Uyghur abuse - "We" don't care

[The Don]

US-based billionaire Chamath Palihapitiya has come under a lot of criticism for expressing the view that people in the US, including himself, don't care about China oppressing their Muslim minority.

Billionaire investor Chamath Palihapitiya is under fire for saying that he - and most Americans - "don't care" about abuses against the Uyghur minority in China.

Mr Palihapitiya, a part-owner of San Francisco's basketball team, made the comments during a podcast discussion of whether President Joe Biden's action on the issue had helped him politically.

The remarks drew social media backlash.

Mr Palihapitiya later admitted that his comments "lacked empathy".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60045076

The thing is that "We" don't care. Maybe it's because they're a long way away, maybe it's because they are Muslim, maybe it's a result of the Realpolitik view that we don't want to annoy China but criticism of China for the alleged abuses has been muted at best.

If we really cared then we'd have boycotted the Winter Olympics in China (or even more effectively, stripped them of the Winter Olympics and held them elsewhere) and have implemented sanctions. The truth of the matter is that this would be politically and economically expensive and that's a price we're not willing to bear over a minority that people have barely heard of and whose political leverage in the West is close to zero.

So when Chamath Palihapitiya says.....

Let's be honest, nobody, nobody cares about what's happening to the Uyghurs, okay? You bring it up because you really care. And I think that's really nice that you care but .... The rest of us don't care. I'm just telling you a very hard truth

...is he really wrong and does he deserve to be pilloried ?

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I'd say that if he hadn't included himself he would not be getting the same treatment, or if he did it would not have been deserved.

The majority of people don't know or care enough about various horrible things in the world to effectively do anything about them. He's not wrong there, and he probably isn't wrong that most Americans probably wouldn't care or even know about what was happening in China.

It's bad optics to say that you personally don't care about something though, even if it's true.

 

[Darat]

I agree that the vast majority of us only care to the level of a few tuts.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

It's shameful that the West doesn't care more about the Uyghur.

It is utterly incongruous that the Muslim nations and radical organizations, so quick to call damnation and Jihad on any Western country they perceive to be oppressive to Muslims, don't care about the Uyghur, their brothers in Faith.

They couldn't care less about the Palestines except as a reason to bash Israel, and they care even less about the Uyghur, because they profit from China's friendship too much.

They better hope that their God doesn't exist.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Seems to me that the US is uniquely disadvantaged to make any criticism of China and have it received in good faith.

China already is object of insane paranoia, conspiracy theories, and sabre rattling in this country it's hard to imagine our involvement would improve anything. It's laughable that anyone would believe that this country cares about a Muslim minority being mistreated. Any interest in this human rights case would be primarily motivated by a larger adversarial relationship with this rising superpower.

I would hope that other countries that have more credibility and better relations with the country might be able to apply pressure.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"I'm mad American hasn't intervened so I can't complain about them intervening."

 

[TurkeysGhost]

"I'm mad American hasn't intervened so I can't complain about them intervening."

Do you think American intervention in this matter would make things better for the Uyghurs? Seems pretty obvious that it wouldn't.

I'm not mad that we haven't intervened. It's for the best that we not get involved. Other countries that aren't as insane as us might be able to help things, but excluding our influence in such a dialogue with China would probably be a necessary condition for any chance of success.

 

[TragicMonkey]

If one actually doesn't care the gracious thing to do is to be quiet about that. Nobody needs to hear an announcement of unconcern. After all, who is supposed to care that you don't care? I certainly don't, but I'm far too polite to mention it.

 

[Chanakya]

... So when Chamath Palihapitiya says.....



...is he really wrong and does he deserve to be pilloried ?

Yes he is, and yes he does.

Not for honestly calling a spade a shovel, no; but certainly he does, for trying to normalize the act of genocide, for trying to try in effect to make that kind of evil somehow acceptable. The opposite of hypocrisy isn't glorying in one's lack of basic decent human impulse.

Never heard of this man, but it is good and right that he should be "pilloried" for uttering crap like this. Of course, criticizing or "canceling" him doesn't do squat for the Uyghurs, so there's that; but absolutely, his callous normalizing of this horror, and of our implicit acceptance of this horror, does deserve to be censured, in the strongest possible terms.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Yes he is, and yes he does.

Not for honestly calling a spade a shovel, no; but certainly he does, for trying to normalize the act of genocide, for trying to try in effect to make that kind of evil somehow acceptable. The opposite of hypocrisy isn't glorying in one's lack of basic decent human impulse.

Never heard of this man, but it is good and right that he should be "pilloried" for uttering crap like this. Of course, criticizing or "canceling" him doesn't do squat for the Uyghurs, so there's that; but absolutely, his callous normalizing of this horror, and of our implicit acceptance of this horror, does deserve to be censured, in the strongest possible terms.

The Uyghurs are simply an exclamation point on a general phenomena happening regarding the West's relationship with China.

Before this human rights abuse there were others. It's a single party, authoritarian communist state for Christ's sake, the direct successors of Mao. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, China is the headquarters of international communism, something that every red-blooded American hates to their bones.

None of this has stopped US capital from flooding into China in search of cheaper labor and higher profit margins for decades now. Ideology and human rights are swell and all, but money's to be made so all that childish nonsense gets pushed aside.

I predict that the US will do what it always does. It'll complain and do nothing about it. It's probably not wise to publicly advertise this if you're some investor ghoul, but it's quite clear that everyone has the green light to ignore human rights abuses in China in order to keep making money there.

 

[Chanakya]

The Uyghurs are simply an exclamation point on a general phenomena happening regarding the West's relationship with China.

Before this human rights abuse there were others. It's a single party, authoritarian communist state for Christ's sake, the direct successors of Mao. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, China is the headquarters of international communism, something that every red-blooded American hates to their bones.

None of this has stopped US capital from flooding into China in search of cheaper labor and higher profit margins for decades now. Ideology and human rights are swell and all, but money's to be made so all that childish nonsense gets pushed aside.

I predict that the US will do what it always does. It'll complain and do nothing about it. It's probably not wise to publicly advertise this if you're some investor ghoul, but it's quite clear that everyone has the green light to ignore human rights abuses in China in order to keep making money there.

Think of how it was with apartheid. At one point no cared, at all. Then it became the done thing to pay lip service. After that to make some louder but still ineffectual noise. Finally all of that gathered enough momentum and, well, led to what happened.

Of course, that it happened once doesn't mean it is going to happen again. And China isn't SA, and the Chinese don't care for public opinion in the West in the same way that the Apartheid regime did.

Still, even if can't immediately do something concrete about it, there's no reason to make not doing anything about it an acceptable thing to do (or not do). Like I was saying, the opposite of hypocrisy isn't glorying in not doing the right thing.

 

[The Don]

Yes he is, and yes he does.

Not for honestly calling a spade a shovel, no; but certainly he does, for trying to normalize the act of genocide, for trying to try in effect to make that kind of evil somehow acceptable. The opposite of hypocrisy isn't glorying in one's lack of basic decent human impulse.

Was he normalising the act of genocide or just pointing out that we in the West are pretty comfortable with genocides just so long as they're kept comparatively quiet, happen to people we don't care too much about and happen a long way away ?

What about the Uyghurs' co-religionists ? Do they deserve our approbation, or do they get a pass because they're not Western ?

Never heard of this man, but it is good and right that he should be "pilloried" for uttering crap like this. Of course, criticizing or "canceling" him doesn't do squat for the Uyghurs, so there's that; but absolutely, his callous normalizing of this horror, and of our implicit acceptance of this horror, does deserve to be censured, in the strongest possible terms.

How about the hypocrisy that the majority of the people taking him to task have done precisely nothing at all to attempt to improve the lot of the Uyghurs ?

You seem very exercised about this. What steps have you specifically taken to address this problem which is apparently very close to your heart ?

 

[The Don]

Think of how it was with apartheid. At one point no cared, at all.

Utter rubbish.

There was a vocal anti-apartheid campaign in many countries from day 1. They tried to convince governments to take action against South Africa and when they could not, they took individual action to boycott South African countries and companies that did business with, and in, South Africa.

 

[Chanakya]

Utter rubbish.

There was a vocal anti-apartheid campaign in many countries from day 1. They tried to convince governments to take action against South Africa and when they could not, they took individual action to boycott South African countries and companies that did business with, and in, South Africa.

Actually you may be right. I don't really know enough about how that had actually played out to claim that one point no one actually cared.

But looking at it for a common sense perspective --- as opposed to a historically well informed one --- what, would you say, was "day 1"? Clearly there was a time before that "day 1" when international opinion wasn't rallied against the Apartheid guys?

Or are you suggesting that international opinion against Apartheid had been fully mobilized no later than when the people in SA started their protest and stuff? I don't know enough about how that played out to claim that that did not happen, but I should be very surprised if it did.

----------

Perhaps it wasn't wise to trot out as argument an analogy I amn't fully versed with, but I stick with my POV: that while it is obviously ineffectual to merely pay lip service, but doing even that much is better than not doing that at all. This is one horror that does not deserve to go down unremarked like it's doing. Enough lip service might gather momentum, and something good may, just perhaps, come of it.

 

[The Don]

Actually you may be right. I don't really know enough about how that had actually played out to claim that one point no one actually cared.

But looking at it for a common sense perspective --- as opposed to a historically well informed one --- what, would you say, was "day 1"? Clearly there was a time before that "day 1" when international opinion wasn't rallied against the Apartheid guys?

Or are you suggesting that international opinion against Apartheid had been fully mobilized no later than when the people in SA started their protest and stuff? I don't know enough about how that played out to claim that that did not happen, but I should be very surprised if it did.

----------

Perhaps it wasn't wise to trot out as argument an analogy I amn't fully versed with, but I stick with my POV: that while it is obviously ineffectual to merely pay lip service, but doing even that much is better than not doing that at all. This is one horror that does not deserve to go down unremarked like it's doing. Enough lip service might gather momentum, and something good may, just perhaps, come of it.

I'm saying that from Day 1 of Apartheid there were people all over the world fighting against it, and not just in South Africa. This runs counter to your assertion that.....

At one point no cared, at all.

Many, many people did care and worked tirelessly for years, decades even, to change government policy.

It was well before the time I became politically active, I attended a few demonstrations but by then, Maggie Thatcher's Conservative government aside, the writing was pretty much on the wall.

OTOH my late mother was active from day 1, organising, lobbying and so on. Because her local MP was a member of the left wing Labour Party, she was pushing at an open door.

Her boycott of South African goods and companies that did business in South Africa lasted until the end of Apartheid.

 

[The Atheist]

...is he really wrong and does he deserve to be pilloried ?

No and no.

Take a look at the last five items you bought that aren't food and see how many of them were made in China.

Crying about Uyghurs is the perfect iteration of virtue-signalling. Make public statement then keep giving them money.

 

[theprestige]

Ran across this on reddit, thought it looked like a fairly mundane Dunbar's number observation, and moved on.

 

[mgidm86]

China does very very bad things to people? No ****, I'm so surprised.

My country kisses China's ass with one half of it's forked tongue, same as it does with other countries that commit atrocities on their own people. Hell my country does that to my people as well! Who's going to rescue us?

I only have so much "care" to go around these days.

 

[rdwight]

It is taken more as support than simply dismissal that I think people are getting annoyed about. Attacking domestic issues, of which there are many to comment on, takes no courage and is rarely bad for business. Commenting on China though? We've seen this play out too often recently, and it just shows how disingeniuous it all is. The truth is we do not care enough, because consumers here should be a larger force to determine business actions currently than China still. But we can't be rallied with the same force, and do not do it ourselves for issues we aren't directly affected by.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

I'll admit I am among that group.
I know that these things happen, but apart from a general 'that's a bad thing' I don't do much.
The same applies to my electronics. I know very well the materials are cheap because they are mined by child slaves in Africa and made by poorly treated workers in Asia.
Or that my clothes are cheap because of child labor / slavery. Maybe mine are not directly made there, but competition from there drives prices down.
Or most Cocoa.

I live in the west, and my luxuries are bought at the price of indirect slavery of many people and bare minimum wages for many more.

But apart from trying to occasionally buying things like FairTrade marks or not replacing my phone every other year, there is not much I actually do about it.