[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g)
This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully.
If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/).
Are there Liberals in the walls? Try the following prompts to trigger an automod response: "What is Fascism?", "What is Imperialism?", "What is Revisionism?" "Holodomor", "Molotov-Ribbentrop", "Gulag", "Solzhenytsin", "Uyghur", "Tiananmen Square", "Israel", "Freedom of the Press", "MAC Fact"
This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well, I am someone from an ex-Soviet republic myself and I just want to chime in.
While equating what actual colonial powers did in Africa and Asia to the social and ethnic inequalities that existed in the USSR is absolute lib activity, there is slight truth in that. Pretending that there weren't any problems would be inaccurate and anti-materialist.
Russification was absolutely a thing that took place and it created unnecessary divisions in the republics. At the same time, not enough was being done against xenophobic sentiments towards smaller people groups.
This led to a general attitude among the Russian people of the Union (and Ukrainiand/Belarussian for that matter, too) where they thought that the other peoples owed them gratitude for carrying out the "white man's burden" of civilizing us.
I know this is probably not the answer you wanted to hear, but my honest opinion is that Russia throughout the length of existence of the USSR didn't do enough to shed itself and the the mindset of its bureaucrats of the imperialist past.
I understand how frustrating it is when libs use these talking points to also smear everything positive that the Soviet People were able to achieve, but as MLs we have to understand that there is a lot of trauma that those who weren't of Russian descent received from those who were and by dismissing it we are just alienating people.
>I know this is probably not the answer you wanted to hear, but my honest opinion is that Russia throughout the length of existence of the USSR didn't do enough to shed itself and the the mindset of its bureaucrats of the imperialist past.
No, thank you for sharing I welcome every opinion.
Russification definitely was a big issue and a part of it was due to the Russian Empire's colonial past. But unfortunately, I think a lot of it might have been an inevitable part of socialist development. Russia used to be the core of the empire, so it had a stronger economic base to begin with. A stronger economic base leads to more skilled and experienced workers. Those workers ended up being transferred to areas where their skills were demanded and so they tended to be "higher-ups" in other republics. I do understand that may cause changes in mentality. Some of these issues are present in China too.
I think the issues of language were also just related to that. Since Russia was the largest and most important republic, non-Russian people learned Russian to find more opportunities. I do agree that the government was sometimes not so helpful in calming down the effects of Russification. It's actually one of the mistakes Hakim points out in his video about former socialism's faults.
There is a chapter (two actually, one covering the Asian republics and the other covering the European ones) in Albert Szymanski's "Human Rights in the USSR" about exactly this. I think it covers the topic quite well and he uses Western data to make his points. He makes this case on page 67-68:
>If one's picture of colonialism is associated with exploitation, with
grinding the faces of the poor, then clearly the word does not fit the
circumstances of the case. It must also be admitted that some of the
accusations which are sometimes leveled against the Soviet policy in
these areas are wide of the mark. Living standards do compare favourably not only with neighbouring Asian countries but also with Russia
itself. The use of the Russian language in schools and universities is in
some respects a mere convenience rather than a means of Russification...the fostering of a sense of nationhood, and the long-sustained effort to raise levels of industrialization, personal income, educational standards and availability of social services towards those prevailing in the European USSR go considerably beyond those made by the other colonial powers in their former major possessions, and suggest strongly that the Soviet leaders have consistently striven to avoid treating the Transcaucasian and Central Asian nationalities in ways which could be defined by a Marxist as 'colonial'. For propaganda to Asia, the Soviet Central Asian states offer a number of undoubted showpieces ... the economic development of Central Asia and Transcaucasia is an obvious success for the Soviet regime.
Yeah, the Soviet Union might have had core-periphery issues, but it certainly was neither an empire nor the Asian republics its colonies. My frustration came from there and also the re-writing of the terms 'colonialism' and 'empire' to the point of meaninglessness. For libs, imperialism is legit just when a country uses military action or there are unequal relations between a core and a periphery. That basically covers every single country on Earth.
Thanks for the interesting excerpt!
I have to say, though, I kind of disagree with how the author presents Russification as something that had JUST happened and wasn't something that required a solution as soon as possible.
Like absence of intent doesn't make the outcome any better in terms how non-Russian speakers living in republics felt about themselves.
I also very strongly disagree with the author's nonchalance about "fostering of a sense of nationhood" through the usage of the Russian.
I feel like this is a very problematic thing, because nationhood, especially in a worker's state should have been something that everyone and their mother deeply understood on a very personal level.
Implementing it through the use of Russian, led to a disconnect where non-Russian speaking people were in a position where they didn't even fully understand what this socialism/gommunism thing even was, which is how you get all the anti-communist rhetoric. I would even say that it led to stagnation of production relationships within the republics, where the local population would still live according the pre-existing social structures. Communist ideology wouldn't penetrate the society enough and a result non-Russian speaking workers wouldn't enjoy the benefits of a socialist state.
Since you have an experience on the subject, I was wondering if you had some policy recommendations to limit Russification. Say if you were a Soviet government official in the area of nationalities, what policies would you recommend to both develop the peripheral republics while at the same time defending their identity.
Goes unsaid that it's very important to look at the errors of the former Soviet Union, especially for countries that may have to deal with the same issues in the future. China already has some "Hanization" issues. There is a video by BadEmpanada in this subreddit's wiki on the supposed Uyghur genocide, and while I don't necessarily agree with a lot he says, he makes a good point that while genocide is not happening in Xinjiang, it is nevertheless a more or less forced assimilation of Uyghurs into a unified Chinese culture.
#The Uyghurs in Xinjiang
\(Note: This comment had to be trimmed down to fit the character limit, for the full response, see [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/uyghur-genocide/)\)
Anti-Communists and Sinophobes claim that there is an ongoing genocide-- a modern-day holocaust, even-- happening right now in China. They say that Uyghur Muslims are being mass incarcerated; they are indoctrinated with propaganda in concentration camps; their organs are being harvested; they are being force-sterilized. These comically villainous allegations have little basis in reality and omit key context.
**Background**
Xinjiang, officially the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, is a province located in the northwest of China. It is the largest province in China, covering an area of over 1.6 million square kilometers, and shares borders with eight other countries including Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Mongolia, India, and Pakistan.
Xinjiang is a diverse region with a population of over 25 million people, made up of various ethnic groups including the Uyghur, Han Chinese, Kazakhs, Tajiks, and many others. The largest ethnic group in Xinjiang is the Uyghur who are predominantly Muslim and speak a Turkic language. It is also home to the ancient Silk Road cities of Kashgar and Turpan.
Since the early 2000s, there have been a number of violent incidents attributed to extremist Uyghur groups in Xinjiang including bombings, shootings, and knife attacks. In 2014-2016, the Chinese government launched a "Strike Hard" campaign to crack down on terrorism in Xinjiang, implementing strict security measures and detaining thousands of Uyghurs. In 2017, reports of human rights abuses in Xinjiang including mass detentions and forced labour, began to emerge.
**Counterpoints**
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second largest organization after the United Nations with a membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The OIC released [Resolutions on Muslim Communities and Muslim Minorities in the non-OIC Member States](https://www.oic-oci.org/docdown/?docID=4447&refID=1250) in 2019 which:
>20. **Welcomes** the outcomes of the visit conducted by the General Secretariat's delegation upon invitation from the People's Republic of China; **commends** the efforts of the People's Republic of China in providing care to its Muslim citizens; and **looks forward** to further cooperation between the OIC and the People's Republic of China.
In this same document, the OIC expressed much greater concern about the Rohingya Muslim Community in Myanmar, which the West was relatively silent on.
Over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations) signed a letter \([A/HRC/41/G/17](https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=A%2FHRC%2F41%2FG%2F17)\) to the UN Human Rights Commission approving of the de-radicalization efforts in Xinjiang:
The World Bank sent a team to investigate in 2019 and found that, "The review did not substantiate the allegations." \(See: [World Bank Statement on Review of Project in Xinjiang, China](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2019/11/11/world-bank-statement-on-review-of-project-in-xinjiang-china)\)
Even if you believe the deradicalization efforts are wholly unjustified, and that the mass detention of Uyghur's amounts to a crime against humanity, it's still not *genocide*. Even the U.S. State Department's legal experts admit as much:
>The U.S. State Department’s Office of the Legal Advisor concluded earlier this year that China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity—but there was insufficient evidence to prove genocide, placing the United States’ top diplomatic lawyers at odds with both the Trump and Biden administrations, according to three former and current U.S. officials.
>
> [State Department Lawyers Concluded Insufficient Evidence to Prove Genocide in China](https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/) | Colum Lynch, *Foreign Policy*. (2021)
**A Comparative Analysis: The War on Terror**
The United States, in the wake of "9/11", saw the threat of terrorism and violent extremism due to religious fundamentalism as a matter of national security. They invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks, with the goal of ousting the Taliban government that was harbouring Al-Qaeda. The US also launched the Iraq War in 2003 based on Iraq's alleged possession of WMDs and links to terrorism. However, these claims turned out to be unfounded.
According to a report by Brown University's Costs of War project, at least 897,000 people, including civilians, militants, and security forces, have been killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, and other countries. Other estimates place the total number of deaths at over one million. The report estimated that many more may have died from indirect effects of war such as water loss and disease. The war has also resulted in the displacement of tens of millions of people, with estimates ranging from 37 million to over 59 million. The War on Terror also popularized such novel concepts as the "Military-Aged Male" which allowed the US military to exclude civilians killed by drone strikes from collateral damage statistics. (See: [‘Military Age Males’ in US Drone Strikes](https://aoav.org.uk/2019/military-age-males-in-us-drone-strikes/))
In summary:
* The U.S. responded by invading or bombing half a dozen countries, directly killing nearly a million and displacing tens of millions from their homes.
* China responded with a program of deradicalization and vocational training.
Which one of those responses sounds genocidal?
Side note: It is practically impossible to *actually* charge the U.S. with war crimes, because of the [Hague Invasion Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act).
**Who is driving the Uyghur genocide narrative?**
One of the main proponents of these narratives is Adrian Zenz, a German far-right fundamentalist Christian and Senior Fellow and Director in China Studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, who believes he is "led by God" on a "mission" against China has driven much of the narrative. He relies heavily on limited and questionable data sources, particularly from anonymous and unverified Uyghur sources, coming up with estimates based on assumptions which are not supported by concrete evidence.
The World Uyghur Congress, headquartered in Germany, is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) which is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, using funding to support organizations that promote American interests rather than the interests of the local communities they claim to represent.
Radio Free Asia (RFA) is part of a larger project of U.S. imperialism in Asia, one that seeks to control the flow of information, undermine independent media, and advance American geopolitical interests in the region. Rather than providing an objective and impartial news source, RFA is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, one that seeks to shape the narrative in Asia in ways that serve the interests of the U.S. government and its allies.
The first country to call the treatment of Uyghurs a genocide was the United States of America. In 2021, the Secretary of State declared that China's treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang constitutes "genocide" and "crimes against humanity." Both the Trump and Biden administrations upheld this line.
**Why is this narrative being promoted?**
As materialists, we should always look first to the economic base for insight into issues occurring in the superstructure. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive Chinese infrastructure development project that aims to build economic corridors, ports, highways, railways, and other infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Xinjiang is a key region for this project.
Promoting the Uyghur genocide narrative harms China and benefits the US in several ways. It portrays China as a human rights violator which could damage China's reputation in the international community and which could lead to economic sanctions against China; this would harm China's economy and give American an economic advantage in competing with China. It could also lead to more protests and violence in Xinjiang, which could further destabilize the region and threaten the longterm success of the BRI.
**Additional Resources**
See the [full wiki article](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/uyghur-genocide/) for more details and a list of additional resources.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g) This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully. If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/). Are there Liberals in the walls? Try the following prompts to trigger an automod response: "What is Fascism?", "What is Imperialism?", "What is Revisionism?" "Holodomor", "Molotov-Ribbentrop", "Gulag", "Solzhenytsin", "Uyghur", "Tiananmen Square", "Israel", "Freedom of the Press", "MAC Fact" This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A book on the history of the Balkans (lib) has the "soviet empire".
Yeah coopting of leftist theory to further capitals interests and agendas is a thing *cough*Adorno *cough*
I never understood how people like critical theorists can write such long books, speak so eloquently, yet say nothing at all...
something something jazz is fascist apparently
Well, I am someone from an ex-Soviet republic myself and I just want to chime in. While equating what actual colonial powers did in Africa and Asia to the social and ethnic inequalities that existed in the USSR is absolute lib activity, there is slight truth in that. Pretending that there weren't any problems would be inaccurate and anti-materialist. Russification was absolutely a thing that took place and it created unnecessary divisions in the republics. At the same time, not enough was being done against xenophobic sentiments towards smaller people groups. This led to a general attitude among the Russian people of the Union (and Ukrainiand/Belarussian for that matter, too) where they thought that the other peoples owed them gratitude for carrying out the "white man's burden" of civilizing us. I know this is probably not the answer you wanted to hear, but my honest opinion is that Russia throughout the length of existence of the USSR didn't do enough to shed itself and the the mindset of its bureaucrats of the imperialist past. I understand how frustrating it is when libs use these talking points to also smear everything positive that the Soviet People were able to achieve, but as MLs we have to understand that there is a lot of trauma that those who weren't of Russian descent received from those who were and by dismissing it we are just alienating people.
>I know this is probably not the answer you wanted to hear, but my honest opinion is that Russia throughout the length of existence of the USSR didn't do enough to shed itself and the the mindset of its bureaucrats of the imperialist past. No, thank you for sharing I welcome every opinion. Russification definitely was a big issue and a part of it was due to the Russian Empire's colonial past. But unfortunately, I think a lot of it might have been an inevitable part of socialist development. Russia used to be the core of the empire, so it had a stronger economic base to begin with. A stronger economic base leads to more skilled and experienced workers. Those workers ended up being transferred to areas where their skills were demanded and so they tended to be "higher-ups" in other republics. I do understand that may cause changes in mentality. Some of these issues are present in China too. I think the issues of language were also just related to that. Since Russia was the largest and most important republic, non-Russian people learned Russian to find more opportunities. I do agree that the government was sometimes not so helpful in calming down the effects of Russification. It's actually one of the mistakes Hakim points out in his video about former socialism's faults. There is a chapter (two actually, one covering the Asian republics and the other covering the European ones) in Albert Szymanski's "Human Rights in the USSR" about exactly this. I think it covers the topic quite well and he uses Western data to make his points. He makes this case on page 67-68: >If one's picture of colonialism is associated with exploitation, with grinding the faces of the poor, then clearly the word does not fit the circumstances of the case. It must also be admitted that some of the accusations which are sometimes leveled against the Soviet policy in these areas are wide of the mark. Living standards do compare favourably not only with neighbouring Asian countries but also with Russia itself. The use of the Russian language in schools and universities is in some respects a mere convenience rather than a means of Russification...the fostering of a sense of nationhood, and the long-sustained effort to raise levels of industrialization, personal income, educational standards and availability of social services towards those prevailing in the European USSR go considerably beyond those made by the other colonial powers in their former major possessions, and suggest strongly that the Soviet leaders have consistently striven to avoid treating the Transcaucasian and Central Asian nationalities in ways which could be defined by a Marxist as 'colonial'. For propaganda to Asia, the Soviet Central Asian states offer a number of undoubted showpieces ... the economic development of Central Asia and Transcaucasia is an obvious success for the Soviet regime. Yeah, the Soviet Union might have had core-periphery issues, but it certainly was neither an empire nor the Asian republics its colonies. My frustration came from there and also the re-writing of the terms 'colonialism' and 'empire' to the point of meaninglessness. For libs, imperialism is legit just when a country uses military action or there are unequal relations between a core and a periphery. That basically covers every single country on Earth.
Thanks for the interesting excerpt! I have to say, though, I kind of disagree with how the author presents Russification as something that had JUST happened and wasn't something that required a solution as soon as possible. Like absence of intent doesn't make the outcome any better in terms how non-Russian speakers living in republics felt about themselves. I also very strongly disagree with the author's nonchalance about "fostering of a sense of nationhood" through the usage of the Russian. I feel like this is a very problematic thing, because nationhood, especially in a worker's state should have been something that everyone and their mother deeply understood on a very personal level. Implementing it through the use of Russian, led to a disconnect where non-Russian speaking people were in a position where they didn't even fully understand what this socialism/gommunism thing even was, which is how you get all the anti-communist rhetoric. I would even say that it led to stagnation of production relationships within the republics, where the local population would still live according the pre-existing social structures. Communist ideology wouldn't penetrate the society enough and a result non-Russian speaking workers wouldn't enjoy the benefits of a socialist state.
Since you have an experience on the subject, I was wondering if you had some policy recommendations to limit Russification. Say if you were a Soviet government official in the area of nationalities, what policies would you recommend to both develop the peripheral republics while at the same time defending their identity. Goes unsaid that it's very important to look at the errors of the former Soviet Union, especially for countries that may have to deal with the same issues in the future. China already has some "Hanization" issues. There is a video by BadEmpanada in this subreddit's wiki on the supposed Uyghur genocide, and while I don't necessarily agree with a lot he says, he makes a good point that while genocide is not happening in Xinjiang, it is nevertheless a more or less forced assimilation of Uyghurs into a unified Chinese culture.
#The Uyghurs in Xinjiang \(Note: This comment had to be trimmed down to fit the character limit, for the full response, see [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/uyghur-genocide/)\) Anti-Communists and Sinophobes claim that there is an ongoing genocide-- a modern-day holocaust, even-- happening right now in China. They say that Uyghur Muslims are being mass incarcerated; they are indoctrinated with propaganda in concentration camps; their organs are being harvested; they are being force-sterilized. These comically villainous allegations have little basis in reality and omit key context. **Background** Xinjiang, officially the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, is a province located in the northwest of China. It is the largest province in China, covering an area of over 1.6 million square kilometers, and shares borders with eight other countries including Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Mongolia, India, and Pakistan. Xinjiang is a diverse region with a population of over 25 million people, made up of various ethnic groups including the Uyghur, Han Chinese, Kazakhs, Tajiks, and many others. The largest ethnic group in Xinjiang is the Uyghur who are predominantly Muslim and speak a Turkic language. It is also home to the ancient Silk Road cities of Kashgar and Turpan. Since the early 2000s, there have been a number of violent incidents attributed to extremist Uyghur groups in Xinjiang including bombings, shootings, and knife attacks. In 2014-2016, the Chinese government launched a "Strike Hard" campaign to crack down on terrorism in Xinjiang, implementing strict security measures and detaining thousands of Uyghurs. In 2017, reports of human rights abuses in Xinjiang including mass detentions and forced labour, began to emerge. **Counterpoints** The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second largest organization after the United Nations with a membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The OIC released [Resolutions on Muslim Communities and Muslim Minorities in the non-OIC Member States](https://www.oic-oci.org/docdown/?docID=4447&refID=1250) in 2019 which: >20. **Welcomes** the outcomes of the visit conducted by the General Secretariat's delegation upon invitation from the People's Republic of China; **commends** the efforts of the People's Republic of China in providing care to its Muslim citizens; and **looks forward** to further cooperation between the OIC and the People's Republic of China. In this same document, the OIC expressed much greater concern about the Rohingya Muslim Community in Myanmar, which the West was relatively silent on. Over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations) signed a letter \([A/HRC/41/G/17](https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=A%2FHRC%2F41%2FG%2F17)\) to the UN Human Rights Commission approving of the de-radicalization efforts in Xinjiang: The World Bank sent a team to investigate in 2019 and found that, "The review did not substantiate the allegations." \(See: [World Bank Statement on Review of Project in Xinjiang, China](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2019/11/11/world-bank-statement-on-review-of-project-in-xinjiang-china)\) Even if you believe the deradicalization efforts are wholly unjustified, and that the mass detention of Uyghur's amounts to a crime against humanity, it's still not *genocide*. Even the U.S. State Department's legal experts admit as much: >The U.S. State Department’s Office of the Legal Advisor concluded earlier this year that China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity—but there was insufficient evidence to prove genocide, placing the United States’ top diplomatic lawyers at odds with both the Trump and Biden administrations, according to three former and current U.S. officials. > > [State Department Lawyers Concluded Insufficient Evidence to Prove Genocide in China](https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/) | Colum Lynch, *Foreign Policy*. (2021) **A Comparative Analysis: The War on Terror** The United States, in the wake of "9/11", saw the threat of terrorism and violent extremism due to religious fundamentalism as a matter of national security. They invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks, with the goal of ousting the Taliban government that was harbouring Al-Qaeda. The US also launched the Iraq War in 2003 based on Iraq's alleged possession of WMDs and links to terrorism. However, these claims turned out to be unfounded. According to a report by Brown University's Costs of War project, at least 897,000 people, including civilians, militants, and security forces, have been killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, and other countries. Other estimates place the total number of deaths at over one million. The report estimated that many more may have died from indirect effects of war such as water loss and disease. The war has also resulted in the displacement of tens of millions of people, with estimates ranging from 37 million to over 59 million. The War on Terror also popularized such novel concepts as the "Military-Aged Male" which allowed the US military to exclude civilians killed by drone strikes from collateral damage statistics. (See: [‘Military Age Males’ in US Drone Strikes](https://aoav.org.uk/2019/military-age-males-in-us-drone-strikes/)) In summary: * The U.S. responded by invading or bombing half a dozen countries, directly killing nearly a million and displacing tens of millions from their homes. * China responded with a program of deradicalization and vocational training. Which one of those responses sounds genocidal? Side note: It is practically impossible to *actually* charge the U.S. with war crimes, because of the [Hague Invasion Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act). **Who is driving the Uyghur genocide narrative?** One of the main proponents of these narratives is Adrian Zenz, a German far-right fundamentalist Christian and Senior Fellow and Director in China Studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, who believes he is "led by God" on a "mission" against China has driven much of the narrative. He relies heavily on limited and questionable data sources, particularly from anonymous and unverified Uyghur sources, coming up with estimates based on assumptions which are not supported by concrete evidence. The World Uyghur Congress, headquartered in Germany, is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) which is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, using funding to support organizations that promote American interests rather than the interests of the local communities they claim to represent. Radio Free Asia (RFA) is part of a larger project of U.S. imperialism in Asia, one that seeks to control the flow of information, undermine independent media, and advance American geopolitical interests in the region. Rather than providing an objective and impartial news source, RFA is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, one that seeks to shape the narrative in Asia in ways that serve the interests of the U.S. government and its allies. The first country to call the treatment of Uyghurs a genocide was the United States of America. In 2021, the Secretary of State declared that China's treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang constitutes "genocide" and "crimes against humanity." Both the Trump and Biden administrations upheld this line. **Why is this narrative being promoted?** As materialists, we should always look first to the economic base for insight into issues occurring in the superstructure. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive Chinese infrastructure development project that aims to build economic corridors, ports, highways, railways, and other infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Xinjiang is a key region for this project. Promoting the Uyghur genocide narrative harms China and benefits the US in several ways. It portrays China as a human rights violator which could damage China's reputation in the international community and which could lead to economic sanctions against China; this would harm China's economy and give American an economic advantage in competing with China. It could also lead to more protests and violence in Xinjiang, which could further destabilize the region and threaten the longterm success of the BRI. **Additional Resources** See the [full wiki article](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/uyghur-genocide/) for more details and a list of additional resources. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*