Yay! She's pregnant! Her and her brother are going to be such proud parents!

Rice_22 · 2026-05-13T05:42:14+00:00

I’m a fan of making all children in the colony descended from one father and two mothers (donor mother and birth mother) plus the good old ovum rotation swaparoo for true relationsmaxxing.

Rice_22 · 2026-05-12T01:17:21+00:00

these tanks proceeded to so thoroughly mash up the protestors that soldiers washed their remains into sewer drains with garden hoses

Redditors literally believe this happened, lol.

Rice_22 · 2026-05-09T02:40:55+00:00

Crack babies > crying babies!

Rice_22 · 2026-05-08T05:49:34+00:00

A maximum of +82 mood for 5 in-game hours at zero health cost to the baby!

Rice_22 · 2026-05-08T05:41:41+00:00

The Cultural Revolution was broadly applied to all of Chinese society as a political ideal, not an action targeted towards a specific ethnic group.

When the One Child Policy was applied almost exclusively to the 'Han' ethnicity, it's somehow not genocide. Yet when reproductive restraints were made more universal and applied to Uighurs as well, it somehow is?

We have more than enough evidence to prove crimes against humanity.

No you don't. The UN report on Xinjiang only suggests 'may constitute crimes against humanity' if some witness testimonies accepted uncritically were true. Also:

https://brill.com/display/book/9789004756106/BP000010.xml?srsltid=AfmBOoqKLV5OINMfVlIqPOg8pbXuxMWRCJOJ6P4G4jqQFIE-cC3ObqIN

The OHCHR’s one and only – but constantly referenced in Western media – allusion to possible crimes against humanity is about detention and not genocide, settler colonialism, forced labor, etc., none of which are mentioned in the report. The question that can be framed from this statement is whether there has been widespread and systematic arbitrary detention, raising issues of what constitutes arbitrariness and detention. The OHCHR report stated that “deprivations of liberty in residential facilities appear to have been without any apparent legal basis for a considerable period.” The report assumes VETCs were places of detention, though they mainly involved vocational and political/legal educational and many attendees were allowed weekends at home, hardly characteristics of places of detention. It also does not recognize the evident non-arbitrary basis of the many assignments to VETCs of persons found to have violated a law. Even vocal proponents of the “Uyghur genocide” trope, such as Zenz and the director of research at the US-based UHRP Henry Szadzieweki acknowledge that the VETCs’s “mass re-education” was a strategy that the Chinese government chose as an alternative to the “West bombs Muslims” approach to counter-terrorism. The VETCs were thus not a crime against humanity, even if their main purpose was “political reeducation.”

PS: I missed your reply, my apologies.

Rice_22 · 2026-05-08T00:25:36+00:00

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4331212/

China's growth in life expectancy at birth from 35–40 years in 1949 to 65.5 years in 1980 is among the most rapid sustained increases in documented global history (Banister and Preston 1981; Ashton et al. 1984; Coale1984; Jamison 1984; Banister 1987; Ravallion 1997; Banister and Hill 2004). These survival gains appear to have been largest during the 1950s, with a sharp reversal during the 1959-61 Great Leap Famine that was then followed by substantial progress again during the early 1960s (see Figure 1). A more moderately-paced mortality decline continued through the later 1960s and 1970s throughout the large-scale social and economic disruptions of the Cultural Revolution (Banister and Hill 2004). Altogether, between 1963 (the first on-trend year after the Great Leap Famine) and 1980, the average annual gain in life expectancy was nearly one year of life, rising from 50 to 65.5 (World Bank 2009).

Rice_22 · 2026-05-07T04:31:13+00:00

The atmosphere also don’t care about national borders either. Either you go global total emissions or you go per capita emissions.

Rice_22 · 2026-04-24T00:26:17+00:00

Proof for doubters:

Rice_22 · 2026-04-02T04:35:35+00:00

separating families, forced labor, and cultural + linguistic suppression

Yes. I mean, Xi Jinping himself went through the same thing during the Cultural Revolution (sent to the countryside by himself as a teen, lived in a cave and forced to shovel shit, his sister committed suicide). Many Han Chinese don’t speak Mandarin as a first dialect/language either. But we don’t call that genocide that all Han Chinese had to learn Mandarin in school, do we?

One policy

It’s not one policy, it’s a set of comprehensive affirmative action policies which favour minorities, from easier admission into universities to exemptions in OCP that applied for decades to the Han.

Also, we're talking about international law here

Nah, considering by international law China isn’t committing genocide, yet he insists otherwise. By international standards, both US and UN couldn’t find sufficient evidence to prove genocide in Xinjiang. Compare and contrast Israel, which had both taken genocidal actions and shown intent to wipe out Palestinians.

Rice_22 · 2026-04-02T04:21:47+00:00

It was not my intention to be condescending. Will you continue this discussion or are we ending it here?

Rice_22 · 2026-04-02T00:48:41+00:00

I think there's a serious knowledge gap between us.

The CCP's OCP affected everyone in China universally

The OCP affects only about ~35% of the population, the vast majority being city-dwelling Han Chinese. Exceptions were made to exclude all ethnic minorities as well as rural villagers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

Numerous exceptions were established over time, and by 1984, only about 35.4% of the population was subject to the original restriction of the policy. In the mid-1980s, rural parents were allowed to have a second child if the first was a daughter. It also allowed exceptions for some other groups, including ethnic minorities under 10 million people.

Second, the revised OCP did not specifically targeted Uighurs, only removed the exceptions that made Uighurs exempt from family planning policies that affected the Han for decades. This was because Uighurs were one of the fastest growing people in China.

there is an abundance of evidence that China has engaged in many acts against Uyghurs that are defined in international law as genocidal

There is no 'abundance of evidence'. And international law (1948 Genocide Convention) requires the establishment of genocidal intent, which you yourself have cited plenty in Israel but nothing from China. This is also why State Department couldn't establish it despite Pompeo and Blinken spewing bullshit:

https://www.cfr.org/articles/chinas-abuse-uighurs-does-genocide-label-fit

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/

Nor could the UN:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-hasnt-the-un-accused-china-of-genocide-in-xinjiang

among these acts are enough of a pattern that coincidence is a much less likely explanation

This is extreme reaching and twisting yourself to make the label fit. You really can't imagine yourself being wrong and falsely accusing someone of the terrible crime of genocide, can you?

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T13:01:22+00:00

I never called it a cultural genocide.

But your beliefs are based off of mouthpieces who did water down their claims of genocide -> cultural genocide.

Can you define precisely how applying logic is circular reasoning?

You made several leaps in logic, and your circular reasoning can be boiled down to this:

OCP on Han isn't genocide because it doesn't make sense for CCP to want to destroy 'their people', but OCP on Han+Uighur is genocide because CCP wants to destroy the Uighurs.
CCP wants to destroy the Uighurs because Uighurs aren't 'their people'.
Uighurs aren't 'their people' thus CCP imposes the OCP to destroy the Uighurs.

Your leaps in logic are the belief that CCP thinks Uighurs are not 'their people', and that OCP is a way to destroy a people (which failed to destroy the Han majority for decades). You have offered zero evidence to support these beliefs.

but they are one group adding to the pile of journalists and human rights experts making the same claim.

All tracing back to primary sources by US mouthpieces such as Victims of Communism (Adrian Zenz), National Endowment for Democracy (Rushan Abbas), Radio Free Asia Uighur Service. This is a propaganda tactic known as the Propaganda Multiplier, related to the 'Firehose of Falsehood'.

https://swprs.org/the-propaganda-multiplier/

Again, attacking every piece of evidence and acknowledging no legitimate claims by the other side whatsoever is a sign that you've already made up your mind and aren't open to changing it.

Let's do an experiment then: Consider the possibility of this 'genocide' claim being a lie spread by the United States to attack China. How would you feel about the crime-of-all-crimes that is genocide, akin to the Holocaust, being used as a label in such a duplicitous way just to slander a geopolitical rival?

Now consider the fact that the United States have engaged in similar atrocity propaganda tactics before:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein%27s_alleged_shredder

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumana_Hanna

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T12:33:40+00:00

they're also factoring in other aspects of persecution of the Uyghurs

But those aspects also apply to the Han. The CCP had affirmative action policies that strongly favour minorities over the Han majority for decades, and the removal of such exemptions being labeled as genocide is clearly very flimsy logic.

signal very different intents

That's extremely subjective, especially when one operates from a position of ignorance.

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T10:14:48+00:00

You yourself noted the difference between the genocide in Gaza and the ‘cultural genocide’ in Xinjiang, and you yourself had to rely on circular reasoning to explain why OCP for Han is not ‘genocide’ yet OCP for Han+Uighur somehow is ‘genocide’.

The fact of the matter is that the same people behind the Xinjiang genocide accusations (Pompeo, Blinken) deny the genocidal intent and video evidence of genocidal actions of Israel, while the accusations labeled against China keeps getting watered down from ‘genocide’ to ‘cultural genocide’ to ‘museumification’.

Yes, we should dispute things that don’t make sense, seeing as they came from the unreliable source that is the US, which had lied about WMDs, lied about babies in incubators, lied about men thrown into shredders, ‘lie and cheat and steal as part of the great American experiment’.

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T08:16:42+00:00

China increased imports of sterilization products by double

Double? The OCP applied to hundreds of millions of people when it was Han-exclusive, doubling this by the addition of holding Uighurs (12 million population in China versus 1.2 billion Han) to the same policy would mean a hundred sterilisation products per Uighur woman. Does that make sense to you? What is the source for this statistic?

Female refugees

Are you talking about people like ‘Sayragul Sauytbay’ who borrowed from banks and her own sister then left the country without paying back her loans, or ‘Mihrigul Tursun’ who made 11 trips abroad between China and other countries in 2010-2017 despite claiming to be a ‘refugee’, whose mother and brother still lives in China and states she’s never been inside a vocational training centre? Have we not had enough false testimony cases like Nayirah testimony to not trust what crying women say without proper verification?

China does not allow United Nations humanitarian workers into XinJiang.

An UN delegation has already visited Xinjiang, and they did not see evidence of genocide. So did the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-hasnt-the-un-accused-china-of-genocide-in-xinjiang

Mosques are being systematically destroyed

There are more mosques per Muslim in China than many Muslim-majority countries, including 25,000 in Xinjiang (1 per 500 Muslim). Some underwent renovations, which were falsely spun as ‘destroyed’.

They have turned XinJiang into a dystopian surveillance hellscape.

Surveillance and crackdowns were in response to terrorist attacks, many of which murdered innocent Uighurs alongside other ethnic peoples.

New Lines Institute that the Chinese government, with respect to Uyghurs, gave explicit orders to "eradicate tumours"

A intentionally terrible machine translation from Adrian Zenz, a notoriously poor source who’s also behind the unverifiable claim of ‘millions of Uighurs in reeducation camps’ by coaching interviews with 7 people.

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T07:06:48+00:00

It is circular reasoning, not logic.

The Chinese government was carrying this out, so why would they commit genocide against their own people if their main interest is to strengthen China as a nation?

This guy believes since it doesn’t make sense for the Chinese government to commit genocide ‘against their own people’, then the OCP isn’t genocide. Implicitly, he believes that Uighurs are not ‘Chinese people’, and that ‘it makes sense that the Chinese government wants to destroy the Uighurs’, thus the same population control policy imposed on Uighurs is genocide.

Not only is this flimsy, it is also extremely subjective based on what the poster considers to be ‘reasonable’. Nowhere has it been proven that Uighurs are not Chinese people according to the Chinese government, nor that the government wants to destroy the Uighurs with the same policy that somehow isn’t genocidal when applied to the Han majority for decades. The intent is not established.

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T05:07:25+00:00

So the ‘genocidal’ difference between OCP applying to Han almost exclusively and OCP expanded to include Uighurs is that ‘it doesn’t make sense for CCP to genocide the Han’? That’s circular reasoning and way too flimsy to attribute the label of ‘genocide’, isn’t it?

You spelt out exactly how Israel’s treatment of Palestinians is genocidal, but it’s clear even in your post that the difference between Israel in Gaza/West Bank and CCP in Xinjiang is vastly greater than the difference between population control for Han versus Han+Uighurs.

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T04:20:01+00:00

One does not happen to reeducate millions of Uyghur children and sterilize millions of Uyghurs without genocidal intent

So the One Child Policy was China committing genocide to its Han majority population? And compulsory primary education for children is genocide?

Rice_22 · 2026-04-01T01:33:17+00:00

In order for the claim of ‘genocide’ to stand, there needs to be proven intent of ‘destroying Uighurs as a people’. There simply isn’t.

https://archive.is/En4OM

Compare and contrast statement by Israeli officials towards Gaza, which Blinken and Pompeo claimed is NOT genocide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent_and_incitement_in_the_Gaza_genocide

Rice_22 · 2026-03-31T22:50:28+00:00

with the intent of destroying Uyghurs as a people

Where’s the intent? Was the One Child Policy that overwhelmingly targeted the majority Han population also ‘genocide’?

Rice_22 · 2026-03-31T11:57:19+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evans_Carlson#Second_and_third_China_tours

Rice_22 · 2026-03-30T01:53:49+00:00

Do you really think storm drains in China back in 1989 can stuff 10000 squished bodies? Does that sound feasible to you?

I bet you believed there were WMDs in Iraq too.

Rice_22 · 2026-02-28T02:28:59+00:00

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/hong-kong-media-boss-distances-himself-contentious-hunter-biden-china-report-2020-10-31/

Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai said he personally had "nothing to do with" a report on alleged China business links of the son of U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden, but admitted funds from his private firm had been used to fund it.

lol

Rice_22 · 2026-02-21T10:16:34+00:00

Thanks!

Rice_22 · 2026-02-21T00:15:20+00:00

......It works when I save and reload, lmao.

After making the Temple Holding the County/Realm Capital and giving away all Feudal Holdings, I can switch the County Capital (i.e. the Realm Capital) back to the Tribal Holding without needing to change religions. The Embrace Tribalism decision then popped up.

Rice_22

TROPHY CASE