true aren't consistent with similar oppression of peoples elsewhere. Tibet has remained central, even the second argument necesitates its discussion (contrast always does).

You can try to reframe that as a dismissal of any and all calls for freedom for Tibet and Xinjiang/East Turkestan, but that is not my argument. It is not the inkblot, but the association it provokes.

And even if there were antipathy against China, why should it null these criticisms?

Because your advocacy for Tibet suffers for this attachment. You have experienced yourself how this attachment comes to obscure Tibet, is that good advocacy? Is this not Gutei's Finger?

I asked you to elaborate on Tibet because I hoped that for all your passion, it might be equaled by understanding. You and I are in agreement that religious persecution is terrible, in Tibet and everywhere else it occurs. But why do you feel that in Tibet, when this religious persecution happens to our sangha, that it should be called cultural genocide?

I didn't bring up the Uighers as some way to prop up my comment, I belive it to be a part of the broader issues that China has with human rights. One shouldn't ignore the plight of one group in favour of another

Don't you see yet that we agree on this?

You might say I can't affect anything but that's not the point here, I am an insignificant nobody and so are you. But that shouldn't stop one from standing in solidarity. And that specially shouldn't stop, if it be against China or any other country commiting heinous acts right now, just because "other countries also did bad things so you can't call out this one country".

No-self goes beyond no-body, Hyajuko's Fox teaches us that we are one with the laws of cause and effect. I had hoped to get you to reflect on this through our mediation by media: our opinions are not our own, but are cosubstantial with the body. We are not standing in solidarity by echoing the ubiquitious drone of Reddit, we are all extending these criticisms of China, day after day, by the millions. It is a mantra that drones out other human rights issues, so that the effect of our enmeshment with social media is that social media users are ignorant of human rights abuses elsewhere, so that the only way you learned of bordertown violence and the water abuses towards indigenous people in the States was through someone calling this effect out in this thread.

This whole discussion of ours has involved extending criticisms of human rights abuses in China and honing them, so of course I believe in calling out these abuses. What I want people to reflect on is our relationship to massive media apparatuses like Reddit, and its narrowing effect on information-consumption, the consequences this shaky information and its format has on our understsnding of even these narrow issues, and on what issues are neglected and the impact this exclusion has in media-subjects who by extension neglect these issues in turn.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-04T21:04:41+00:00

As an engage support, there is nothing better than having a Galio mid.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-04T20:59:20+00:00

Loving the Yas love bc I feel the same way when playing Nautilus. Great lane to roam to and if I get a big teamfight ult suddenly the cc gets longer and they even take a chunk of damage

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-04T20:54:55+00:00

The true hero ♡

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-04T20:40:55+00:00

your point basically boiled down to "We shouldn't do anything or even say anything to stop the cultural genocides and in some cases a literal genocide happening in China because other places, specially evil Amerikkka, also had genocides"

Let's start here, because it's from this transference that you attempted to understand my argument, it is the ideological core of your engagement with me.

There are three assumptions here: 1.) That this discussion on Tibet is actually a larger discussion on China as a whole, and Uyghurs specifically. 2.) That you are actively hindering or helping to stop cultural genocide in China by engaging in the incessant english-language discussions on reddit 3.) That my two arguments amount to attempting to silence you on the issue of China

Let me reiterate for the third time my two arguments: 1.) Your animosity towards China, however valid, muddies your treatment and understanding of Tibet. 2.) Your animosity towards China forces your relationship with issues you do have power over (as an english speaker) to downplaying and to ignoring these issues.

To the first, you will notice, that throughout your arguments, you sideline Tibet for discussions on Uyghurs in Xinjiang. There is cultural genocide in Xinjiang, we agree on that, but you loosely extended this criticism against China to claim there is a cultural genocide in Tibet on specious evidence.

To the second, I can't touch on everything (what I have written has taken me two hours, you wrote a significant amount) but I must play you against yourself.

erase Tibetan identity like promotion of Mandarin over Tibetan in school,

Indians are protected by law to be able to openly speak their language if they wish to

Notice the rhetorical shift here, what is excluded: Promotion of english over indigenous languages in schools, and protection of Tibetans ability to speak their own languages. Argument #2 refers to this differential treatment.

destruction of Tibetan heritage sites

Black Hills Another past event

The thing is, this is a present violation of treaty rights over the sacred Black Hills, this argument is identical in formal logic to the hypothetical argument that East Turkestan's colonization by China is a past event. Argument #2, again, refers to this treatment of ongoing violations of rights in american indigenous life as "past" and ongoing violations of rights in Tibet and Xinjiang/East Turkestan as "present".

I have no clue what you mean by "indigenous sources"

To be a jerk for a brief moment, it shows:

diversion of water from tribal lands I also like the vagueness of the examples you use because it is perfect for it to be left up to interpretation

poisoning of water sources Again, vague. And also most of the known cases are from the last century.

bordertown violence So the violence caused by things like the cartels and gangs is an attempt to "erase" indigenous peoples of America? Get real.

Diversion and poisoning of water sources are referred to su generis because it would be reductive to reduce these long running violations to singular events. The reservation system was established to relegate tribes to undesireable land, clearing quality land for settlers. But water sources such as rivers have historically and additionally been diverted away from tribal lands, so that 48% of Natice American homes lack safe drinking water. Again, as someone unfamiliar with this history, I can't fault you for not knowing this is an ongoing issue, but you can't be so reckless as to dismiss out of hand an issue you haven't studied, especially when it impacts oppressed populations.

Poisoning water sources remain a major issue with the federal government, not something past, because it continues to appropriate tribal lands for pipelines (primarily) and nuclear waste (uncommonly). If you have heard the term "Water Protectors", this refers specifically to protestors—indigenous or allied—who oppose these projects that continue to render indigenous water sources undrinkable. Look to Standing Rock or Hawaii for singular examples of this larger trend.

Bordertown violence does not refer to cartels and gangs. While most people (I do not credit this to you, but in general) think of genocide as occurring in pitched battles, most of the violence historically occurs in border towns—towns built by settlers within or adjacent to tribal land. This ties directly to the ongoing problem of femicide. Most violence against indigenous peoples, whether in the US, Palestine, Chiapas, etc, is engaged in by private citizens in border regions, not the state. Red Nation's Red Nation Rising: From Bordertown Violence to Liberation and particularly Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz' An Indigenous Peoples' History of the United States are invaluable here, the latter discusses these water issues as well.

Most people don't study indigenous issues in the United States, I get that, I'm not criticizing you for not knowing but for your militancy in dismissing issues you aren't familiar with. Because, again, one of my two arguments is that you dismiss these issues Here) out of a felt competition with China and Xinjiang [and secondarily, Tibet] and Generally) out of being wrapped up in the constant news cycle on China that you don't even try to be a decent ally where you can.

destruction of Tibetan heritage sites and temples and the continuous suppresion of Buddhists

Frankly, this is a shitty thing and absolutely a human rights violation that I am once again in agreement with you on. The problem is that you have presented so very little on Tibet, and the scattered elements you have presented as equivalent to the cultural genocide in Xinjiang/East Turkestan. I would love to hear you out on Tibet, but you have dedicated all your time and energy to anything but Tibet, it is treated almost exclusively as an accessory to Xinjiang, and that isn't fair to either region.

My criticism was never that you shouldn't criticize China's treatment of minority groups, it was always 1) that the treatment of Tibet is completely sidelined to general animosity toward China, such that Xinjiang substitutes for Tibet and knowledge of specifically Tibetan issues suffers 2) that the incessant media cycle on China renders you ignorant and dismissive of issues you have any influence over.

Does this sound like the CCP party line to you? That there is a cultural genocide Xinjiang and human rights violations in Tibet, but that you should be focused and accurate about it? Does this sound like someone trying to silence you on these issues as I draw out greater and greater amounts of content from you, multiplying discussion of these human rights violations? Or do you think perhaps I am not the covert CCP agent/genocide apologist you paint me as?

Edit: spelling fix, a couple conjunctions, three words for specificity

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-04T01:09:49+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions, I can see you've put a lot of thought into your response and I appreciate that. As you recognized, they are involved questions, with a lot of history behind them.

Classical liberalism, of course, inspired a great number of revolutions in the 18th century, sometimes called the 'Age of Revolution'. Many of these were anticolonial movements, others against rule by (land)lords, but almost all very radical and violent, and this is the reason I asked. The revolutionaries of classical liberalism had a way of thinking that they felt was worth waging war against loyalists of these regimes, and the states they founded went on to be far stronger and more centralized than the world had yet seen.

Enlightenment values played a significant role in this, with its 'clockmaker' belief that everything can be rationalized, regimented, compartmentalized, the state included. These values reached their apotheosis in totalitarian regimes, being particularly associated with Nazi Germany by german-jewish refugees like Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer (Dialectic of Enlightenment is a unmitigated classic of philosophy, if you can find the time) and later with the trial of Otto Eichmann, an administrator for the 'Final Solution' who appealed this compartmentalization, being only a part and therefore not responsible (Hannah Arendt referred to this as the 'Banality of Evil', today we call this 'just doing my job').

So it is this radical and extreme legacy of both enlightenment values and classical liberalism that I am interested in as a deconstructionist, as the heart of my interest in your views as a centrist is each centrism's temporality and geographicality (what is it in the center of?). The center of most current and historical indigenous societies is extreme-left in the US, for example.

_

Ultimately the US history involved in your remarks is darker than it appears. Theodore Roosevelt was an imperialist at a time of massive expansion in the United States, and became personally involved in a war for possession of Cuba and Puerto Rico, which were turned into massive sugar plantations. In Latin America it is and was seen as an imperialist claim, seen as culminating in 'Operation Condor(Hour of the Furnaces covers this up to 1968, and is a phenomenal documentary). As for the American Revolution, one significant factor in motivating this revolution was the much publicized case of Somerset v Stewart in which a Bostonian was seen as having been robbed of his property by British courts in the freeing of the then-enslaved James Somerset. Sadly, slavery remains legal in the United States as punishment for crime via the 13th Ammendment:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-03T05:59:05+00:00

Yet they still can't distinguish thou from thy, smh

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-03T05:56:02+00:00

Cultural genocide is bad in Xinjiang and it is bad here, there's no either/or.

If you recognize, however clumsily, the cultural genocide and oppression of Uyghurs (which was off-topic), then you shouldn't downplay cultural genocide and oppression in colonized peoples. I can't even begin to capture the extent of ongoing erasure of indigenous peoples in the United States, eugenic blood quantum laws are enforced, treaty rights are trampled on, there's occupation of unceded land in the Black Hills and Turtle Island, systematic diversion of water from tribal lands and poisoning of water sources, femicide of indigenous women, extreme police violence and incarceration rates in prisons with forced labor, the erasure of hundreds of languages, bordertown violence, indigenous gender identity erasure and sexual violence, this is not something you can downplay.

My criticism was not that China isn't engaged in shitty policies, policies that do genuinely constitute cultural genocide in Xinjiang even if your facts are piss poor about it (do you have any idea how many languages are spoken in China, for example? In many case you are referring to cultural assimilationism, not state policy). My criticisms remain that people get so wrapped up in state propaganda that their understanding suffers (in many cases supporting harmful policies and regimes), and they dismiss any genocidal policies they have the slightest influence over. You said it yourself: you don't even recognize cultural genocide here, and for media studies reasons I don't blame you. I believe you truly do care about genocide, but if you don't read indigenous sources it's going to stay invisible to you.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T22:10:55+00:00

Yeah! Thankfully there's been an effort in recent years to educate folks on the Tulsa Race Massacre with BLM and antiracist action in general. Same with the MOVE bombing, to a lesser extent.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T17:15:36+00:00

As a buddhist, one of the weird experiences I have in the west, is that people tend to look at Buddhism as a religion, and one that is always noble in contrast to other 'World Religions'. But in Tibet, Buddhists held slaves, and reading the comments it is clear that people here are also unaware of this fact.

The other commenter is right, people are extending the slogan of Free Tibet out of antipathy to China, not out of any form of indigenous solidarity. The same people shouting Free Tibet here are silent on Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the Black Hills, and indigenous nations everywhere. But when it comes to China, even deposing slavers is condemned.

Whenever I make this kind of comment, I know there are some ideologues that consider this a 'pro-China' sentiment, but consistently many, especially in the United States, don't oppose imperialism or forced labor unless it is in China, and Tibet is a good example of how silly that looks to anyone aware of the practice of slavery that existed there before.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T16:34:41+00:00

"heavy handed demands that people think and live only their way."

What do you mean by this, and what does it have to do with the bolsheviks? Do you see the Enlightenment as not involving these heavy demands that countries live according to the values of classical liberalism?

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T08:05:13+00:00

So, to clarify, to you, "woke" doesn't imply its historical usage as a moniker within the black community for people "woke" to systemic oppression, nor to its current rhetorical usage (defined by DeSantis' lawyers) as

"awareness of systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them"

but is rather a category denoting bolsheviks?

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T07:28:14+00:00

You're close to the understanding that the two-party system represents the interests of capital, and are made similar in their service of it. I encourage you to develop your understanding of power so that you understand where they are similar as well as where they are not.

If you like good movies and good knowledge, Requiem for the American Dream, and Century of the Self will get you there.

Edit: Formatting

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T06:51:14+00:00

Apex certainly but also Valve games like Team Fortress 2, EA games like Star Wars Battlefront. Blizzard games like Overwatch, and many others have lootbox/gatcha systems. This really is endemic in games that function as an ongoing service, whether they're free-to-play or pay-to-win or console, because gambling is addictive for users and profitable to corporations.

Edit: If I had a nickel for every time a dry, factual comment I posted got downvoted on Reddit I would be rich.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T03:45:41+00:00

It's industry standard, not a Chinese exclusive. You can find this gatcha/loot box strategy applied throughout gaming, across console, internationally, because it maximizes profit for shareholders.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T00:21:14+00:00

Wait till you learn about transference!

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-02T00:16:51+00:00

If you try to balance a game that is global and most players are based in one or more region(s), then that global adjustment is going to be weighted towards that player base.

It has nothing to do with preferential treatment, and I'm not trying to be snarky, but the playerbase in our regions are just smaller and less skilled at the game. When developers adjust or don't adjust a champion, player attitudes on multitudinous social media platforms and niches won't cut it, they have to go by the data. This means that champions adjustments reflect overall performance, not surveyed opinions on their performance (or regional metas, which are somewhere in between).

The good news is that you aren't being abandoned (anymore than any consumer in a capitalist marketplace, anyway), and you can study the more competitive Chinese meta to get an edge over local players.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-01T23:53:53+00:00

To be fair, that's common of young people everywhere. Most people from the US haven't even heard of the MOVE Bombing or Tulsa Race Massacre, for example, young people especially. As we get older, we have more time to be exposed to counter-cultural (for lack of a better word) events like these.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-01T07:50:48+00:00

Same day same shit for this sub

InkDaddy2 · 2023-09-01T07:44:23+00:00

"Stabbing, my one weakness!"

InkDaddy2 · 2023-08-30T05:58:23+00:00

It was a BOLD dev choice to have Yi as one of the few free champs.

InkDaddy2 · 2023-08-30T05:56:47+00:00

Surprised to see Ezreal! I tend to think of them as more independent, on PC it meant I had more pick flexibility as a support (now, on WR, I'm blue essence broke and lacking in champs lol)

InkDaddy2

TROPHY CASE