
China has turned Xinjiang into a police state like no other - farseer
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turned-xinjiang-into-a-police-state-like-no-other
======
tc
In the West we have a false sense of security that totalitarianism will
inevitably fail. We've seen so many examples of fallen tyrannical states. But
many ideas fail the first few times they're tried. China seems committed to
making totalitarianism "work."

It's hard to think of any more dangerous invention. Even nuclear weapons
aren't as dangerous as a sustainable model for modern tyrannical government.

This is an invention that would be exported and widely adopted.

The liberal democratic model of government spread around the world not just
because the people saw it work in America and decided that's what they wanted,
but also because the ruling aristocrats saw that it would be net better for
them. The French Revolution probably helped convince them it compared
favorably to the guillotine.

If another model is pioneered and proven that's better for the ruling class,
it won't be difficult to find regimes eager to adopt it.

~~~
Laforet
I very much doubt it is sustainable. The cost of policing is quite substantial
and the productivity lost is hard to replace which adds to the cost.

What we are seeing today is essentially a low intensity conflict[0] not unlike
what took place in white Rhodesia/Namibia, Northern Ireland during the
troubles, etc. There is a economic reason why these conflicts could not last
indefinitely, no matter what ideologies drive them.

[0]:[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_intensity_conflict](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_intensity_conflict)

~~~
kinsomo
> I very much doubt it is sustainable. The cost of policing is quite
> substantial and the productivity lost is hard to replace which adds to the
> cost.

Why do you think the Chinese government can't sustain the cost? Intensive
policing is manpower intensive, and China presently has manpower to spare.
They also don't have to deal with democratic pressures to contain the cost and
redirect the savings to programs that benefit the general public.

~~~
analog31
In my view, they are not sustaining the cost. We are, by buying their
products. If totalitarianism becomes universal, that's when it ceases to be
sustainable.

The ruling class has luxuries that they could not have developed for
themselves without them being broadly available. I'm thinking of things like
cell phones, the Internet, and possibly the money system.

Parasites need a viable host.

~~~
Can_Not
I love that we're talking about how bad totalitarianism is meanwhile we
literally have the upperclass exporting jobs to China for a quick buck and
president who campaigned on bringing them back who just betrayed his base (and
his country) by helping a Chinese company keep their jobs... Living in the
free-ist country in the world apparently means you're free to sell out your
fellow man to the totalitarian state overseas.

I think _that_ is the sustainability problem we need to talk about. We're
feeding them and starving ourselves.

------
rhn_mk1
The lengths that China goes to control the minority (although it's about half
of the region) is astounding. I can't imagine what little privacy they have,
between constant physical checks, personal party spies and electronic
surveillance.

I heard once that in a world where everyone agrees to being spied on by
carrying a mobile, the mobile-less will be suspect. I never thought this would
actually be the case, but there it is: people must install government spyware
on their personal devices.

Reading this gave me a new appreciation of how human rights are broken in
China. I sincerely hope that those people recover their freedom.

As recent history had shown, even Western countries, proud of their freedom
and Enlightenment values, may realize that something bad is happening when
it's too late. Seeing how surveillance is making comparatively small advances
here, I'm slightly more worried that privacy might be completely extinguished
from the world one day.

~~~
brianpgordon
The GDPR just coming into force is surely a promising sign that we're moving
generally in the right direction.

------
CapacitorSet
The fact that this is done under the guise of antiterrorism ought to ring some
bells to American readers.

~~~
adventured
The situations don't compare well, even though the US too often uses terrorism
as a guise to pursue global political goals.

Domestically there are 3.3 million Muslims in the US. There are ~50 detainees
at Guantanamo Bay, with most of the former detainees having been released
without charge. Some of them were charged as enemy combatants and or
terrorists. And Guantanamo is widely considered a black mark on the US
reputation.

The US has millions of Muslims that co-exist entirely peacefully with a very
large Christian majority. After 9/11, at the height of anti-Muslim emotions in
the US, Muslim Americans weren't put into camps by the tens or hundreds of
thousands; they weren't slaughtered; their rights weren't wiped out; their
culture and religion wasn't made illegal; the US didn't arrest them by the
hundreds of thousands in targeted fashion. In fact, it's extraordinary just
how peaceful and calm the situation after 9/11 actually was: if you believed
the propaganda, America surely would have killed or arrested every Muslim in
the country, except the propaganda is all a lie.

The US is not trying to destroy Islam in the US. The US is not interning
millions of Muslims, trying to eradicate their culture and beliefs. The US is
not torturing its Muslim population of 3.3 million. The US is not restricting
their movement, their worship, or keeping them from owning guns or knives to
defend themselves. The US is not razing their places of worship. The US is not
building massive camps to put hundreds of thousands of Muslims into.

The US isn't doing anything even remotely similar to what's going on in China.

~~~
s2g
No, the US just goes and bombs their homes instead.

and at home the US strips away freedoms from their own people with the
justification of "national security".

~~~
323454
If you're a US Muslim then your home is probably the US.

------
assblaster
I have first hand experience in Xinjiang a decade ago. I can only imagine it's
getting worse.

What I remember most was:

1) nearly hourly MMS messages to my flip phone from unknown numbers with an
unknown attachment. Since my phone was bought outside China, the MMS
attachment didn't automatically open the likely spyware.

2) Being followed and monitored by plainclothes policemen

3) Having my hotel room searched while I was away. Having police come to my
hotel room to interrogate me but lacking access because I had the only key to
the room (very very cheap hotel).

4) Armed convoys of Chinese army soldiers constantly going up and down major
streets.

------
woodandsteel
Perhaps the most important reason authoritarian regimes fail in the modern
world has to do with decision making. In order to make good decisions, you
need accurate information and a good discussion of alternatives and their
likely outcomes.

The modern world is so complex and changes so much that the only way to get
this is a free flow of information in which everyone can honestly say what is
happening in their particular part of the society, and everyone can make
suggestions and offer evaluations.

Authoritarian regimes shut all of this off, such as through turning the press
into a governmental propaganda machine, and dictating what university
professors can research.

The consequence is the top decision makers live in an epistemic bubble and
become increasingly out of touch with reality, and increasingly subject to
group-think. And that in turn leads to poorer and poorer decisions, and
eventually the system comes to an end. I think it is quite predictable that
this is where Xi's regime is heading over the long term.

------
duxup
The scale is jaw dropping.

~~~
manuelmagic
That is exactly what I thought while reading the article.

------
throw2016
The economist and other media love pointing fingers at others. That's easy to
do. Everyone knows China is not a democracy but we are which makes
surveillance here much more problematic.

Yet we do not see any serious examination from the economist on threats to
democracy from surveillance. Infact it is at the forefront on hit pieces on
Snowden accusing him of treachery [1] which means their concern for
'surveillance' is entirely fabricated.

Why is Assange still stranded and Snowden in Russia? What consequences has
there been from the revelations on western security services and rubber stamp
courts? No answer from the economist because they aren't even asking the
question. Yet another cheap ploy to use 'human rights', 'democracy' and
'freedom' to attack other countries while soiling these principles.

The economist is a principal cheerleader of neoliberalism, shock therapy and
other exploitative economic policies that directly lead to corruption, theft
of national resources by uncontrolled privatization and oligarchies in third
world countries. Nothing to do with democracy.

This kind of hypocrisy and grandstanding has run its course, its a dangerous
distraction designed to lull readers into complacency while entrenched
interests that publications like the economist support make democracy more and
more meaningless.

[1] [https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-
america/2014/01/10/tr...](https://www.economist.com/democracy-in-
america/2014/01/10/treachery-and-its-consequences)

~~~
pas
Could you point to a few examples of support for "shock therapy and other
exploitative economic policies" on the Economist?

------
emptybits
A thought experiment, from an ignorant Canadian to those Chinese who accept
ethnic discrimination in national policy:

Generation(s) of Han Chinese and Uighurs get together and start having
children. An act of loving subversion, if you will. At what level of mixing
does the dangerous Uighur contribution become safe to you? 50%? 25%? 12.5%?

[Only somewhat tongue-in-cheek.]

~~~
throwaway9346
It's not about race but rather their patriotism towards China.

The largest group of Muslims in China are the Hui Muslims (about 10 million of
them). They are the descendants of the Muslims that were absorbed during
conquests in the Tang and Ming Dynasty.

They eventually integrated and married other Han Chinese. They are still
Muslim, but also identify as Chinese. There are also affirmative action
programs for them, making it easier for them to into good colleges and
government jobs.

They were also exempt from the 1-child policy.

They are how Asians are in the US, the "model minority."

~~~
emptybits
> It's not about race but rather their patriotism towards China.

Please explain, then, why race is a category used to reduce a person's numeric
"trustworthiness score" in China. If one is ethnically Uighur instead of Han
or if one has received religious education then one is deemed by the
government as "less trustworthy" \-- not because of behaviour or evidence of a
crime but simply because of ethnicity.[1][2][3]

Since this score is used to determine whether freedoms are restricted (e.g.
travel, communication, and forced "re-education"), it is racism.

[1] [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/thousands-
chin...](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/thousands-china-
xinjiang-uighur-beijing-disappear-fears-authorities-thought-police-personal-
safety-a8115421.html)

[2] [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/15/opinion/china-re-
educatio...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/15/opinion/china-re-education-
camps.html)

[3] (TFA) [https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-
turn...](https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/05/31/china-has-turned-
xinjiang-into-a-police-state-like-no-other)

------
nomass
As a European I hope we find the courage and the strength to allow ourselves
to be militarized as we where at the beginning of the 20th century. I think to
a certain degree a military conflict with China would not be a bad thing. Here
we have achived quite a few things of which each of his own would be worth
dying for.

Typical western values are seriously underrated and are not taken seriously.

~~~
UncleEntity
> Here we have achived quite a few things of which each of his own would be
> worth dying for.

What, like nuclear bombs?

Because that's what most likely will kill you in a large scale conflict
between superpowers.

There ought to be a law that you can't advocate for war unless you've actually
been to war...

~~~
bilbo0s
I don't think he really understands the full implications of modern warfare
between global powers. He's likely thinking in terms of firearms and tanks.
Maybe some airplanes.

He's in for a big surprise.

On the plus side, the surprise will be quick.

------
purple-again
This paywall is defeating all my usual tricks, can someone help me out? On an
iPhone and the web link didn’t work, nor did going through twitter or
Facebook.

Thanks in advance for any help.

~~~
Barrin92
>This paywall is defeating all my usual tricks, can someone help me out?

Paying for the content ought to do the trick.

~~~
LearnerHerzog
What an ignorant and patronizing thing to say. Does your daddy have enough
money for us too?

~~~
Barrin92
I don't really see the point of the excursion into my private life but I pay
for my newspaper subscriptions myself, and I'm not really sure that being
unable to pay for content somehow justifies stealing it.

------
joejerryronnie
What happens if we find out China is committing atrocities like ethnic
cleansing? Will we implement some economic sanctions or will we send in the
troops?

~~~
pas
North Korea is still doing whatever the hell they feel like doing. Because
bombs (and artillery pointed at Seoul).

------
flyGuyOnTheSly
I keep telling people about this and their unconcerned reactions really worry
me.

~~~
ironjunkie
People are only getting concerned by the "hype thing of the day". (today it is
the 1500 immigrant children lost, yesterday it was some battle in Syria)

They don't care about things until a mob of similar people care about it. It
is group thinking and virtue signaling at its peak

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
Like the frog in gradually heated water, no one notices the gradual
intensification.

~~~
pas
That's actually false. The frog jumps out when the water gets too hot.

------
Roritharr
Besides this being dystopian out of the western libertarian pov, i wonder what
it actually does against crime? I imagine a crime free city would be an
interesting human phenomenon without equal. The side effects of there not
being any undetected and unprosecuted crime would be fascinating.

~~~
jdavis703
What is crime though? Do you want to live somewhere where spitting on a random
sidewalk in front of the wrong camera means you're banned from flying for a
year? Is the fear of criminal violence greater than the fear of state
violence?

~~~
kfrzcode
> an action or omission that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by
> the state and is punishable by law.

He who holds the biggest stick writes the book of law

------
dreamszl
Tell the story not the news. Wow, well done.

------
volgo
Whether you like China or not, Islamic fundamentalism is a huge problem to
global peace today. Not just in the Middle East, Europe, but also parts of
Southeast Asia (Malaysia, Philipphines) and China.

The problem is people clinging to old time religious beliefs that women are
inferior and must be veiled and that infidels are not worthy

We've slowly dispelled Christian fervor (which used to be just as bad as
Islamic fundamentalism) by slowly improving the scientific literacy rate and
living standards in the west. Must of the Islamic countries haven't seen
growth like this. How do you root these out?

Not sure if China's hard handed approach may work. Maybe it will, who knows.
Maybe it will fail. But we at least must do something about it

~~~
duxup
"But we at least must do something about it"

Like oppress an entire region of people who aren't committing violence to get
to the handful who are?

~~~
raverbashing
As opposed to the western approach which lets religious fundamentalists
profess their anti-semitism, anti-atheism and misoginy freely and violently?

Example: [http://www.france24.com/en/20180511-saudi-financed-
belgian-m...](http://www.france24.com/en/20180511-saudi-financed-belgian-
mosques-teach-hatred-jews-gays-report?ref=tw)

And while freedom of expression is important, it is limited (especially in
Germany). Racists expressions are a no-no pretty much everywhere.

Now Jews feel increasingly unsafe in the streets of Europe.

~~~
beebmam
Freely, yes. People in the United States have the right to express publicly
whatever their beliefs are. And we also have the right to judge people based
on their beliefs.

I'm not sure about the rest of the "western" world. But I this the way it is
in the United States.

------
biggio
China must be split up. It's a huge population and it's not working.

~~~
partycoder
Hello

[https://youtu.be/0vVOXlgHC1U?t=37m5s](https://youtu.be/0vVOXlgHC1U?t=37m5s)

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
For those that don't watch the YouTube, it shows a long Chinese military
parade, which suggests the unlikelihood of China splitting up.

------
scotty79
What would be your advice to China about how should they treat Uighurs?

~~~
emptybits
Treatment identical to Han Chinese would be a great start.

~~~
ihsw2
They do get treatment identical -- any Han committing the same crimes would be
exposed to the full force of the law.

~~~
emptybits
You refer to a very qualified and narrow "identical". In the general sense,
before an Uighur commits a crime, are they treated in an equal manner to a Han
Chinese before they commit a crime? In all manners of expression, association,
travel and employment, for example?

------
stephengillie
> _As a result, more and more_ private prisons _are being built: the_
> incarceration _archipelago is adding islands even faster than the South
> China Sea. Adrian Zenz of the European School of Culture and Theology in
> Kortal, Germany, has looked at procurement contracts for 73_ private prisons
> _. He found their total cost to have been $108 million, almost all spent
> since April 2017. Records from Akto, a county near the border with
> Kyrgyzstan, say it spent 9.6% of its budget on_ law enforcement _(including_
> private prisons _) in 2017. In 2016 spending on_ law enforcement _in the
> province was five times what it had been in 2007. By the end of 2017 it was
> ten times that: $1.24 billion._

Change a few keywords and it sounds more like the current situation in the
USA.

> _CCA revenue hit a whopping $1.79 billion in 2015, up from the year before,
> while GEO revenue hit an even higher $1.84 billion, likewise an improvement
> over their previous year._ [0]

[0][http://allthatsinteresting.com/private-prisons-us-
stats](http://allthatsinteresting.com/private-prisons-us-stats)

