China’s Genocide Cannot be Overlooked, Nightmare of “Eugenics” Strikes Uyghurs

China’s Genocide Cannot be Overlooked, Nightmare of “Eugenics” Strikes Uyghurs

https://ironna.jp/article/17011

by Hideomi Tanaka (Professor, Faculty of Business and Information Studies, Jobu University)

 The Chinese government’s “genocide” against the Uyghur minority in Xinjiang, China, has been attracting international criticism. The Chinese government’s “genocide” against the Uyghur minority in Xinjiang is attracting international criticism because it has been reported that they have been subjected to forced sterilization, brainwashing and forced labor in detention facilities, and forced assimilation policies, which can be called genocide.

 However, the Chinese government does not accept any criticism from the international community. The number of sterilization operations and the sharp decline in the birth rate have been revealed in the Chinese government’s official documents, but there is no sign of even a hint of a cover-up. In short, the Chinese government is “convinced” of this.

 However, the question arises as to how the Chinese government can be so “sure of itself” to such an extent. One answer may be that the Chinese government and local governments believe that their population control policy, which could be called the “population extinction policy,” is consistent with their past policies. In other words, what is a nightmare for us is “reasonable” for the Chinese government.

 The genocide of the Uyghurs is easier to understand if we consider the quantitative control of population policy, the “one child policy” that was abolished in 2004, and the warped eugenicist ideology that is being implemented at the same time.

 Let us define eugenics as “the desire for a better society based on a better life brought about by improved heredity and environment” (Introduction to Population Theory, by Naho Sugita). Eugenics is strongly associated with the bad social exclusion, where people’s “lives” may be ranked from good to bad. The flow of eugenics or eugenic thought is complex and linked to various social and economic ideas and institutions in various countries (see “Eugenics and Human Society” by Shohei Yonemoto et al.

 (See “Eugenics and Human Society” by Shohei Yonemoto et al. Even today, court cases continue to be filed over the damage caused by the former Eugenic Protection Law. With the recent advances in genetic engineering, this is by no means a problem of the past. However, in China, this eugenicist concept persists on a completely different level than in Japan or the West.

President Xi Jinping is shown on a street screen in China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, November 2017 (AP)

 There is a problem called the “disappearing woman. In China, far more boys are born and raised than girls. This is born out of eugenics, which favors boys over girls. It is pointed out that the lives of small girls have been lost due to abortion, abandonment, and lack of proactive treatment of illnesses. Similar problems have arisen not only in China, but also in several other countries and regions in India, the Middle East, and Africa.

 However, due to the adoption of the one-child policy in China in the 1980s, the original preference for boys, and the widespread adoption of gender segregation and abortion since the 1990s, the number of boys in China reached 1.2 times that of girls in 2007.

 The one-child policy itself has also caused serious human rights violations. The one-child policy is based on Chinese Malthusianism, which emphasizes the perspective of finite resources (land, food, economic opportunities) and an exploding population.

 In developed countries, it is entirely up to the individual to have or not to have children, and how many children to have. Of course, there may be various social and economic circumstances, but there is no legal restriction on the number of children one can have. The one-child policy was in itself a violation of human rights.

 In the first place, as China researcher Arthur Kroeber summarizes in “The China Economy,” even without adopting population control policies, fertility rates in Asian countries have declined more than in China as their economies developed. This is because as people move from rural to urban areas, they are no longer trying to have as many children as the typical urban dweller.

 Clover points out that the population control effect of the one-child policy is not clear. On the other hand, what is clear is that the one-child policy is a violation of human rights due to the planned parenthood policy. The purpose of the planned parenthood policy was to “marry late, give birth late, have fewer children, improve the quality of children, and make births more rare,” and it was based on eugenic thinking. Even today, China is said to be aiming to improve the “quality of the population,” but this undefined “quality of the population” is a dubious concept that leads to eugenics.

 The only child was socially privileged, and social penalties (such as fines) were imposed for having more than one child. Human rights violations were particularly serious in the local government, with confiscation of property, expulsion from the workplace, and destruction of houses.

 There is also a research paper that describes an episode where a woman who did not have permission to give birth was required to have an abortion if she became pregnant, and even if she did have permission to give birth, she was forced to sign an abortion consent form because she could not pay the fine, and was then forced to take an injection that would kill the fetus.

Mr. Feng’s wife was taken by ambulance to the city hospital and forced to take a pregnancy test. After arriving at the hospital, the officials ordered her to have a miscarriage and an indefinite operation, but she refused. She was then blindfolded with a pillowcase, her arms were held down, and with a pen in her right hand, she was forced to sign an abortion consent form and stamp it with the fingers of her left hand.

She was then taken to the operating room where she was given an injection of anesthesia and an injection to terminate the fetus. According to her, the fetus stopped moving after the injection, and at around three o’clock on the morning of September 12, the five-month pregnant fetus was born dead.

In other words, Mr. Feng and his wife were unable to give birth to their third child because they could not provide sufficient fines.

Population Policy and Its Practice in China” by Zheng Ouming

 For the Uyghurs, the one-child policy has been applied in a relaxed manner due to their ethnic minority. In urban areas, the limit was two children, and in rural areas it was three. In reality, some families have more children than that. That is why the sharp increase in sterilization, the number of abortions and the number of women wearing intrauterine devices in the last few years is so unnatural. The Nishinippon Shimbun reported, “In 2014-18, sterilization surgeries in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region increased 18-fold, and a total of 100,000 residents underwent surgeries.

 Surprisingly, the Chinese government may be aiming to “improve the quality of the Uyghur population” with this kind of genocide.

Chinese tourists hold paper bags with duty-free items they purchased at the airport in Sanya, Hainan province, China, Jan. 3, 2021.

 The one-child policy in the past was really an attempt to increase economic opportunities per capita by limiting the number of children born. I think they are trying to increase the economic level of Uyghur Autonomous Region by the policy of “reducing” the population of Uyghurs in the present and future. If so, it is really a horrible eugenicist nightmare.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *