Written on 11 July 2021.

   Pompeo had routinely accused China of committing human rights abuses in the Xinjiang region, and these four people made videos to express their outrage. They did so in oddly similar ways.

 

“Pompeo said that we Uyghurs are locked up and have no freedom,” the store owner said.

“There’s nothing like that at all in our Xinjiang,” said the taxi driver.

“We are very free,” the retiree said.

“We are very free now,” the store owner said.

“We are very, very free here,” the taxi driver said.

“Our lives are very happy and very free now,” the textile company worker said.

 

   ProPublica and The New York Times analyzed propaganda videos featuring Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities from across Xinjiang.

   These and thousands of other videos are meant to look like unfiltered glimpses of life in Xinjiang, the western Chinese region where the Communist Party has carried out repressive policies against Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities. Most of the clips carry no logos or other signs that they are official propaganda.

   But taken together, the videos begin to reveal clues of broader coordination — such as the English subtitles in clips posted to YouTube and other Western platforms.

   A monthslong analysis of more than 3,000 of the videos by ProPublica and The New York Times found evidence of an influence campaign orchestrated by the Chinese government.

   The operation has produced and spread thousands of videos in which Chinese citizens deny abuses against their own communities and scold foreign officials and multinational corporations who dare question the Chinese government’s human rights record in Xinjiang.

   It all amounts to one of China’s most elaborate efforts to shape global opinion.

   Beijing is trying to use savvier and more forceful methods to broadcast its political messages to a worldwide audience. And Western internet platforms like Twitter and YouTube are playing a key part.

   Many of these videos of people in Xinjiang first appeared on a regional Communist Party news app. Then they showed up on YouTube and other global sites, with English subtitles added. (The excerpts of dialogue in this article are translated from the original spoken Chinese or Uyghur by ProPublica and The Times. They are not taken from the English subtitles in the original videos.)

   On Twitter, a network of connected accounts shared the videos in ways that seemed designed to avoid the platform’s systems for detecting influence campaigns.

   China’s increasingly social-media-fluent diplomats and state-run news outlets have since spread the testimonials to audiences of millions worldwide.

   Western platforms like Twitter and YouTube are banned in China out of fear they might be used to spread political messaging — which is exactly how Chinese officials are using these platforms in the rest of the world.

   They are, in essence, high-speed propaganda pipelines for Beijing. In just a few days, videos establishing the Communist Party’s version of reality can be shot, edited and amplified across the global internet.

How the Videos Work

   The dialogue in hundreds of the Xinjiang videos contains strikingly similar, and often identical, phrases and structures.

   Most videos are in Chinese or Uyghur and follow the same basic script. The subject introduces themselves, then explains how their own happy, prosperous life means there couldn’t possibly be repressive policies in Xinjiang.

   Many people in the videos use the expression tusheng-tuzhang (土生土长), meaning “born and raised.” They claim that, as native Xinjiangers, they know best how their community is treated.

   A four-character Chinese phrase meaning “born and raised” appears in more than 280 of the more than 2,000 videos attacking Pompeo that ProPublica and the Times found on YouTube and Twitter.

   The people in more than 1,000 of the videos say they have recently come across Pompeo’s remarks, most of them “on the internet” or on specific platforms such as Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok.

   Many of those who appear in the videos claim to have recently seen former U.S. secretary of state Mike Pompeo’s declaration of genocide in Xinjiang.

   An expression meaning “complete nonsense” and close variations of it appear in more than 600 of the videos.

   People in the videos frequently use the expression hushuo-badao (胡说八道), meaning “complete nonsense” or “hogwash,” to dismiss Pompeo’s accusations.

   Establishing that government officials had a hand in making these testimonials is sometimes just a matter of asking.

   In one clip, the owner of a used car dealership in Xinjiang says: “Pompeo, shut your mouth.”

   A video featuring a man who later acknowledged that his video was made by local propaganda officials.

   When reached by phone, the man said local propaganda authorities had produced the clip. When asked for details, he gave the number of an official he called Mr. He, saying, “Why don’t you ask the head of the propaganda department?”

   Multiple calls to Mr. He’s number were not answered. Seven other people in the videos whose contact information could be found either declined to be interviewed or couldn’t be reached. (The name of the car dealership’s owner is being withheld to protect him from retribution by Chinese officials.)

   In another sign of government coordination, language in the videos echoes written denunciations of Pompeo that Chinese state agencies issued around the same time.

   Beginning in late January, government workers across Xinjiang held meetings to “speak out and show the sword” against “Pompeo’s anti-China lies,” according to statements on official websites.

   The clips’ effectiveness as propaganda comes in part because they will probably be most people’s only glimpse into Xinjiang, a remote desert region closer to Kabul than to Beijing.

   The Chinese authorities have thwarted efforts by journalists and others to gain unfettered access to the indoctrination camps where hundreds of thousands of Muslims have been sent for reeducation.

   On government-led tours of the region, foreign diplomats and reporters have been allowed to speak with locals only under Chinese officials’ watchful eyes, often in settings that seem staged and scripted.

   For Western platforms hosting the Xinjiang testimonials, the fact that they are not immediately obvious as state propaganda poses a challenge.

   To promote transparency, sites like YouTube and Twitter label accounts and posts that are associated with governments. The Xinjiang videos, however, carry no such tags.

   YouTube said the clips did not violate its community guidelines. Twitter declined to comment on the videos, adding that it routinely releases data on campaigns that it can “reliably attribute to state-linked activity.”

How the Videos Spread

   The video campaign started this year after the State Department declared on Jan. 19, the final full day of the Trump presidency, that China was committing genocide in Xinjiang. (Story continues; see here)

Jeff Kao, ProPublica, and Raymond Zhong, Paul Mozur and Aaron Krolik, The New York Times

(This story was originally published by ProPublica)

Written on 15 April 2021.

   Foto Wikipedia

Am 1. Mai 1942 schneite es in Stephansdorf. Dicke Flocken bedeckten die Fuchsienbüsche zu beiden Seiten der Eingangstreppe des Schlosses. Schnee fiel auch auf die rosa Blüten des Tulpenbaums im Park, doch es bestand kein Grund, den Schlitten noch einmal anzuspannen.

   Wiewohl mitten im Krieg, lag Niederschlesien noch in tiefstem Frieden, weit weg von den Fronten und den Bomben Berlins. Das Leben ging seinen unaufgeregten Gang. Der Inspektor leitete die Landwirtschaft, so dass mein Onkel Heinrich als Gutsbesitzer, wenn er nicht als Richter gefordert war, seinen Studien als Privatgelehrter nachgehen konnte, die ihm auch heute noch eine rechtsgeschichtliche Präsenz sichern

   Trotz des bukolischen Daseins forderte der Krieg bereits Einschränkungen, vor allem in der Küche: es wurde die gesamte Produktion des Agrarbetriebs abgeliefert. Für die Familie gab es nur die Rationen der Lebensmittelkarte. Es herrschte ein bescheidenes, immer gleiches Wochenmenu: Donnerstag Spinat mit Setzei, Freitags schlesische Klösse mit Backobst. Nur Sonntag abends spendierte Onkel Heinrich zum Abendbrot zwei Scheiben der  Würste, die in der Küche von der Decke hingen. Montags erhielt jeder ein halbes Pfund Butter, in das ein Gittermuster mit acht gleichen Fächern einzuritzen war. Jeden Tag durfte man ein Blöckchen herausschneiden und essen, am Sonntag gab es dann als Festgabe die restlichen zwei Portionen.

   Das frugale Leben bedeutete jedoch kein Opfer: auf den Schlössern Ostelbiens galt bescheidenes Leben seit jeher als vornehm und gottgefällig. Das vereinfachte auch die Arbeit der Mamsell, der Köchin. Mit anderen Worten: auf den Schlössern war das Essen herzlich schlecht und verwöhnte Stadtbewohner nahmen sich in Friedenszeiten bei Schlossbesuch eine Tafel Schokolade als Notreserve mit.

   Auch sonst war der Lebenszuschnitt einfach. Es gab kein Auto weit und breit. Transportmittel waren Kutsche, Pferderücken und der nahe gelegene Zug Breslau-Berlin. Die Landarbeit verrichteten Pferde, schwere Kaltblüter, Belgier. Die Landarbeiter schienen mir eher knapp entlohnt: ein wichtiges Element ihres Lebens war das Deputat – Lohn in Form von Naturalien aus der eigenen Erzeugung und Holz aus dem Wald, dazu eine einfache Wohnung.

   Im Schloss, einem Barockbau aus der österreichischen Zeit, wohnten neben Onkel Heinrich und der am Fuss behinderten Tante Resi, die stets bodenlange Kleider trug, drei unverheiratete Töchter, die sich um mich kümmerten. In zwei Kavaliershäuschen wohnten zwei weitere Tanten. Tante Klara brillierte mit gutem Kaffee, während Tante U (für Ursula) ihr Leben mit englischen Romanen verbrachte. Ihr kleines Haus war randgefüllt mit einer Sammlung von Tauchnitzbänden und anderen Taschenbüchern, die sie stets im Original las. Aus dem zu Stephandorf gehörenden Gut Falkenhain kam oft der einzige Sohn Konrad zu Besuch, bevor er für immer im Krieg verschwand.

   Ein gastliches Haus, vor allem für Bombenflüchtlinge aus Berlin wie mich. Man besuchte die einklassige Volksschule des Dorfes und lernte bei dem klugen und freundlichen Kantor Froböss. Neben der Schule und der Kirche gab es nur einen wichtigen Ort im Dorf, den Dorfladen, ein Reich wunderbarer Schätze, in dem es mir gelang, eine Peitsche zu kaufen, farbig geflochten, mit der ich knallen üben konnte.

   Ein anderes Juwel fand ich auf dem Dachboden des Schlosses: ein Kinderfahrrad, verrostet und mit luftleeren Reifen. Kein Problem: Tante Bertha, die Gute, fand einen Topf roten Lacks, half mir das Fahrrad zu lackieren, und fortan konnte ich durch Hof und Park karriolen – ohne Luft natürlich, aber das hinderte mich nicht.

   Grossen Unterhaltungswert besass der Gutshof. Ein Pferd, Vesta, war so gutmütig, dass es für Kinder reserviert war, die es durch die Schwemme reiten durften. Den Bau der Wagen sah ich beim Stellmacher; beim Schmied durfte ich auch mal einen Pferdefuss halten, damit er neu beschlagen wird mit einem glühenden Eisen auf dem rauchenden Huf.

   Auf dem Gutshof entwickelten sich Freundschaften mit anderen Kindern, was freilich von den sonst so gütigen Erwachsenen ungern gesehen wurde. Spiel nicht mit den Hofejungs, wurde mir eingeschärft. Warum eigentlich, frug ich mich, denn in der Schule teilte man die Bank.

   Drei Jahre danach war alles vorbei, untergegangen in der Katastrophe des Kriegsendes. Viele Jahre danach war ich noch einmal in Stephansdorf. Das Schloss steht noch, ist unbewohnt. Durch das Treppenhaus zieht sich eine Bretterwand. Mein altes Turmzimmer ist leer.  Der Teich ist verschwunden, verlandet. Von der alten Wassermühle, vom Park keine Spur mehr. Bei der Fasanerie, in der die tüchtige Tante Bertha Küken zog, haust irgendwelches Gesindel. Aus, Ende, vorbei. Nur die Dorfkirche steht noch, tadellos erhalten. Als ob das ein Trost wäre. 

                                                                                                                                                                Heinrich von Loesch

Written on 02 July 2021.

   U.S. Rep. Jim Banks of Indiana sent a letter to fellow Republicans on June 24, 2021, stating: “As Republicans, we reject the racial essentialism that critical race theory teaches … that our institutions are racist and need to be destroyed from the ground up.”

   Kimberlé Crenshaw, a law professor and central figure in the development of critical race theory, said in a recent interview that critical race theory “just says, let’s pay attention to what has happened in this country, and how what has happened in this country is continuing to create differential outcomes. … Critical Race Theory … is more patriotic than those who are opposed to it because … we believe in the promises of equality. And we know we can’t get there if we can’t confront and talk honestly about inequality.”

   Rep. Banks’ account is demonstrably false and typical of many people publicly declaring their opposition to critical race theory. Crenshaw’s characterization, while true, does not detail its main features. So what is critical race theory and what brought it into existence?

   The development of critical race theory by legal scholars such as Derrick Bell and Crenshaw was largely a response to the slow legal progress and setbacks faced by African Americans from the end of the Civil War, in 1865, through the end of the civil rights era, in 1968. To understand critical race theory, you need to first understand the history of African American rights in the U.S.

   After 304 years of enslavement, then-former slaves gained equal protection under the law with passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868. The 15th Amendment, in 1870, guaranteed voting rights for men regardless of race or “previous condition of servitude.”

   Between 1866 and 1877 – the period historians call “Radical Reconstruction” – African Americans began businesses, became involved in local governance and law enforcement and were elected to Congress.

   This early progress was subsequently diminished by state laws throughout the American South called “Black Codes,” which limited voting rights, property rights and compensation for work; made it illegal to be unemployed or not have documented proof of employment; and could subject prisoners to work without pay on behalf of the state. These legal rollbacks were worsened by the spread of “Jim Crow” laws throughout the country requiring segregation in almost all aspects of life.

   Grassroots struggles for civil rights were constant in post-Civil War America. Some historians even refer to the period from the New Deal Era, which began in 1933, to the present as “The Long Civil Rights Movement.”

   The period stretching from Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, which found school segregation to be unconstitutional, to the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibited discrimination in housing, was especially productive.

   The civil rights movement used practices such as civil disobedience, nonviolent protest, grassroots organizing and legal challenges to advance civil rights. The U.S.’s need to improve its image abroad during the Cold War importantly aided these advancements. The movement succeeded in banning explicit legal discrimination and segregation, promoted equal access to work and housing and extended federal protection of voting rights.

   However, the movement that produced legal advances had no effect on the increasing racial wealth gap between Blacks and whites, while school and housing segregation persisted.

   The racial wealth gap between Blacks and whites has persisted. Here, Carde Cornish takes his son past blighted buildings in Baltimore. ‘Our race issues aren’t necessarily toward individuals who are white, but it is towards the system that keeps us all down, one, but keeps Black people disproportionally down a lot more than anybody else,’ he said.AP Photo/Matt Rourke

What critical race theory is

   Critical race theory is a field of intellectual inquiry that demonstrates the legal codification of racism in America.

   Through the study of law and U.S. history, it attempts to reveal how racial oppression shaped the legal fabric of the U.S. Critical race theory is traditionally less concerned with how racism manifests itself in interactions with individuals and more concerned with how racism has been, and is, codified into the law.

   There are a few beliefs commonly held by most critical race theorists.

   First, race is not fundamentally or essentially a matter of biology, but rather a social construct. While physical features and geographic origin play a part in making up what we think of as race, societies will often make up the rest of what we think of as race. For instance, 19th- and early-20th-century scientists and politicians frequently described people of color as intellectually or morally inferior, and used those false descriptions to justify oppression and discrimination.

   Legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw, who devised the term ‘critical race theory,’ explains what it is – and isn’t.

   Second, these racial views have been codified into the nation’s foundational documents and legal system. For evidence of that, look no further than the “Three-Fifths Compromise” in the Constitution, whereby slaves, denied the right to vote, were nonetheless treated as part of the population for increasing congressional representation of slave-holding states.

   Third, given the pervasiveness of racism in our legal system and institutions, racism is not aberrant, but a normal part of life.

   Fourth, multiple elements, such as race and gender, can lead to kinds of compounded discrimination that lack the civil rights protections given to individual, protected categories. For example, Crenshaw has forcibly argued that there is a lack of legal protection for Black women as a category. The courts have treated Black women as Black, or women, but not both in discrimination cases – despite the fact that they may have experienced discrimination because they were both.

   These beliefs are shared by scholars in a variety of fields who explore the role of racism in areas such as education, health care and history.

   Finally, critical race theorists are interested not just in studying the law and systems of racism, but in changing them for the better.

What critical race theory is not

   Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, giving his version of what critical race theory is.

   “Critical race theory” has become a catch-all phrase among legislators attempting to ban a wide array of teaching practices concerning race. State legislators in Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and West Virginia have introduced legislation banning what they believe to be critical race theory from schools.

   But what is being banned in education, and what many media outlets and legislators are calling “critical race theory,” is far from it. Here are sections from identical legislation in Oklahoma and Tennessee that propose to ban the teaching of these concepts. As a philosopher of race and racism, I can safely say that critical race theory does not assert the following:

(1) One race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;

(2) An individual, by virtue of the individual’s race or sex, is inherently privileged, racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or subconsciously;

(3) An individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of the individual’s race or sex;

(4) An individual’s moral character is determined by the individual’s race or sex;

(5) An individual, by virtue of the individual’s race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;

(6) An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or another form of psychological distress solely because of the individual’s race or sex.

What most of these bills go on to do is limit the presentation of educational materials that suggest that Americans do not live in a meritocracy, that foundational elements of U.S. laws are racist, and that racism is a perpetual struggle from which America has not escaped.

   Americans are used to viewing their history through a triumphalist lens, where we overcome hardships, defeat our British oppressors and create a country where all are free with equal access to opportunities.

Obviously, not all of that is true.

   Critical race theory provides techniques to analyze U.S. history and legal institutions by acknowledging that racial problems do not go away when we leave them unaddressed.

David Miguel Gray -- The Conversation

Written on 28 March 2021.

Leggere gli servizi e le analisi della corrispondente economica della Süddeutsche Zeitung in Italia, Ulrike Sauer, è sempre un piacere, perché si basano su fatti solidi combinati con un giudizio chiaro.

    Giovane, femmina, disoccupata e il titolo del suo articolo (SZ 26-3-21, 17) sull'impatto della crisi COVID sull'occupazione femminile in Italia: "Su 101000 lavoratori che hanno perso il lavoro in Italia lo scorso dicembre, 99000 erano donne". (2000 erano uomini)

    Strage! Un bagno di sangue! Come se i datori di lavoro si fossero accordati per salvare gli uomini e sacrificare le donne per farlo.

    Il rapporto è pieno di statistiche da far rizzare i capelli. Analizza l'European Recovery Program, che dovrebbe risanare e modernizzare l'Italia con 200 miliardi di euro. Ma "il 57% dei fondi va a industrie in cui gli uomini costituiscono più dell'80%", si lamenta Sauer, citando la parlamentare tedesca Alexandra Geese (Partito Verde), che, con una forte eco in Italia, chiede che la metà dei fondi UE sia "spesa specificamente per le donne". Sarebbero 100 miliardi in Italia.

    È ovvio che l'Italia, in quanto ultima dell'UE in termini di occupazione femminile, sta buttando via un enorme potenziale economico, come sottolinea anche il primo ministro Mario Draghi. Ma c'è un abisso tra la realizzazione e il rimedio. Un programma da miliardi di euro per le donne guidato da Bruxelles e Roma potrebbe rivelarsi un costoso flop, perché....

- come sottolinea Ulrike Sauer, i principali settori dell'occupazione femminile (gastronomia, turismo, commercio al dettaglio) sono stati colpiti più duramente dalla pandemia, il che spiega in parte l'ondata di licenziamenti dello scorso dicembre.

- l'ostacolo più forte all'occupazione femminile in generale sono i milioni di uomini disoccupati o lavorando part-time (soprattutto giovani) che appartengono alla generazione Mille Euro, che devono accontentarsi di mille euro lordi o addirittura lottare per ottenerli. Finché prevale la disoccupazione maschile massiccia e la precarietà, molti datori di lavoro preferiscono gli uomini alle donne a causa delle tradizionali preoccupazioni per le gravidanze, la cura dei figli e i doveri domestici.

- Come la Deutsche Rundschau ha recentemente sottolineato, le donne sono in gran parte responsabili della miseria. L'educazione sbagliata in un mondo ancora patriarcale spinge i giovani uomini alla disperazione perché non vedono come si potrebbe "nutrire una famiglia" con un reddito tipo Generazione Mille Euro. Le ragazze sono addestrate dal loro ambiente a cercare un uomo che possa "sfamare una famiglia" invece di vedersi come un potenziale capofamiglia (anche di un uomo se necessario).

- che la situazione in Italia è grottesca, perché il livello di occupazione femminile è inferiore del 6% a quello della Grecia ed è in Europa solo poco superiore dalla Bosnia-Erzegovina (prevalentemente musulmana). Italia: un paese principalmente cristiano con una struttura sociale pseudo-islamica. Mentre in Germania le signore con il velo guidano gli autobus urbani, si cerca invano una voce italiana su Yahoo.it digitando "conduttrice autobus". Invece, troverete numerose voci per il maschio "conduttore", compresa una descrizione del lavoro sul portale di formazione e scelta della carriera www.wecanjob.it, che è sostenuto da una comunità imprenditoriale. Il servizio di consulenza descrive il lavoro di autista di autobus come pericoloso, stressante e tecnicamente impegnativo. Soprattutto, si suppone che "l'autista" sia disponibile in qualsiasi momento su richiesta dell'azienda (figli? famiglia? cure parentali?) Conclusione: non consigliabile per le donne!

- perché in Italia l'istruzione superiore non aiuta necessariamente le donne a trovare un lavoro professionale. Le spazzine romane con titoli accademici (lavoro sicuro, reddito fisso) non sono uno scherzo, ma la realtà. La maggior parte delle donne con un'istruzione superiore diventano insegnante, alcuni avvocate, funzionari pubblici, ecc. Soprattutto, cercano lavori d'ufficio. Come ovunque, le donne ottengono migliori risultati accademici, sono più studiose e hanno più talento linguistico degli uomini della stessa età. Ma cosa studiano? A parte dell'insegnamento, studiano poco di pratico e amano spesso materie orchidee: il liceo e l'università invece di una scuola tecnica. Si può ottenere l'impressione che per molte donne italiane un titolo accademico sia più un simbolo di prestigio sociale e un vantaggio nella scelta del marito che un trampolino per una carriera professionale.

-- come sottolinea l'articolo, l'Italia non ha mai sviluppato strutture per facilitare l'occupazione femminile. La chiesa e i suoi ordini religiosi erano felici di occuparsi degli asili nido, e lo stato era contento di questo. Ma ci sono anche altre ragioni per cui ci sono così pochi posti all'asilo: una domanda limitata. In molte famiglie del ceto medio esistono ancora domestici che si occupano dei bambini. Alcune giovani madri giustificano il loro lavoro casalingo con la necessità di fare da autista al bambino o ai bambini. Dato il traffico pericoloso e la mancanza di sistemi di scuolabus, è comprensibile che non si voglia esporre i piccoli alle lacune del trasporto pubblico. Allo Stato non importa molto perché, a differenza della Francia, per esempio, la rapida contrazione demografica dell'Italia (meno 350.000 abitanti nel 2020) non ha portato a riflessi natalisti che cerchino di mettere i giovani genitori e la loro prole sulle rose finanziariamente e organizzativamente. Se mancano bambini italiani, ci sarà l'immigrazione.

Conclusione: con l'attuale generazione di donne e politici, ci si possono aspettare pochi progressi nell'occupazione femminile, vista la disoccupazione maschile prevalente. Come al solito in Italia, la situazione è difficile al nord e molto peggio al sud. La COVID ha colpito il sud ancora più duramente del nord dal punto di vista economico e dell'occupazione, nonostante Bergamo e Milano. Cosa significa questo per la già precaria situazione delle donne può essere immaginato.

Benedikt Brenner