Xinjiang is a region in China that's populated by people known as the Uyghurs, whose religion happens to be Islam. Because they are different from the rest of China, the habits of the Uyghurs clash at times with the way that China is transforming itself as it seeks to modernize and meet the challenges of a promising future, but one that is also fraught with enormous dangers.
Suppose now, for the sake of
engaging in idle talk, that the Chinese government in Beijing becomes so
irritated by the refusal of the Uyghurs to join the transformation the rest of
China is embracing –– and decided to bomb the Uyghurs in an attempt to force
them into accepting the way of life it is imposing on them.
If this happened in real life,
you would consider it uncivilized behavior on the part of the Chinese, would
you not? And you would reject Beijing's bombing of Hong Kong into submission,
would you not? Of course, you wouldn’t accept any of that because these are the
Chinese leaders' “own people,” and no one should treat its people this way. Is
that not true?
Well then, in this case, let’s
try another approach. We first observe that Bangladesh is inhabited by a
majority Muslim people and that, contrary to the Uyghurs, they are not the
Chinese leaders' own people. Will that make it more acceptable to you if the
Chinese bombed the Bangladeshis who are someone else's people?
By now, you must have guessed
what I'm trying to establish. It is that the narratives created to serve the
various propaganda machines over the decades, have together produced a weird
kind of paradigm whereby the bombing of one's “own people” is not acceptable,
thus making it the duty of others to intervene. In contrast, bombing someone else's
people is perfectly acceptable, and requiring no action on anyone's part.
This is why Syria's Assad who
was falsely accused of bombing his own people, was labeled a bad guy, whereas
the Israeli leaders who regularly bomb the people of Palestine are rewarded
with amounts of cash that would make your head spin. That's not to ignore the
Americans whose bombs have create more misery on the planet than all the
natural pandemics that hit it since the beginning of time.
But how does it all begin, and
how does it evolve and end? Good questions. Fortunately, we have an example of
how it happens. The rise and evolution of that phenomenon is reflected in an
article that came under the title: “The Chinese Communist Party's Dangerous Bid
for the UN Human Rights Council,” and the subtitle: “The conditions that allow
the Chinese delegation to run the table are structural.” It was written by
Jimmy Quinn, and published on September 13, 2020 in National Review Online.
The following is a montage of
excerpts from the article, showing how America brought itself to a point where
it could no longer function in collaboration with other nations, including its
old friends and allies, and was therefore upstaged by China:
“China is engaged in a
campaign to wipe out ethnic identities within its borders and do away with
democratic governance in Honk Kong. But that barely registers in the
proceedings of the UN Human Rights Council. China isn't currently a member but
will be a candidate this time around. International pressure has mounted as the
human-rights situation in China deteriorates. The reason that China has been
immune from criticism is that non-democracies have been allowed to run for
election to the council, participate in debates, even draft and vote on
resolutions. Autocracies that band together get their way. The Chinese
convinced dozens of countries to back Beijing's actions in Xinjiang and Hong
Kong. To this day, the UN Human Rights Council has never condemned China's
violations of human rights. The council had time to consider North Korea's
concerns about racism in the United States”.
We can see in that passage
how, in complaining that the Chinese are having things done their way, Jimmy
Quinn is actually alluding to a time when it was America that had things done
its way. Indeed, there has been a reversal from a time when the world
considered the American system of governance to be most ideal, loaded as it was
with attractive features suitable for anyone that desired to emulate it.
But look what happened since
that time. America disgraced itself so badly, it can do nothing better than
bribe the poorest countries in the world to have them vote with it at the
United Nations. And when it comes to the Human Rights Council, the issue that
diminished America the most, has been its whorish adherence to the doctrine
that made of crimes committed by Israel, a blessed category of crimes worthy of
being venerated and not criticized.
Yes, America has been
diminished, but it still has the means to punish the weakest of nations, which
it often tries to do. And yet, despite all of this, the nations of the world
are abandoning America one after the other because they eventually come to
realize that when America fulfills the wishes of Israel's Jews, it causes more
damage to the world than the economic sanctions it would impose on them, or the
bombs it would drop on them if and when it comes to that.
The net result is the current situation. It is one in which the world is progressing at a rapid pace; one in which America is neither leading it nor following it. America is simply falling behind and looking neither like the old self, nor like the vision of a future that the rest of humanity aspires to realize brick by brick as time moves on.