pretty clear actions of a colonial oppressor, imo
Who is colonizing who in this case?
Chinese people colonising turkic people
Ethnic Han to be more specific, but yeah
Yep. Independent Turkic kingdoms were in the region until China conquered them in the 18th century.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Yunnan/History
Says it was controlled by various Chinese dynasties starting in 221 BC. I don’t see any references to Turkic peoples being in Yunnan, on that page or others.
Oh indeed, I assumed this was in North Western China.
The Muslim minority in Yunnan is probably the Hui. They, however, are “native” from North Western China. Considering they are also present in Kazakhstan and Kirghizstan, they might be turkic too.
So these Hui migrated inside China after their homeland was colonised instead of Yunnan being a colony directly. Repressing your colonised population still is colonial bullshit
It seems weird that the CCP destroyed this Mosque and ran a massacre, apologized for it, paid for it to be rebuilt which was completed in 2009, and then promptly changed it again.
Incidentally, it had to do with who was running the CCP at each time period. Really helps to discredit Xi as some pompous moron compared to Deng who understood the value in giving people rights & liberties and not running the country like a craphole like how Mao did.
Those two are the same place? Looks like it was entirely destroyed and rebuilt as something else, I’m seeing very little similarly between the two.
They basically added a couple of floors to hide the dome. Looks like the spires got shorter though.
I do really wonder if the dome is still hiding inside there. It looks like it might be big enough and that sounds like it would be the easy solution.
AFAIK these domes are beautiful on the inside, I would assume they kept it, but we’re talking cultural revolution levels of narrow mindedness here, so who knows?
Edit: from the satellite imagery I’d say its gone.
Wait, in ALL of China? Not a single mosque dome?
There’s domes everywhere, not really sure what The Guardian is talking about
Is it the wording? They said “Arabic”.
I don’t know anything about building, China, mosques, etc. I’m just saying words.
No, there’s many many Hui Arabic-style mosques.
Maybe The Guardian doesn’t know about them and doesn’t consider them “major”, but that sounds like The Guardian’s problem.
Complete bullshit. I saw multiple when I was there, and some of the oldest mosques in the world are in China, dating back to at least 800AD
shh The Guardian had a slow news day ok
Sinicism - something characteristic of or peculiar to the Chinese; a Chinese method, custom, or usage.
Learned a new word today.
I’ve always had a pretty sinical view about the Chinese.
This is an amazing pun by means of play on words and phonetics to imply additional meaning. Incredible.
You’ll see the prefix “sino-” a lot if you start looking into Chinese geopolitical history.
Jesus turned into a white dude and Mohamed is now Han Chinese.
Not only that but Mary, Jesus’ mom is both a virgin, a mom, and white and Mexican! She’s not a trinity, she’s a forthnity!
Maybe they should work on demolishing some of those ghost cities instead…
There are people there now:
Reporting in a 2018, Shepard revisited a number of the so called “ghost cities” several years his book and noted that, "Today, China’s so-called ghost cities that were so prevalently showcased in 2013 and 2014 are no longer global intrigues. They have filled up to the point of being functioning, normal cities … "
Oh, well, if “Justapedia” says so…
(The fuck is this website?)
Yes. “Biases.”
I was reading about it too.
But hey, Elon Musk and writers at Quillette like it, so there’s that.
I’ll reserve judgment until I find more information. It could be a good thing, Wikipedia does have problems with editors changing articles, or it could be a bad thing to proliferate misinformation. That’s why I linked the Reuters article.
Edit: I read through the page on Fascism. It’s crap, runaway.
Someone already showed that the linked article was outdated nonsense almost the minute it was published.
But if you want more, take a look at the pictures at the top of their page on fascism, note the non-fascists in the picture and the conspicuous absence of Francisco Franco.
https://justapedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Edit: Furthermore- https://x.com/JustapediaF/status/1757941868778700982
Someone already showed that the linked article was outdated nonsense almost the minute it was published.
Where? Everything I’m reading says that most of the new state-level areas are inhabited and not “ghost cities.” Unless Ohio State is wrong.
Is this satire? Ghost cities really just started to seriously get reported on in 2018 and subsequently more each following year. Also what the heck even is Justapedia? The opinion piece that the “2018 onwards” section is based on was released in 2018 itself and was proven wrong almost immediately. It’s outdated. Frankly, the section doesn’t even look like it belongs on the page and is phrased intentionally devious. It’s completely wrong.
Justapedia is crap, but the article it references is real and from the guy that first wrote about the ghost cities.
That’s even worse. This is almost a decade old and got absolutely nothing to do with the housing market today. Are we really pretending nothing has changed since 2015? Especially in China? Seriously? The argument in the beginning was precisely about ghost cities 2018 onwards and neither of you provided a source that‘s remotely recent or accurate today.
Whatever dude. People are just mad that they’ve been misinformed. It happens to all of us.
While most of these so-called ghost cities have failed to live up to their original promise, very few of them have actually failed completely and are hardly deserving of the nickname that’s been assigned to them. They may have to go back to the drawing board and set some more realistic goals. Most of them should become fully functioning cities eventually. All they need is a little more time.
The opinion piece that the “2018 onwards” section is based on was released in 2018 itself and was proven wrong almost immediately.
Which piece has been proven wrong?
You didn’t just make that up to confirm your bias, did you? Can you please provide evidence that the state-level new area is unpopulated? Because my search says the population is 5.68 million.
The very source of the page you just sent refers to an article from 2018. Do you understand there are cited sources? Did you not bother checking them?
I invite anyone to verify that the “ghost cities,” are indeed, inhabited. Why do people choose to fight battles that are easily fact-checked. Confirmation bias is a helluva drug.
China’s property glut is being eaten up by the rural-urban migration. It’s not a static demand market.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The last major mosque in China to have retained Arabic-style features has lost its domes and had its minarets radically modified, marking what experts say is the completion of a government campaign to sinicise the country’s Muslim places of worship.
Satellite imagery from 2022 shows the entrance pavilion decorated with a large crescent moon and star made from vivid black tiles.
Ruslan Yusupov, an anthropologist at Cornell University who spent two years in Shadian doing fieldwork, said: “Sinification of these two landmark mosques marks the success of the campaign.
Yusupov said the development of Shadian and Najiaying mosques represented “the ability of Muslims to regain religious and Islamic space after the cultural revolution.
“We just wanted to preserve our last bit of dignity, because except for Shadian and Najiaying, every [mosque] in the country has been remodelled,” said the man, who has since left China and who asked to remain anonymous because of fears for his safety.
Ian Johnson, the author of The Souls of China, a book about religion, said: “Given the tragic history of this mosque – especially that within living memory Han chauvinism already led to its destruction once – the reconstruction and renaming of it is another effort to erase local people’s beliefs and their cultural heritage.”
The original article contains 1,207 words, the summary contains 211 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I will never understand people who are so fragile about their birth culture. Cultures should serve us humans, not the other way around. Who cares if there is a not- enough Chinese building in China? Let people build whatever architecture they want to worship their skydaddy how they feel like.
The old Chinese style building was there until the end of the Qing Dynasty or whatever
Straight from the top of my dome
Rock rock, rock a rock a rock the microphoneBoomfunk Mosques?
This feels like something that would happen in some version of Civilization, the 4X game.
My guess is that some time within the next century or two, robot-constructed buildings are going to become a thing, and then a lot of the apparent permanence of buildings due to the cost of construction is going to go away.
Arnaud Bertrand has different opinions about this. He delves into the dishonesty of this article and why the renovation has been misrepresented.
From the garbage you posted:
https://theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/25/shadian-last-major-islamic-style-mosque-in-china-loses-its-domes
First of all, the timing of the article is fascinating. Just when the West is facilitating yet another large-scale massacre of Muslims civilians they want your attention drawn to China rearranging the architectural features of some mosques to make them look more Chinese… which they present as some sort of evil project.Yeah, the GUARDIAN of all newspapers wants to distract you from Gaza, that is why the main news on their homepage is:
You see, there is exactly one person working for newspapers who is in charge of writing articles.
Whenever they write something criticizing something I am obsessed with, it’s the only article posted on a given day and meant to distract the sheeple from some other horrific thing going on at the same time. That’s not whataboutism, it’s different because I’m doing it.
Kinda related way editorials work. If a news source endorses a candidate or published an editorial that is their opinion forever. They own absolute loyalty to the candidate and support everything they have ever done or said in the past and in the future.
Every article every written, every social media post, all of it forever and ever are to be viewed under the lens of the one time someone working there expressed a viewpoint. Did the Guardian write a single article that seemed biased towards a side of a conflict? That gets round up to absolute loyalty to that side.
From the Scott Trust Limited, owners of the Guardian:
In 1992, the Trust identified its central objective as being the following:
- “To secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian in perpetuity: as a quality national newspaper without party affiliation; remaining faithful to its liberal tradition; as a profit-seeking enterprise managed in an efficient and cost-effective manner.”
Certainly a liberal, profit-seeking enterprise wouldn’t be biased against a socialist, communist nation… /s
https://inf.news/en/culture/99cd839e359599d0079b82992ff8fe3a.html
They had a Ming-style mosque that was destroyed in a massacre of Muslims during the Cultural Revolution in 1975, they rebuilt a warehouse-looking mosque in 1981, then the Arabic-style mosque was built in 2010.
The Guardian does write the article to make you think it’s a historical landmark, and not a Chinese copy of the Eiffel Tower kind of landmark that’s being rebuilt to look more like the one the government originally destroyed.
Thanks for the historical context. I’m tired of being told to hate China, when I know very little of its history, culture and how its current government operates. I’ll make up my own mind.
Why did Biden do this?
