China razes Mosque ...

[minionofmidas]

Independence for East Turkestan NOW!
Seriously. These people have gotten it far worse from the Chinese than Tibet, they're just lacking a Dalai Lama.

[minionofmidas]

Independence for East Turkestan NOW!
Seriously. These people have gotten it far worse from the Chinese than Tibet, they're just lacking a Dalai Lama.

And then what they would probably end up getting, after the initial power vacuum and the following struggle? Their own Islamic despot or their own Ataturk? In todays climate where those who can shout the loudest, advance the concept of 'brotherhood' based on faith and military support from middle eastern despotic regimes at the expense of the concept of a secular, non exclusive state for the Ughyur people, promote ethnic cleansing and generally blow people up will probable emerge victorious.

And China would then blast them back to the Stone Age.

And most bizzare is that people probably wouldn't blame them for doing so.

So, in other words the Uyghur deserve slavery because they're fairly unsophisticated radical Muslims.

[minionofmidas]

So, in other words the Uyghur deserve slavery because they're fairly unsophisticated radical Muslims.

Of course most of them are not, but many of those involved in the independence movement (barring moderates like Erkin Alptekin) are.

Actually... most of them are. That was not my point.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh... what?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes. Quite a few Hui. Quite a few Kazakhs. Also Muslims to a man, of course.
And a lot of Chinese immigrants who wouldn't be there if the central government didn't explicitly want them to be there. Just as in Tibet, except far more of them. Just as in much of the German-occupied parts of Poland before 1918 (not everywhere - some areas had a legit German presence). Point being: Most of them would leave voluntarily if China just let them, quite without an Uyghur post-independence ethnic cleansing campaign (which I sadly agree would probably occur.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In principle I would agree, obviously. (I certainly am not calling for a US invasion of East Turkestan, in case you were wondering. ) In this case, that means no independence ever, though.

And yeah, I still tend to prefer a homemade tyranny when all things are equal.

[minionofmidas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is not what I was referring to at all... as you hopefully know... or else you were talking of something about which you know nothing.
How high is the percentage born in Turkestan? Given that the Chinese share of the population was 5% 50 years ago and the lower birthrates, it can't be all that extremely high.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nyes/not really... although oviously, for *many* of the people involved it probably is. None of which really was my point.

Excellent post by rice, although of course,

Tibet, Mongolia, Central Asia, and Xinjiang have always been under the influence of the empires of China (whether they be outright annexation or vassal states or protectorates). The only exception to this rule is whenever China itself is in a period of civil war and incapable of influencing those areas.

is the traditional chinese view but not really an accurate description of historical realities. Chinese influence in the area waxed and waned. The area has been influenced just as much from the west (ie, West Turkestan and Iran.) Not to mention that China has been conquered from Mongolia a couple of times.
But this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

was basically my original point.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A neocolonial dependence instead of the current fully colonial one, eh? Yeah well, still preferable.

[minionofmidas]

Where's the outcry from Iran? Oh yea, that's right.....  China basically built their military.

...and they dislike the Sunni Uyghur radicals because of their links to Iran-haters all over the Sunni world. Including Al Qaeda.

[minionofmidas]

Of course. It was my example and my reference

Well it was an inappropriate example then, as that wasn't much of a case of ethnic cleansing - they moved all of the population of Lower Silesia, Pomerania, East Prussia out, and a wholly new population in.
Of course, compared to the numbers of Slavs displaced by the war - refugees from the German army, slave labourers, etc, mostly resettled in other than their original homes aftet the war too - the figures involved are actually small fry (you can't say that in Germany without public outcry, btw. The right has its own pc code.)

[minionofmidas]

..and authoritarian is always bad.

Yes, I agree. Corporations are always bad.

[minionofmidas]

..and authoritarian is always bad.

Yes, I agree. Corporations are always bad.

Are you saying corporations are authoritarian?

Well it's bleeding obvious, isn't it?
Just look at management chains of command.

[minionofmidas]

Ok, fine.  Not ALL authoritarians are bad.  All authoritarian governments are bad.

But again, in what way can a corporation be authoritarian against their customers?

Who spoke of customers?
Although there are myriad petty ways, of course, if you have sufficient market power which, admittedly, is quite a lot of market power. That wasn't my point though. I'm entirely interested in the internal workings of large companies here - since your description of China supposed to prove its communism sounded nothing like a communist country but a lot like a description of big business.