Asklemmy

The problem is not with the editing. The problem is that men and women dancing and singing together in happiness is literally just appealing to westerners, being of similar culture to Uyghurs I'd only be part of this practice as a humiliation ritual.

Uyghurs traditionally do both coed and segregated dancing depending on the event, the locale, the families, etc. Trying to shoehorn them based on your claims about your aculture is a form of tokenization, projection, and even islamophobia, given how you characterize this as universally muslim, whereas islamic practice is actually rich with cultural variety over geography and time.

Perhaps you should recognize your own ignorance in this matter. Are you here asking questions about people in a large and populous region with which you are unfamiliar, or are you here to lecture others about it? Does your culture promote speaking authoritatively about things you do not understand, to the detriment of others?

Another thing that went passive but is really huge is when the guy at 00:32 was asked how often he prays and he answered with the playbook "China's laws define schools as public places. And in public places religious activities are not allowed".

Suddenly you are familiar with "the playbook"? How long have you known this "playbook"?

But really, you started by saying it is not editing, but at 00:32 there is literally a jump cut between question and answer, with an entirely different camera angle for the presented answer. Do you know what was said before and after, or is 5 seconds of selective BBC editing enough? What has given you this confidence?

The worst part is that the officials basically admitted that they took these people based on predictions ? Like even if we ignore the ethical dilemma, you want me to believe that statistics&probability predicts which person will commit crime with ? That's like a book example of bad math imo.

The worst part is that the officials basically admitted that they took these people based on predictions ? Like even if we ignore the ethical dilemma, you want me to believe that statistics&probability predicts which person will commit crime with ? That's like a book example of bad math imo.

If you listen to the answers and not the narrator, you wipl find they sound exactly like progressives in the West trying to use preventative approaches and actually describe rehabikitating people who have committed minor crimes. Like the one literally says they want to rehabilitate those who commit minor crimes. You have come away with the impression that it is some claim about Minority Report-esque precog crimes because the narrator told you this, but not the the interviewees.

This is actually a fairly rosy picture. As I have already explained, social networks also led to people being required to attend these facilities. It is true that radicalizatikn is more frequent within social networks, it is literally a method used by all competent organizers to grow their impact. That does not mean it is good or right for a state to use this to coerce or punish (though they are not prisons), of course. But one must have perspective. What did the US and its friends do to muslim-majority nations after 9/11? Surely building skills and competency is a much less bad thing to coerce than death and disposession.