The ABC ran a series of stories on Chinese Uyghur labour camps, estimated to detain one million people.
To add context, that estimate would represent an incarceration rate of 8,847 per 100,000 Chinese Uyghurs.
China's overall prison population rate is between 118 and 164 detainees per 100,000 persons, a total prison population of up to 2.3 million.
It's unclear whether the Uyghurs in detention are counted as prisoners or officially counted at all. If they are, they would make up close to half the prison population. If not, then China would be running a parallel detention system nearly half the size of the criminal one. Possible, but surely something so hard to keep off the books that there would be more data available.
In comparison, Australia's incarceration rate is 169 per 100,000 persons. Higher than China's but lower than the U.S. (666 per 100,000 persons).
The resurfacing of Uyghur detention reports coincided with NAIDOC week. In the absence of better international data Indigenous Australians remain the most incarcerated peoples on Earth (2,253 per 100,000 Indigenous Australians).
Global interest in Uyghurs spike around the times stories on their detention are released. This attention is presumably unfavourable towards China. Contrast this to interest in Aboriginal Australians which remains steady despite the difference in incarceration rates and continuous reports of questionable detention.
Perhaps Australia can teach China a thing or two about constructing narratives which normalise ethnic incarceration.
Transparency. The availability of data is enough to make many complacent. In an open society, there are many like statistics that are as much distraction as information. It would make Huxley proud.
Independent opinion should be welcomed, if not sought, debate around their findings adding to the information maelstrom. Allowing some white saviours to add their two cents will increase international standing. No action need result as long as the guise of openness is built.
Confuse the issue. Adding nuance like socio-economics, geography, and education encourages apathy as it also makes the problem - and hence possible solutions - more complex, while diverting focus away from the State. This may be difficult for Governments which have invested in an image of being in control.
Personal Responsibility. Keep framing the failure to overcome systemic causes of crime (and thereby punishment) as a personal choice. e.g. "He's not in the lockup because he's black. He's there because he bashed his missus." Make wretchedness a lifestyle choice. Maintain that race is incidental.
Positive Spin. This is something that China does well, casting labour camps as training centers. However, it begs the question why training is needed. Surely surgeons needn't study to be seamstresses. If detention is required to remedy deficiencies then the presence of deficiencies must be acknowledged. Again, a tough ask for a State that projects an ability to pre-emptively eliminate problems.
Just Cause. According to Western doctrine, the use of force requires imminent danger to innocent life, not merely suffering a wrong. Australia framed sending troops into the Northern Territory as an intervention, and the U.S. relied on the threat of WMD alongside the injustice of September 11 to re-enter the Middle East. This diverges a little from Confucian just-war theory which tends towards righteousness being proved after the fact by campaign success. To gain wider acceptance for its program, China could do more to revive memories of the 2009 riots. However, this would also highlight its inability to prevent and halt them quickly. It is difficult to cast oneself as victim and supreme authority at the same time. Similarly, while governments can leverage tough-on-crime narratives to extend power, this presupposes that crime has been allowed to flourish.
Letting a hundred flowers bloom (百花齐放) was (supposed to be) followed by letting a hundred schools of thought contend. By looking elsewhere to how other countries justify incarcerating ethnic minorities, China can add to its rising power another aspect of becoming a developed nation.
To add context, that estimate would represent an incarceration rate of 8,847 per 100,000 Chinese Uyghurs.
China's overall prison population rate is between 118 and 164 detainees per 100,000 persons, a total prison population of up to 2.3 million.
It's unclear whether the Uyghurs in detention are counted as prisoners or officially counted at all. If they are, they would make up close to half the prison population. If not, then China would be running a parallel detention system nearly half the size of the criminal one. Possible, but surely something so hard to keep off the books that there would be more data available.
In comparison, Australia's incarceration rate is 169 per 100,000 persons. Higher than China's but lower than the U.S. (666 per 100,000 persons).
The resurfacing of Uyghur detention reports coincided with NAIDOC week. In the absence of better international data Indigenous Australians remain the most incarcerated peoples on Earth (2,253 per 100,000 Indigenous Australians).
Global interest in Uyghurs spike around the times stories on their detention are released. This attention is presumably unfavourable towards China. Contrast this to interest in Aboriginal Australians which remains steady despite the difference in incarceration rates and continuous reports of questionable detention.
Perhaps Australia can teach China a thing or two about constructing narratives which normalise ethnic incarceration.
Transparency. The availability of data is enough to make many complacent. In an open society, there are many like statistics that are as much distraction as information. It would make Huxley proud.
Independent opinion should be welcomed, if not sought, debate around their findings adding to the information maelstrom. Allowing some white saviours to add their two cents will increase international standing. No action need result as long as the guise of openness is built.
Confuse the issue. Adding nuance like socio-economics, geography, and education encourages apathy as it also makes the problem - and hence possible solutions - more complex, while diverting focus away from the State. This may be difficult for Governments which have invested in an image of being in control.
Personal Responsibility. Keep framing the failure to overcome systemic causes of crime (and thereby punishment) as a personal choice. e.g. "He's not in the lockup because he's black. He's there because he bashed his missus." Make wretchedness a lifestyle choice. Maintain that race is incidental.
Positive Spin. This is something that China does well, casting labour camps as training centers. However, it begs the question why training is needed. Surely surgeons needn't study to be seamstresses. If detention is required to remedy deficiencies then the presence of deficiencies must be acknowledged. Again, a tough ask for a State that projects an ability to pre-emptively eliminate problems.
Just Cause. According to Western doctrine, the use of force requires imminent danger to innocent life, not merely suffering a wrong. Australia framed sending troops into the Northern Territory as an intervention, and the U.S. relied on the threat of WMD alongside the injustice of September 11 to re-enter the Middle East. This diverges a little from Confucian just-war theory which tends towards righteousness being proved after the fact by campaign success. To gain wider acceptance for its program, China could do more to revive memories of the 2009 riots. However, this would also highlight its inability to prevent and halt them quickly. It is difficult to cast oneself as victim and supreme authority at the same time. Similarly, while governments can leverage tough-on-crime narratives to extend power, this presupposes that crime has been allowed to flourish.
Letting a hundred flowers bloom (百花齐放) was (supposed to be) followed by letting a hundred schools of thought contend. By looking elsewhere to how other countries justify incarcerating ethnic minorities, China can add to its rising power another aspect of becoming a developed nation.
Comments
Post a Comment