Usually in relation to Uighur camps, the argument is “since you’re in America you can’t change whether they’re concentration camps or education facilities, so you should just concentrate on the concentration camps within your own borders instead.”
Like, motherfucker, I can have an opinion on the actions in another country and still work on changing things I can change.
I guess my question is, is this concentrate on what you can change part of some theory or strategy I haven’t read or is it just bad and lazy?
In particular for China it’s essentially conceding to the people who thinks there are millions of Uighurs being murdered, rather than attempt to engage and show that there is no evidence of that, and just what abouting.
No worries, my question was kind of rambling about Xinjiang and I wasnt careful with my wording.
But, I do feel that there was se good discussion here. I think the correct response is not disengage, but ensure that critique is done from a specific anti-imperialist perspective without speculating on the motivations of the local people or nation. That is, we can and should critique America’s actions on the area as a go to rebuttal. And also point out direct false information.
