you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 4 months ago (52 children)

Can you tell me why do you think this law is bad?

It bans acts that “undermine ethnic unity or create ethnic division” among China’s 56 officially recognized ethnicities

Should we strive for divisions among ethnicities? Like burgerland?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 52 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 4 months ago (20 children)

    That talk about ethnic unity sounds a bit right wingery

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    It’s just the same old ML supporting ethnic cleaning when it’s what they’re told to support.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    Ah nice, you don’t know how to reply and start inventing shit. Very smart discussion. Still waiting to know how the law is bad eh… (͡•_ ͡• )

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago

    You don’t know if you support this or not? Sounds like you heard “China” and came to argue without having a personal view. Before I answer your questions, I need to know where you stand on it. Or do you not have individual thoughts and feelings?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    The same right wings that tells you to hate brown people? These unity talk you mean? 🫤

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    The same one talking about ethnic unity within their preferred groups yeah

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (10 children)

    Within and among are different words in English with different meanings but ok.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    I'm guessing it's a translation issue since the law mandates using Mandarin etc

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    Yes, as a main language not as only language. Again here English language did a trick ehehe sneaky little education…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    You're saying it's fine because they're forcing it as just the main language and not the only one..?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Can you live in your country (have a job, pay taxes, buy a house, raise kids) without using the official language of the state? In mine is not possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago*

    These communities existed before today, and seemed to be doing fine.

    The fact people can learn and use a language, without being raised to consider it their primary language, is what you think you're arguing. It would be nice if you meant anything by it besides "nuh uh."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Definitely yeah. Are you saying you shouldn't be able to do that or wdym

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    There are older Germans who have been living here for generations and don’t speak standard German. Germans learn it in school now, but not every school insisted on Hochdeutsch in the post-war period, especially in more rural areas.

    Generally they all understand standard German, but not all of them can produce it. Their children can often understand and produce both their dialect and standard German, but their grandchildren have mostly lost the ability to produce the dialect.

    It’s really sad to lose the diversity of dialects, and it’s a direct result of enforcing a standardized German dialect in schools and government institutions.

    China is geographically massive in comparison to Germany and has that much more to lose.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago*

    You are changing your question. First it was if you can live there without speaking the language. And that's easy. And we're talking about minorities in China, in some areas you'd be surrounded by a community who speak the same language as you so integration into that area isn't a problem at all.

    I mean right wingers push for mandatory language classes (and talk about ethnic unity). This is getting eery. And this is going further in that that it is forcing it as the primary language...

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    Yes, like American bigots screaming 'love it or leave it,' and 'stand for the flag, kneel for the cross,' or other demands to adopt an identity rooted in American nationality with allegiance to ethnic majority culture.

    The ones trying to make the majority language the only official primary language, even in communities where yeehaw jingoism has done considerable damage, or outright stolen entire nations' worth of land.

    The ones eager to project that, globally, as if sovereignty is when you get to say what people do in other countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    It is bad because out of China’s 56 officially recognized ethnicities, 55 are suppressed, and this law makes everything worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (14 children)

    Do you think it’s a good thing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    How promoting unity among ethnicities a bad thing? At least on paper yes I agree with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    Is it okay when Israel does it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    They'll never answer you in good faith because they're hypocrites. They cry and scream about genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid when Israel does it, but they'll turn around and praise China for doing the same exact things.

    The reality is that they have no morals, no values, and no principles. If Israel was Marxist by name and was anti-American to some degree, you'll see these same exact types come out and defend Israel for fighting the CIA funded Palestinian color revolution and their terrorism against the liberated Israeli workers. Logical consistency is the biggest enemy of zealous tankies.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Bro what are you smoking? Ahahah did you just let the autocorrect reply? Wtf

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    So you don’t actually have your own thoughts and feeling on the subject? Do you or do you not support this law in China?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    So you don’t know how to write or how to read. I already wrote my “feelings” above :/ do you want me to quote myself or you know how to search for it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Do you support this law in China?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Ok I quote myself. As the great infallible hell_nah_brother (praise upon him) said:

    At least on paper yes I agree with it.

    Did I satisfied your requests agent? Can you now, finally, tell me why do you think this law is bad?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    So you think Israel should make one of these laws too right? You’d agree with it “on paper” which means you agree with it word for word.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    why is having an identity that isn't common considered division?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    You guys really don’t know how to read. Nowhere in the article it says that they ban or consider it a “division” being of a different ethnicity other than the main one, you just made shit up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I'm literally replying to your quote from the article?

    did you read the article?

    Organizations and individuals outside mainland China that “undermine” ethnic unity or “create ethnic division” will also be held liable, the law says – a broad-based stipulation that critics say will impact activism, research and discussion of ethnic minority issues globally.

    if you are held legally liable that means your not allowed to do the thing. how is that not a ban?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    if you are held legally liable that means your not allowed to do the thing. how is that not a ban?

    Re-read the sentence but slowly. Yes, you are held legally accountable if you create divisions among or undermine the 56 different officially recognised ethnicities.

    The same way the US or Russia or Israel (and their agency and organisations) should be held responsible for instigating divisions in other countries. That’s really it.

    It’s “”banning”” foreign interference in the social and ethnic fabric of the country. Oh no!! Can you imagine the US without Israeli interference? People would be forced to think by themselves!!

    You can spin it and call it what you want, but you can’t change reality. Unfortunately for you this is not what the law we are discussing says.

    And if you are thinking: “holdup, this is challenging my worldview too much! Is it possible that I’m wrong? No CNN must be right!” I have a lot of bridges to sell to you man.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    What they mean by division is other cultures existing.

    What they mean by unity is everyone acting like Beijing, or getting re-educated.

    If you applied this to Burgerland it would mean Spanish is illegal and Muslims better watch their ass. Which you'd surely have no trouble condemning, since it's obviously intolerable and the Bad Camp did it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Walk us through what you think this law actually does.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Ah, looks like you finished your tokens for today. Would you like to buy 100 more tokens for the low low price of 259,99$?

    Sorry I don’t take questions from rude users who think they are right until their back is against the wall. You can go read the article, it’s in English.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

    The article that says they're banning schools in other languages? Like we're talking about, and you're denying? You fraud?

    You can weasel around and say it's only the primary language, but that's still banning schools... in other languages. It's turning every identity besides Han + Mandarin into a secondary identity, barely tolerated, with oversight. It makes their existence conditional on ongoing state approval. That's ethnic cleansing. That's bloodless erasure of any local identity, where local can mean, the entirety of Tibet.

    You don't get to sneer 'RTFA!' when TFA opens with 'loyalty to the party is mandatory.'

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Hey no, no you are getting boring now, don’t do this to me bro.

    Let’s do this game, I won’t reply anymore until you find me in the article the words “banning schools”. You said the article said it, please quote.

    Maybe you are referring to this bit (?):

    Under the new rules, schools and government agencies must use Mandarin Chinese as their primary language; classrooms must ensure that their curriculum “forges a strong sense of the community of the Chinese people,” and all parents must guide children to “love the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese people.”

    Unfortunately you refuse to understand the English language.

    It's turning every identity besides Han + Mandarin into a secondary identity, barely tolerated, with oversight. It makes their existence conditional on ongoing state approval. That's ethnic cleansing.That's bloodless erasure of any local identity, where local can mean, the entirety of Tibet.

    This vomit is pure fabrication.

    Bear in mind, I’m dog-walking all of you fucks using CNN AS A SOURCE. I didn’t even put my sources because you racists babies immediately start screaming “Aaaaa we only like white people newspaperrr!!! Everything else is propaganda!!”

    🥱

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    'I've quoted what I demand you prove, making me the victor!'

    What else could it mean, Wimp Lo?

    This is why I tried asking your interpretation. You don't appear to have one. You just posture and spit, as if 'all schools must use this primary language' is somehow different from banning schools in another primary language. Can you even form a contrary positive claim? Do you know what having a position looks like, besides performing arrogance?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    No you are right, primary language equals banning schools equals ethnic cleansing. Everything is the same. No nuances, fuck reality. 🥱😴

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago*

    The gentlest excuses are still erasing that culture. Still quashing the minority with the majority.

    You cannot defend that because you don't know what a defense looks like. You don't mean things when you say words.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)