China update of the day

Chinese authorities are carrying out forced sterilisations of women in an apparent campaign to curb the growth of ethnic minority populations in the western Xinjiang region, according to research published on Monday.

The report, based on a combination of official regional data, policy documents and interviews with ethnic minority women, has prompted an international group of lawmakers to call for a United Nations investigation into China’s policies in the region.

The move is likely to enrage Beijing, which has denied trampling on the rights of ethnic groups in Xinjiang, and which on Monday called the allegations “baseless”.

Here is the full story from The Guardian.

Comments

Of Harry H. Laughlin, that is. An inspiration for improving humanity in the same fashion that the Han are improving China.

Other historical comparisons upon request.

Hong Kong is FUBARed. They were already under the thumb of Beijing. Now they are under the boot.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/beijing-passes-new-hong-kong-security-law-n1232330

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/01/hong-kong-makes-first-arrest-under-chinas-new-national-security-law.html

Stop doing business with China or any company in China. Stop allowing Chinese to come to America for any reason.

Now, can we finally pull out the "Evil Empire" label or still not yet?

The Chinese were using forced sterilization back in the 70s and 80s - we didn't call them the evil empire back then either.

Except now their military is four decades more developed, and they've un-liberated Hong Kong; militarized the South China Sea; become more belligerent towards Taiwan, Japan, and India; built a massive surveillance state and are moving to export that through their technology companies; and have purchased shockingly great influence over Western academics, Hollywood studios, executives, and other commentators through their economic power.

The world has lots of evil little tyrants terrorizing their little neighborhoods. The "Empire" part matters too. Hopefully, that will preempt the usual "Whaddabout Saudi Arabia blah, blah, blah" stuff too.

So what? They make cheap stuff for cheap which means my stocks go up. That's all that matters. If you have a better solution for inflation, I'm all ears.

A lot of places can, and do, make cheap stuff that could replace what we get from China. All that would be needed would be the western developed counties deciding to make the investment to move from China elsewhere.

I suspect that in part that is exactly why China has seized and militarized the south china sea and placing so much emphasis on developing its Navy.

Precisely. If China force a one child only policy on its people for many decades, with minimal foreign opposition, why can’t it do the same with Uighurs?

in the 70-80s the chinese use of forced sterilization was routinely called evil

Yet we never called the Red Chinese the evil empire. Nor did we ever jest about outlawing Red China, and start bombing it in five minutes.

clocky, not sure what your point is , if you actually have one.
if there was a nobel for semantical obfuscation you would win.
we are starting to think there is a little evil mini empire in the fbi.
have you seen this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHeCSjcTC64
Go Sidney Powell!

most americans, how young are you?

a woman never reveals her age and it is considered rude to ask.
why do you need to know my age

because you sound like a dumb lib

& you sound like a dumb movie

In the 70s & 80s China was not an empire. It was just a big, poor country with evil polices.

Even now it's a reach to call them an empire. How many bases do they have overseas?

Finally, Tyler has recognized that the Grauniad is an excellent source of information, especially when ignoring all the commentators (and that goes twice on Sunday, so to speak).

Did you read Zenz's actual report? It shows that the Uighur population has doubled while the Han population has declined. Uighur women who have 3 or more children are punished with fines for exceeding birth quotas, just like everyone else in China, and their quota is higher than other groups in China.

It's a completely sensible policy that the EU will have to consider to maintain its European character.

I kind of want to see how MR's resident "Pro-PRC, Pro-Migration" commentor(s) respond to this one... On the one hand, carrying water for the PRC (good for them), on the other hand, calling for child limits on and the sterilization of migrants to the European Union (bad for them)...

If non-whites in the US were having 3+ kids while whites were having only 1.5 and immigration was zero, don't you think Trump and conservatives would be forcing sterilizations on non-whites?

They can not offer bonuses for having children because of the 14th because that would feed into their claim black women birth dozens of babies to get hundreds of thousands in welfare, the message Reagan sent to white union members seeing the jobs their college grad kids should get on the line taken by blacks as leftist destroyed unions by forcing blacks into unions.

Conservatives and the GOP wanted to stop blacks and browns from reproducing in the 50s and 60s by any means possible. Of course, then, Catholics were evil and a threat to Christian America.

And I thought you were nuts when you were blabbering about economics!

Your wife was all over my nuts when I blabber on about economics.

Except that the Uighurs are not immigrants, the Han are the immigrants in Eastern Turkestan. A better analogy would be if in 50 years when Germany has been incorporated into the new Ottoman Empire, the Turkish government takes measures to stop ethnic German women from outbreeding the Turkish populations in Brandenburg.

It's not like that would be fine even if the Uyghur were refugees / migrants...

Another analogy might be if Israel were to sterilise the Arab minority to prevent being outbred...

Israel has confined much of the original Arab population to the Gaza Strip where they are pretty much at carrying capacity though, which will in the long-run achieve the same effect of limiting Arab population growth (or at least force the Arabs to choose between giving birth and facing hard Malthusian limits). That seems worse than what China is doing. Certainly if I were an Uighur I’d rather be limited to two kids, like everyone else in China, than be forcibly moved into a couple sections of Kashgar with all other Uighurs and the same population density as the Gaza Strip and then be sealed off there...

Really?

Gaza has a population density of 4,505 people/sq km.

The island of Malé has a population density of 23,002 people/sq km. It has no evidence of having reached carrying capacity (e.g. no significantly increased mortality rate compared to its economic peers).

At current rates of population growth, Gaza will reach the current density of Malé in around 70 years.

So remember kids when China uses state sanctioned violation of bodily autonomy it is the same thing if the Israelis let Gazans manage Gaza because in 7 decades Gaza might start matching other highly dense geographic regions.

Israel has some control over the water supply going into Gaza. Water puts a hard limit on the carrying capacity. Malé being a remote tropical island with no antagonistic neighbors doesn't have this problem.

Desalinization costs around $400 per acre-ft according to Google. Getting enough water is merely a question of paying for it (and can be done even if Gaza lost its entire coastline thanks to brackish ground water options). The US currently uses about an 1/3rd of an acre-ft of water per year per person. Even accounting for differences in precipitation and irrigation we could safely assume that Gazans could have functionally unlimited water for about $400 per person per year.

Immigration friendly folks tell me that the labors of untrained migrants are an order of magnitude higher so we should expect Gaza to be able to easily afford desalinization 70 years hence.

Now maybe Gaza is not able to sustain large scale infrastructure like that. Maybe it has something to do with Hamas's efforts to "push the Jews into the Sea". Maybe it is all because Israel is being all Shylock and keeping them down for reasons. Regardless, none of that is putting Gaza remotely close to carrying capacity. That is all a very different question.

Water, for any coastal region, is a very soft limit and easily surmounted with cash. You could do it all for the about half the cost that Hamas was spending on unguided rockets to reign down on civilian areas during the last dust-up.

So again, let's all remember, China's decades long, regular, and rampant violation of bodily autonomy is perfectly fine because Israel will, over the course of decades, require Gazans to spend a few hundred dollars per person.

"Another analogy might be if Israel were to sterilise the Arab minority to prevent being outbred..."

+1, yes, that's the correct analogy and it would be greeted with massive sanctions against Israel.

I mean, yeah, and appropriately so, that is a terrible terrible policy.

But they are trying various discriminatory policies, and in many ways succeeding (Jewish birthrate has surpassed Arab in Israel, and the ultra orthodox, which has an extremely high birthrate, is rapidly increasing population in Israel and the West Bank).

With, I mean to me, is all rather uncomfortable.

Not the fact that Jews have higher fertility in some areas, if they do they do, but the fact that Israel's pro natalist policies target Jews and anti natalist policies target Arabs.

Actually, neither the Han nor the Uighurs are the true indigenous population in Xinjiang. Xinjiang was dominated by the Dzungars prior to the mid-1700s, when the Qing Dynasty and its Uighur allies eliminated most of the Dzungars and resettled the area with Uighurs and Han Chinese: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dzungar_genocide

"I kind of want to see how MR's resident "Pro-PRC, Pro-Migration" commentor(s) respond to this one"

Zaua steps up and says: "Hold my Beer!"

Uyghurs have been in the region since 700s AD...

Over what time period? Uigher population is now growing more slowly than Han, it says. Women are being sterilized before reaching the two-child limit.

Does the one child policy count as forced sterilization?

To be clear, you're a

"Women who had fewer than the legally permitted limit of two children were involuntarily fitted with intrauterine contraceptives, says the report.

It also reports that some of the women said they were being coerced into receiving sterilisation surgeries.

Former camp detainees said they were given injections that stopped their periods or caused unusual bleeding consistent with the effects of birth-control drugs."

The author of the non-reviewed "report" happens to be a crazy person whose other work includes a book called "Why All Believers Will Not Be Raptured Before the Tribulation." And as Anon comments above, China's reproductive policy towards Uighurs is generous compared to the rest of Chinese citizens, including the dominant Han majority. One could and should debate whether China's limitations on people's child-bearing decisions is a good or a bad thing, but that's not the issue here; the issue here is whether Uighurs are being unfairly discriminated against in terms of their reproductive freedom, and there is no evidence of that.

If someone makes up stuff about what’s going on in Michigan (random selection) it’s pretty easy for Americans to realize it’s made up. Enough people have friends & relatives in Michigan. Etc.

If someone makes up stuff about what’s going on in China, especially a part of China with very few foreigners, it’s almost impossible to figure it out.

My suggestion, based on history - what is put forward by the state and its Pravda-like acolytes is not well correlated with reality. It might be true, but equally it might be false, to get the population riled up ready for war, ready to support sanctions, and so on. Generally we have no way of knowing.

+1, this is a good point to remember and keep in mind,

But on the other hand, I also remember Walter Duranty covering up for the Soviet atrocities. It's not good enough to say, well I don't know for sure this is happening, so let's just assume it's not and go on as normal.

JWatts, yes. Make sure you apply that all directions.

So trump fans are China supporters now? Interesting...🤔

Patrick Collison, CEO of Stripe and who has been on a number of talks with Tyler, is taking a public stand against these Uighur policies.

https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1277783532182671361

Really, just amazing.

That is fantastic by Collison. However, my question to him and Tyler and others is, why now? Xinjiang has been off-the-scale awful for years now, and its been widely reported: mass internment in concentration camps, children raised in orphanages, oppressive racially targeted surveillance, banning of everyday cultural practices, destruction of mosques and cemeteries.

As with many things human, there are tipping points to personal action.

This is nothing. Have you read the latest Trump tweet? That is truly outrageous

That Trump calls on the dead these days.

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)
She gets fired by @CNN for giving Crooked Hillary the debate questions, and gets hired by @FoxNews. Where are you Roger Ailes?

Ailes replying on twitter would be amazing, and get fantastic ratings.

What's the statute of limitations on bad policy? Is the Anglo-American treatment of native Americans accepted or ignored now because it occurred more than a week ago? Yankees should clean up their own mess before complaining about something based on the witless Guardian.

If you’re asking, should we be more concerned about things China is doing today than things the US did so long ago anyone who was alive then is dead now, the answer is yes, and that’s not hypocritical. “Well, what about the Indians!!!” has to be the dumbest attempt at a tu quoque argument re current human rights abuses.

But there does seem to be a statute of limitations on even horrendous oppression. If China had thoroughly wiped out the Uighurs in the 1800s, there would be no unrest in Xinjiang today and no one would care about what China did in the 1800s.

Sure, we aren’t eliminating Indians any more—but we’re certainly still enjoying the fruits of the genocide against indigenous peoples in the Americas today in the form of a country that is extremely prosperous, well-endowed with good land, and natural resources relative to population size.

It does seem a bit hypocritical if someone is living on a multimillion dollar inheritance from their long-dead mafia leader grandfather and then complains about a petty criminal today, even if that heir himself is squeaky clean. He should work on making amends for his own dirty money first.

The problem with this mindset is that none of the aggrieved parties have any intentions of laying out the nature of these amends or any point where the debt has been settled. Which makes them not reparations, but extortion, an act that is playing out across the country as we speak.

Admittedly, the Chinese have the best answer to these criticisms, which is to ignore them. If only white Westerners would do the same, our social unrest would disappear overnight.

Well, in my ideal world, amends would take the form of open borders, which would allow all peoples of the Earth to enjoy the land, which was not created by any human labor and should not go only those whose ancestors were best at conquering. But of course that is a pie in the sky dream.

Go figure. I tell you what: we can have open borders after we dismantle all of the societal benefits that were, in fact, created by human labor, namely, the labor of "conquerors" and their descendants. One supposes there will be much less demand for movement across borders after that happens. (And it's happening, whether we like it or not.)

“You can have open borders. Or a welfare state. But not both.”

Zaua: Why don’t we try? What could go wrong? Sure a few angry whites but that my goal!

Shorter Zaua: hold my beer.

Do you have an argument or are you really just asking for a drink?

"Well, in my ideal world, amends would take the form of open borders, "

Well that would involve demolishing the modern welfare state, so it seems unlikely.

No it doesn't? Open borders doesn't have to mean automatic citizenship and usually doesn't. It could just mean friction free movement like in the EU.

"It could just mean friction free movement like in the EU."

The US already has friction free movement like in the EU. What is being discussed is allowing an unlimited number of people immigrate in from outside the US. Bryan Caplan discussed hundreds of millions in his book. Enough to make the US's population the size of China.

I don't think our society could be viable with an elite class of natives who benefit from the welfare state and a large body (2-3 times their numbers) who don't get such benefits.

It would make more sense in the US than in most other countries though... Russia and Canada also are countries that can handle large increases e the number of immigrants... simply because of their geography...

Shark Lasers: "Just ignore those complaining slaves."

There was a sizable movement at the time of emancipation, including by Abraham Lincoln himself, to send freed slaves to Africa. How's that for reparations? And just think, their descendants wouldn't face the horrible racism and oppression they do in America today.

"But there does seem to be a statute of limitations on even horrendous oppression."

-1, that's are really dumb comment.

Whatever that limit is, it's certainly not relevant for things that are currently happening.

He responded to chuck martel's question "What's the statute of limitations on bad policy?". Of course it is relevant to answering the question asked.

So your point is that we should not object to bad things happening today because if they happened a long time ago we would have forgotten about it already?

"we’re certainly still enjoying the fruits of the genocide"

Are there more American Indians today or when the pilgrims landed? Google says there are almost 7 million in the U.S. today, which I believe is 1-2 orders of magnitude more than there were.

I'm aware of long conflict, but not genocide. At one point there was policy to kill off the buffalo herds to put pressure on the remaining American Indian population and keep them to reservations, but I don't think the U.S. ever tried to kill off the American Indians.

Anonymous, you are an idiot.

A data idiot, firstly; One or two orders of magnitude lower? Current estimates of native american population are 2-4 times higher at first (non-Viking division) contact. And you are talking 400 years after the Pilgrims--spend a moment figuring out the population increase, instead of the statistics-deaf comparison of two widely separated time periods without adjustment.

A historical idiot, second: the slaughter of villages and tribes, down to women and children, the distribution of small pox infected blankets, the forced movement off lands that supported the population to lands that would not, the forced marches from the Southeast to the Texas and Oklahoma plains (and then killing of their descendants when oil was discovered in Oklahoma), etc., etc., all are well-documented. That it is a mere "long conflict" to you says all that is needed about your priors.

Most of those "Indians" today are like Elizabeth Warren Indians.

Killing off the Indians was the goal. The warped concept of "Manifest Destiny" demanded it. George Washington enthusiastically embraced the genocide of the native Americans standing in the way of westward expansion. Before becoming the Great Emancipator good ol' Honest Abe was a soldier in the Black Hawk War in 1832. After the War Between the States, freed blacks were formed into military units, the Buffalo Soldiers, to kill more Indians. Nobody, native Americans least of all, expects any kind of indemnification for their treatment by the technologically superior Anglos. What would be nice is for the authorities to recognize that US history is littered with collective bad behavior and an inhuman leadership. The Yankees talked the Enlightenment talk but walked the Mongol walk.

Depends. The King of Belgium just apologized for the mass genocide his ancestors committed in the Belgian Congo over a hundred years ago.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/belgium-takes-down-statue-king-expresses-regret-for-colonial-violence

The report author may be a nut. But is the report true?

No. It's just some recycled Tibetan sterilization BS in reaction to the the National Security Law, nothing new. Uyghur population actually increased proportionally in the Uyghur areas. Overall, Uyhur population doubled over the past 40 years.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1277660796525465607

https://twitter.com/SpokespersonCHN/status/1277993782508576768

https://thegrayzone.com/2019/12/21/china-detaining-millions-uyghurs-problems-claims-us-ngo-researcher/

While this is obviously bad, what’s the evidence that it’s targeting Uighurs specifically? Everyone in China is subject to birth limits—in fact, the majority Han Chinese were long subject to an even stricter one-child policy. When Chinese people apply for asylum in the West, the one-child policy is by far the most common reason.

China should be putting out new census data soon. We will see whether the Uighur share of China’s population has increased or decreased. I will bet it has increased.

I am against all birth limits and think China should repeal them—judging by the asylum numbers it’s easily the Chinese government’s worst human rights violation. But at the same time people who criticize China for having such strict birth limits shouldn’t also criticize it for being overpopulated or its carbon emissions or advocate for limiting its economic growth—that’s just a recipe for continuing the famine cycle that has happened throughout Chinese history. A lot of people in the West who purport to care about human rights in China are shockingly indifferent to the misery and poverty in China (which have roots extending long before the current government took over in 1949) that spurred the government to enact and the people to support such harsh population control measures in the first place.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/24/china-cables-leak-no-escapes-reality-china-uighur-prison-camp

As far as I know, the evidence shows that China's birth rate reduction largely maps to development and successful voluntary family programs.

So yes you can criticize China's coercive forced sterilisation and fine, etc programs while also arguing the country is overpopulated. They are not necessary measures and never were (like certain other coercive "public health" measures that may give little extra benefit to voluntary ones).

I agree that the main reason for China’s falling population is voluntarily declining fertility due to greater economic development, as seen in all countries around the world.

The coercive measures probably played some role—the thousands of Chinese seeking asylum over the one-child policy would likely have otherwise had many children in China if that policy had not been in place, and for everyone rich enough to seek asylum there are probably many more people who are not. I think the one-child policy also enshrined the one-child family as a social norm which then had knock-on effects on people’s voluntary choices. Chinese fertility has fallen faster relative to income level than its other Asian peer countries.

However, given that economic development is the best step to lowering fertility voluntarily without human rights abuses, and that China is overpopulated, then it seems we should at least support China’s economic development so as to both reduce both the overpopulation problem and the Malthusianism problem that caused China to enact such oppressive family planning laws.

My criticism is directed more towards those (and there are many in the US) who argue for the government interfering with and reducing Chinese development for environmental (like on the left) or national security (like on the right) reasons, thus potentially putting China back into the Malthusian famine cycle that inevitably results from overpopulation in underdeveloped countries, while at the same time arguing that Chinese family planning rules intended to avoid said famine cycle are a violation of human rights.

There is no risk of a famine cycle if Chinese simply do sensible, voluntary things. There never was, regardless of actions by the US right or left or whatever.

It is ludicrous to suggest that the Chinese require the right to variously trade with the world on whatever assymetric terms they fancy, practice whatever environmental degradation they wish, sterilise and fine whoever they wish, and anyone who objects to all this is responsible for non-existent imaginary famines.

This kind of extreme justification of these authoritarian actions with a ludicrous consequence... peak authoritarianism.

What's the evidence that the many policies active in the US that are claimed to perpetuate racism and discrimination actually target any of the groups who claim this specifically?

Glad to read this informative article. Thanks to https://marginalrevolution.com/

So commies are the last best hope for a first world country not overwhelmed and trashed by third world peoples?

Why is Tyler pushing racist anti-Chinese propaganda when the US is suffering under a regime of micro-aggressions? Shameful.

+50 cents for Thiago

Now do Russia.

If only Princeton's policy school had held onto its previous namesake's policy legacy, they'd be able to help the Chinese government implement a well thought out eugenics program. Or wait.... according to Douthat the policy school is still into this, but just changed the name to avoid having to change the school's true Wilsonian policy agenda.

Seems like the racists and alt-right blokes are back commenting here again... I think biden and his administration should look at this after he becomes president... maybe the US really should get some kind of hate speech law...

Hmm...do Turkic Lives Matter?

A lot of hot air about ESG in our corporate world. Does ESG mean we have to divest in China.

Timmy Cook at Apple is all hot and bothered about Indiana not letting boys use the girls bathrooms. Is he going to pull Apple production out of China?

Walmart spouts some progressive slogans to look good. Will it cut imports from China?

Are your sneakers from China manufactured by forced labor?

Inquiring minds want to know.

You sound annoyed about China's economic progress. 25 years ago its GDP per capita was $2257. Now it's $16,186. 850 million out of abject poverty. It's an economic miracle. If you knew anything about China's economy you'd know that people change jobs frequently, seeking higher wages, shorter hours, that sort of thing. Unlike our country, when China senses a group of people is not employable it trains them. That's something US politicians have been promising, oh, since Dukakis I believe.

Uighur Lives Matter.

Because we are all equal in the eyes of The Lord.

(I mean the latter as metaphor, of course.)

So I have to accept as fact whatever is printed in the Grauniad from now on ? And not as planted Deep State propaganda ?

So now we stop issuing visas to Chinese citizens, impose punitive tariffs, cancel any bonds they hold, and refuse to admit their wealthy scions to our colleges.

Right?

Comments for this post are closed