Western media cannot help applying their double standard on China
Here it comes again… The western media is once again quick to apply their double standard to China in the recent riots in Urumqi, Xinjiang. Times of London is among the worst:
(link) As a people, the Uighurs look more like Afghans than ethnic Chinese. Ethnically, they are a Turkic race whose homeland is at the meeting point of Asia and Europe. The area now called Xinjiang was annexed by the Chinese Empire in the 19th century, although it briefly achieved independence before the Communist victory in China in 1949.
Hello?!! I can’t believe this comes out from a westerner who’s supposed to represent the current global atmosphere of trumpeting for multiculturalism and diversity. The blacks look more like Africans than ethnic whites in the US, so they are not Americans??? Ethnically, I look more like a Chinese than ethnic whites, do you say I’m not a taxpaying, honest Canadian?? Again, it shows how selfish the west is.
Look at what this paragraph says: “Xinjiang was annexed by the Chinese Empire in the 19th century”.,.. annexed?? Hong Kong was annexed by the British during the 19th century too. Should it become an independent state under the British Empire?
More from the well-respected media of the former Empire where the Sun never Sets:
(link) The Urumqi riots also call into question Han nationalism, increasingly China’s ideological glue as communism loses its fervour. This platform, appealing to more than 90 per cent of the population, seeks to convince all Chinese that they are one ethnic family and represses any minority dissent. Its flaw is that it denies China’s cultural and human diversity and blinds Beijing to rights that it should admit. Money is no panacea: that the authorities have to focus on these minority resentments, rather than the army of unemployed migrants, should send Beijing a message about where policy is failing. The Uighurs may not be challenging Communist control as much as they are Han hegemony. The riots in Urumqi should force a change. Instead, the likely outcome is denial, repression and a step farther away from basic rights and greater self-expression.
This time, the writer is correct. The Chinese government IS wrong about its ethnic policy. Instead of promoting one rule for all ethnicities, the Chinese government allow ethnic groups to enjoy preferential treatments which Han Chinese could only dream of. For instance, ethnic groups do not need to follow the one-child policy; their children are accepted to universities with lower grades than Han students would need to achieve; some groups are allowed to carry knives (as part of their traditions) etc etc… (Perhaps that’s why Han Chinese could be killed so easily by these peoples whenever there are “ethnic uprising”.)
Imagine if Canada has such preferential treatments for ethnic groups…. I can’t even think of going to universities with less than perfect grades! Or ethnic groups like us should pay less taxes because we in general earn less that white Canadians (even 2nd, 3rd generation Chinese Canadian) as tonnes of research (such as here, here, and here) have concluded?
The west likes to say the ethnic groups are prohibited from practising their own tradition and customs, quoting examples that there are restrictions going to religious places etc. True, there are restrictions under the Communist rule. But that’s NOT about not respecting ethnic customs or traditions, it’s about controlling political atmosphere as a whole. In China, any large gathering places/events are seen as potential threats to public security and/or political stability. The CCP is particularly alert to religious gatherings as we have seen in history and in contemporary events that religion IS the root of the majority of human conflicts — Christianity definitely one of them. Religious followers are encouraged to follow the orders from their religious leaders but not the rules of the states. (For instance, ppl whom should be extradited from Canada can stay on the soil perpetually if a church gives them refuge. Isn’t that church is above the law?) Why shouldn’t the atheist Chinese be higly alert to religions and religious setups? Until religions completely disappear in the human race, they are always a source of turbulence and threat to lives.
Say if the mentality of church/mosque goers is that of someone visiting a restaurant, having dim sum AND not about following the order of the restaurant owner, I bet the government would be more relaxed. I’m not saying the Chinese government is correct to prohibit “freedom” of religion. What I’m trying to say that in the eyes of the CCP, restriction to religious places is not about “Hanification” or not respecting ethnic minorities. It’s about politics. The reason why the west would believe the Han Chinese are trying to “Hanify” ethnic minorities is because this is what the west did — they used to force Christianity onto Aboriginal peoples and “westernize” them. On the other hand, as many China experts have said, the Chinese are proud of their civilization more than the land called “China”. Throughout Chinese history, there has been a constant theme that the Chinese civilization was so supreme that foreigners would fall for it, adopt it naturally (in general term, not talking about specific periods or events). There was no need to use force (comparatively to western history). I’m sure I am attracting attacks by pointing this out. Han Chinese “immigrating” to Tibet and Xinjiang not because they want to “Hanify” the places (such as what Israelis have been doing). For the forever money-thirsty Han Chinese, they are motivated by economic prospects than anything else (ask any of them if they would go to the desert if there is no natural resources to dig out).
Ethnic cleansing by immigration is a western concept.
Tags: China, media bias, riot, Urumqi, western media, XinjiangRelated posts
Short URL: http://www.chineseinvancouver.ca/?p=9749
UK and US also imposes control and close monitoring of mosques. This also happens in Malaysia where mosques are prevented from being used as staging ground for extremism and politics.
If it’s ok to regulate places of worship in the west for the purpose of peace and stability, it should also be ok for China to do the same.
Another point, the Hans are not anywhere near 7 percent of Tibet’s population. On the other hand, Tibetan people are burgeoning in other neighbouring provinces. Yet, no Hans complaining of being threatened or ‘flooded’. And the Tibetans also didn’t complain about cultural dilution/threat in Han majority provinces outside of Tibet. Ethnic cleansing my foot. Really.
But the influx of Hans into Xinjiang is indeed a very difficult issue to handle. I think so because many (not all) Uyghur people there think Xinjiang is theirs and that they’re the earliest settlers there. That’s the main factor that causes uneasiness about the Han immigration.
Han people thinks that Xinjiang is part of China in succession long before the modern time and that other ethnic groups migrated there in large number (not denying the earliest settlers of non-Hans there) progressively.
It’s a moot point. One that is difficult to address that easily. The only way perhaps is indeed eradicating preferential treatment and make everyone equal under the law for them, the ethnic minorities to feel they’re part of China’s mainstream society, part of China, and feel Chinese.
anyone who thinks china treats its minorities better than the han race is like… believing canada treats native indians better than the non-native. preferential treatment is supposed to mitigate against the harshness of a lost culture. and if u go farther u would say who cares about preferential treatment if u can have nationhood or independence. take quebec for instance it has preserved its cultural language and everything else and yet it still wants independence?
it is one thing to recognize the importance of china’s territorial integrity but its another thing to overrate the argument for territorial integrity. its all about self-preservation. small nations or ethnic groups always have to pay a price for being taken over if their neighbors are big and strong.
Good morning lw,
The experiences of Québec and Xinjiang sovereignists are too different to draw comparisons. Sovereignists and nationalists in Lower Canada, Canada East, and Québec have always had access to political and civil institutions that permitted their leaders to protect their interests which could also be promoted through newspapers. If their political leaders could not enact legislation to protect their culture, they could at least block and delay legislation that threatened it. That is also to say that French Canadians never really received preferential treatment. The series of political institutions that have come and gone since 1774 gave them the opportunity to protect their culture in the face of many English-speaking challengers who would have liked to see French Canadian culture disappear. In fact, the Union of Canada was essentially designed to assimilate French Canadians. At any rate, the sovereignists and nationalists of present-day Québec have never wielded more political power in their history. Uyghuirs have never been part of such a process.
i just got this from a friend who studied at nanjing univeristy:
one gets the impression that most of Uyghuirs like to settle dispute by fight instead of by quarrel.and they like to use knife when fighting.i panicked when i accidentally saw the gleam of the knife as it flashed through the air and was stabbed in the guy’s arm by a uyghuir in the street several years ago.since then i don’t dare to walk facing the oncoming uyghuir.i fear uyghuir brothers so much…i state that above-mentioned speech has no meaning of ethnic discrimination definitely.it is completely individual experience and feeling!
I also hear the same things about Hans being afraid of Tibetans. Tibetans could get free train ride without tickets and the authority would mostly ignore them. TIbetan kids also get away with lenient or no punishment in schools. Hans would avoid Tibetans in the street because of their weapons
This kind of generalization only demonizes people.
generalization??? how many cases do you want to hear before you want to accept what’s really happening? standing completely on the tibetan and uyghuirs and believe they have no rights at all in china *IS* a generalization conveniently used by the west to demonize china and the chinese people
it’s obvious china’s minority policy which gives preferential treatments to certain groups than others is the root of many social ills and discontent
jacques bigras i am not comparing quebec with xinjiang in terms of treatment. there is no comparison , of course. i am saying preferential treatment cannot satisfy people who want nationhood. quebec has almost everything except nationhood and it is still not satisfied.
i know all these tibetans and uyghuirs are not treated well in china and minorities do not get treated well in this world period. u think the kurds get treated well by the turks in turkey. the turks get treated well by the germen in germany? the more repressive the regime the less likely minorities will be treated well. so as a chinese i have no illusion about how minorities are treated in china. it is all bad the question is which country is less bad.
sn: So you agree the generalizations above are unfair? My point is unrelated to the actual situation in Xinjiang. My point is that not all Uyghuirs or Tibetans are the knife-wielding thieves described above. Equally, not all Chinese or the central government fit the generalizations communicated by “the West.”
lw: I understand your point and I agree. You may want to use a different example regarding the consquences of preferential treatment, because sovereignists in Québec have never asked for concessions. They have always wanted independence and shunned, and continue to do so, incentives to encourage federalism in Québec. Those incentives are useful among nationalists who seek as much independence as possible without separation from confederation. So there are different groups of people here.
jacques bigras: i’m not trying to say all uyghuirs or tibetans are knife-wielding thieves (i don’t think the original comment by my friend meant that). but it’s the fact that they are allowed to legally carry knives and others aren’t. and that’s not a generalization
Jacques,
your comments clearly shows the double standard in Western people. It is a generalization based on facts.
Sovereignists in Québec have never asked for concessions? Right, is that why we give so much money to Quebec every month? Why would Quebec want Canada’s Federal transfer payments?
Jacques,it’s fascinating to see how different people look at the issue from different angles! i only speak out what sort of person most of uyghuirs (not all of them) are from my viewpoint.I travelled around the resort of half areas in xinjiang for two weeks several years ago.there is unique amazing unworldly scenery,beauty,superb local food as well as a thrilling violence.by the way,you can’t believe that the tour fee of the travel to xinjiang for two weeks is more expensive than two weeks of the tour which takes in ten european famous cities due to xinjiang’s unique position and special treatment given by our central government as a special travel place:)but it was worth every penny.
Someone is making a case against the one-child policy on Hans in China Daily forum’s Free Talk section now.
http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/viewthread.php?gid=2&tid=641695&extra=page%3D1
The ideas are not new but the voices against this policy seems to be gaining momentum recently. It is just a matter of time before the Chinese government is forced to change its policy towards the Hans. Surely, when the policy is reversed or altered, there will be outcry suggesting genocide against the minorities
sn: I think we’re actually on the same page but I seem to bemore weary about generalizing groups of people.
Regarding the past events in Urumqi, the public discussion would change dramatically if journalists described the violence as it really was: a pogrom. According to the images and videos I saw, one ethnic group targetted another ethnic group for violence. This was not just a riot.
Dear Writer:
I agree with you. And it’s sad that many readers/audience are blind by those bias media, for years and years, generation and generation. And a bad perception is build up.
Dear everyone,
After reading every piece of comment, i thank everyone since you guys all want china to be better. we are all trying for the good will of the society. As a Chinese, i have to admit that in china there is a big gap between richness and poverty. However, we are also living in a nice environment. There is rarely such thing like what western propognada newspaper said. Everyone has their basic human rights on hand. no one will be killed if he/she goes on the street and scold on government. Chinese government as a whole meant to make the whole society better. Including Xinjiang and Tibet, people who don’t want its province to be independant are the people who want peace. Those activists are the people who has politicial purpose. They use western people’s concern of human right to go against china. This is such unfair. people in xinjian and Tibet has two group of people, Some want to be independant ,some don’t want. This is more complicated than what western people thought, So i hope people can be more critical. never just look at the picture ( can be fake) or just read articles on line. GO to China and SEE..