What's new

Can Chinese System be the Ultimate Solution Against Radical Islam?

Chinese believe coexistence of differences! We are not against any religion or race but we are strongly against extremism of any direction. Saudia Arabia and Qatar have sponsored spread of Wahhabist development in China since 1980s. Turkey has in recent years supported Eastern Turkishstan Movements as part of pan turkism. It is changing Chinese views about Islam, unfortunately. Let me put it this way: whoever associates himself with Uyghur separatists will be an enemy of China...:(

During the golden period of Islam the philosophy center of Baghdad was prominent in science, astronomy and mathematics etc. Religious debate was encouraged by the Caliphates because it created cohesion within society and the understanding of cultures between the East and the West. Thousands of scriptures are available describing how these debates were structured in the past. Unfortunately the collapse of the Ottoman empire and the role of colonialism has damaged the Muslim world greatly, because traditional Islam is being eroded by a a fundamentalists group which were created on western interests. Salafism exists today because Abdul Wahab and the Al-Saud family were supported by the British and this is a historical fact which cannot be disputed, because most salafists supporters try to hide this dirty little secret. Saudi Arabia and Qatar do support the spread of fundamentalism, because the descendants of Abdul Wahab control the clergy council and dictate how its foreign policy should be conducted, therefore its no surprise how the threat of violence in Xinjinag is linked to them. However the Uighur problem in China, also stems from poverty, unemployment and social alienation. The Government has done many polices in the region which have created a negative effect, therefore it needs to improve its governance, just like Pakistan needs to do more in Baluchistan. Turkey's support of ETIM has nothing to do with religion as ethnic nationalism is the center of their agenda. The ground realities is simple, the Chinese must have a good relationship with Muslim countries because our population is 1.7 billion and in the distant future a number of countries will be economically powerful and a bloc will emerge one day, where Muslim countries will have a system similar to the European Union. This could take a hundred years, however eventually it will occur some point in time. The Chinese Government needs to take the narrative of Islam away from the Uighur problem, otherwise you will cause more problems for your self. Today we have a disgusting situation in the Middle East because of the wrong policies conducted by the west and the ignorance of some Muslims who allowed emotion to dictate their actions rather religious guidance.
 
Interestingly we do approach the problem from quite different frontiers yet I agree with you on more then one front.

During the golden period of Islam the philosophy center of Baghdad was prominent in science, astronomy and mathematics etc. Religious debate was encouraged by the Caliphates because it created cohesion within society and the understanding of cultures between the East and the West. Thousands of scriptures are available describing how these debates were structured in the past.

As you've mentioned I also acknowledge the Islamic Golden Age. It was an historical phenomenon. Islamic scholars back then provided a lot of scientific contribution to philosophy, mathematics, medicine, politics, chemistry etc. Islamic scholars were pioneers in many fields of science and their books and articles were translated into Latin and made their way into Europe. Examples like Ibn-Sina (or Avicenna in Latinized form) had not only made huge developments in the Middle East but also made a lot of contributions in European scientific environment. Back then Islamic civilization and European civilization was somewhat in balance and comparable. However it was back than. Today European civilization is light years ahead of us. China was a great empire back then with lot's of scientific discoveries. They have discovered compass and gun powder both were enough to change evertyhing. Yet they don't seek returning to Ming era and restore that culture. They look forward and try to come up with a new system that can make their civilization great again. They are reinventing themselves. Just like we should do.


That's why we need reforms not only on the front of radical Islam, but as a whole. Today many of the Muslim population still living in rural areas, still living an agrarian lifestyle with a simple mind. We should not only fight radical Islam but also we should invent Islam that can be integrated with an urban lifestyle. Our perception of economy, employment, politics, human rights are still problemmatic. That's why I always say that Islam should be part of an individual belief but states should be run with a secular mentality. I mean just like we don't have political Buddhism, we shouldn't have political Islam. We can be muslim majority countries. That doesn't mean that everyone should be religious, or we should reinvent every economic or social theory with Islamic norms. I think we should do the opposite. We should reinvent the role of Islam in the political and economical sphere.

Unfortunately the collapse of the Ottoman empire and the role of colonialism has damaged the Muslim world greatly, because traditional Islam is being eroded by a a fundamentalists group which were created on western interests

Unfortunately collapse of Islamic Golden Age was more associated with the Mongol Invasion. Islamic nations had to fight in two fronts one front is the Crusades and the other one is Gengis Khan. Regarding Crusades there were a balance of power between Islam and Europe. It was clear that both sides wouldn't be able to destroy the other. However thanks to Gengis Khan the whole civilization is collapsed. Libraries were burnt. Scholars were killed. A whole generation of thinkers were perished. A civilization was erased from the face of the Earth.

Salafism exists today because Abdul Wahab and the Al-Saud family were supported by the British and this is a historical fact which cannot be disputed, because most salafists supporters try to hide this dirty little secret. Saudi Arabia and Qatar do support the spread of fundamentalism, because the descendants of Abdul Wahab control the clergy council and dictate how its foreign policy should be conducted, therefore its no surprise how the threat of violence in Xinjinag is linked to them.

Definitely agree. Head of the snake is Gulf countries. Their clerics spread all those hateful, radical and barbaric ideas. They are living in the Middle Ages.

However the Uighur problem in China, also stems from poverty, unemployment and social alienation. The Government has done many polices in the region which have created a negative effect, therefore it needs to improve its governance, just like Pakistan needs to do more in Baluchistan. Turkey's support of ETIM has nothing to do with religion as ethnic nationalism is the center of their agenda.

I also agree with you on this one. I've repeatedly said that our right wing lunatic friends in Turkey who supports Uyghur cause doesn't do it on the ground of religion but they do it on the grounds of nationalism. Ethnic seperatist movements are percieved much more legitimate in the West then radical Islam. CPC doesn't want :Uyghur cause to evolve into something like Tibet and they have every right to want that. That's why they are trying to find an Islamic motive behind Uyghur attacks and tell the world that it's fighting against radical Islam just like the rest.

I also agree with you that this has a downside. I mean one may try to win the propaganda war in the West. However at the end of the day there are around 160 million Turkic people in the world, yet there are 1.7 billion muslims. That radical Islamic narrative of Ughur movement may sure decrease the Western public support for Uyghur Turks but it will also create a surge of power in the opposing front. 1.7 billion vs 160 million? I know which one I would pick :).

As I've said before Uyghur's are Chinese citizens, and whether they are happy or not is not my problem, should definitely not be Turkey's problem and it should only be China's problem. At the end of the day Chinese government is responsible from their own people, not Turkish government. That's why pointing fingers and telling what to do is out of place, rude and irrelevant.

The ground realities is simple, the Chinese must have a good relationship with Muslim countries because our population is 1.7 billion and in the distant future a number of countries will be economically powerful and a bloc will emerge one day, where Muslim countries will have a system similar to the European Union. This could take a hundred years, however eventually it will occur some point in time. The Chinese Government needs to take the narrative of Islam away from the Uighur problem, otherwise you will cause more problems for your self. Today we have a disgusting situation in the Middle East because of the wrong policies conducted by the west and the ignorance of some Muslims who allowed emotion to dictate their actions rather religious guidance.

We should also have good relations with China. I mean think about it, many people in the forums are actually angry with China and Russia about in the grounds of Islamic sensitivity. There was a thread last week that was stating that Pakistan might have a hard time with it's Islamic neighbours because of having good relations with China. This is definitely most absurd thing I've ever heard. Think of the social dynamics. Today where would a practicing Muslim live without social preassure when living abroad? Most of the right wing in Europe and US hates Muslims. They are discriminated like hell. Take a look at China? Would any Chinese exclude you from his/her social circle if you are a practicing Muslim? Odds are very low. There is a huge group in the Western bloc that hates religious Muslims. Would we also want to ruin Far East for us?

Look at Syria. If there was no Russian intervention, the whole country was ISIS today. Cooperating with the Western bloc didn't pay up well up to now did it? Maybe cooperating with China will provide enough momentum to modernize this dying civilization! Remember, muslim population may be 1.7 billion but the world has 7.3 billion people and the number of people who are tolerant to Muslims are decreasing each day as the image of the Islam erodes before people's eyes. That's why we need China, more then they need us!
 
Last edited:
@Lure. Since you took your precious time to write this constructive article and you are make good points respectfully/politely , I will also take some time in explaining what I think are the main issues facing the Arab world, Middle East and most Muslim countries.

It's true. Outside of oil and gas projects and a few specific infrastructure projects (ports like Jebel Ali and airports like Dubai), far less real economic development has happened in the oil-rich parts of the Arab world than would be expected based on their great endowment of human and natural resources. The Islamic world isn't monolithic, and it's probably worthwhile to address relatively stable oil-rich states separately from Iraq, Iran, and Libya, again separately from other Islamic states without much oil separately from Asian Islamic countries like Malaysia(which you mentioned in your post relative to turkey) and Indonesia. Let's look specifically at the stable oil rich Arab Islamic states for now. I will comment directly on some of the challenges this region faces.

(There are some really interesting aspects of Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, Malaysia, and Indonesia which would be interesting to address separately, since they demonstrate what happens when some of these trends are reversed and taken too far the other way. Those countries deserve another question altogether.)

Overall, the local standard of living has improved dramatically -- walking around Dubai(which I have visited several times during business trips) or even a moderately sized city anywhere in the gulf/Arab region shows a reasonable standard of living, especially compared to a few decades ago. All those shiny new condo buildings, huge hypermarkets, highways, etc. :angel:

However, it's all consumption of energy wealth, not evidence of other productive economic activity. While the economic theory of comparative advantage says you maximize efficiency by going all-in on areas where you have the greatest comparative advantage, economic efficiency isn't the ultimate goal of life, and there are serious consequences to blindly maximizing current economic efficiency to the exclusion of all else. There is a huge qualitative difference between an economy built on natural resource extraction, where the populace is a cost center, and an economy built on productive labor by the population, where increasing capabilities of the society leads to more wealth. If you look at western countries, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, and increasingly, now China, they largely developed through manufacturing, initially low cost, low value add manufacturing, moving up the chain, and ended up with vibrant, well-educated, and diverse economies (even though Japan has demographic challenges, it will still be the number 3 economy in the world in 2030@nihonjin1053.lol . The alternative is an extractive economy like Argentina, which went from 10th in the world in 1930 to a basketcase for the past 80 years(our falkland dispute resentment aside.lol).:sick: That's not to say that natural resource endowment hasn't helped some countries (like the US), but natural resource economies in the absence of local value creation don't tend to lead to well developed societies.:)

Wealth in a resource-based economy is distributed much more unequally and more inefficiently. It goes to a small number of people at the top, and they're at the top due to tribal, family, or political connections, not due to skill or productivity. In a vibrant, competitive manufacturing economy, wealth tends to accrue to innovators and efficient operators, and someone with a new idea or better way of doing things has a chance to get to the top. Admittedly this is imperfect even in the US, but it's a better system than political patronage.

And, someday, the oil will run out (or won't be burned because of global warming).:flame:

Outside simple products and services for local consumption (consumers spending income directly from energy related jobs, or from government redistribution of energy wealth), and development, funded by energy wealth, of local transportation, power, and water infrastructure (starting from a very low base), what local development there has happened has been economically inefficient like building empty skyscrapers in the desert. Lol
This has been largely directed by government, or influential families affiliated with government, and financed by huge capital flows from oil/gas and foreign investment from Russia, South Asia, and other parts of the Arab or Muslim world, and not the product of real free enterprise. Essentially, these investments don't produce wealth; they're just a way to store wealth generated elsewhere, as a form of regulatory arbitrage. Even crazier, most of the labor, including skilled labor, to build buildings and operate companies is imported too I.e labor from China and Pakistan, accountants from the Philippines, advertising executives from the Levant, and engineers and architects from the UK and US.

Contrary to what most people here think ,I'm not anti Islam or whatever(I just tend to speak my mind rather frankly/bluntly.l know sometimes it can sound harsh but what I say are known facts which I don't sugar coat.lol).
I know that Islam is certainly not inherently opposed to development and progress, there's the shining example of the classical period of Islamic civilization, and the huge number of successful Muslim scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, and businesspeople in the US, Europe, and elsewhere. Democracy also isn't always on the list since we have great examples of non-democratic economic successes (China, and if you extend to one-party democracy, Singapore), and of democratic non-successes (India pre-1990s).

Essentially, no great global companies have been built in the region (yet), except to serve local consumption of wealth derived from energy.:(

There are a few potential exceptions -- the media company Al Jazeera in Qatar is probably the best example. It's unclear how profitable Al Jazeera is, but it's undeniably consequential globally -- one of the most important media companies in the world. Emirates Airlines has been very successful, in the model of Singapore Airlines, and there are several other airlines which have been successful to different degrees. Both of these were state sponsored at the beginning. For really private businesses, PwC/Agility logistics (which, admittedly, was largely built on the back of the US occupation of Iraq and artificially inflated prices and demand for shipping), and a little farther afield, Jordan's Aramex courier company is interesting (although not an oil state).

There are of course construction (Orascom) and communications (Wataniya) companies which are regionally important, making investments in Asia and Africa. There are some agricultural, retail, and distribution brands which serve the local economy, but aren't really great engines of wealth.

The irony is that while real growth should originate from and be sustained by the private sector, it's undeniable that some of the enlightened governments of the Gulf (particularly Qatar, Dubai, Jordan, Oman and to some extent, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and other UAE emirates) are more progressive and pro-growth than their populace. So, there's probably a necessary government role in starting the process, but the state needs to get out of the way after giving an initial push.

I think the most promising efforts are bringing top universities from around the world to the region, and establishing new schools like KAUST, which will be both centers of research and product lots of well educated people. Yet, from looking at the students enrolled today, many are from outside the region (mainly, SE Europe) local nationals are more likely to go overseas for an education, or to take a ministry, banking, or other safe, well-paid job fed by energy wealth vs. starting a high risk new business.

Ultimately, investment by government can only provide a foundation for private development. Building infrastructure (physical, legal, and educational/human capital) with oil wealth, until the oil wealth runs dry (solving the resource curse) so the best and brightest then go start productive businesses, is probably the solution, but could take decades. On the other hand, if you look at where the Arab/Muslim world was 50 years ago, and where it is today, there's good reason to be optimistic about the future though, so all hope is not lost . :enjoy:
 
As you've mentioned I also acknowledge the Islamic Golden Age. It was an historical phenomenon. Islamic scholars back then provided a lot of scientific contribution to philosophy, mathematics, medicine, politics, chemistry etc. Islamic scholars were pioneers in many fields of science and their books and articles were translated into Latin and made their way into Europe. Examples like Ibn-Sina (or Avicenna in Latinized form) had not only made huge developments in the Middle East but also made a lot of contributions in European scientific environment. Back then Islamic civilization and European civilization was somewhat in balance and comparable. However it was back than. Today European civilization is light years ahead of us. China was a great empire back then with lot's of scientific discoveries. They have discovered compass and gun powder both were enough to change evertyhing. Yet they don't seek returning to Ming era and restore that culture. They look forward and try to come up with a new system that can make their civilization great again. They are reinventing themselves. Just like we should do.

One of the fundamental principles of Islam is education since the ink of a scholar is more holier than the blood of a martyr and society must be governed on the rule of law, which must provide sanctity of life to all different creeds. Historically the scholars of Islam have extensively debated the topic of governance and how the rebellious actions of the public in removing a tyrannical head of state is considered forbidden. The elucidation behind such a philosophical doctrine stems from distancing 'fitna' within society, which causes unnecessary bloodshed and a vacuum of instability. Even though I adhere to the Sunni school of thought, the protesters who initially rebelled against Assad in Syria have committed an action outside the principles of Islam. By meticulously analyzing historical data on the Islamic world, a person should come to the conclusion that stability in our society was achieved,because internal rebellion was virtually non-existent. The scholars of Islam were pivotal in providing contribution to scientific discoveries, because the cultural environment of learning from other civilizations was prominent and the Europeans themselves eventually adopted a similar framework with their system. Chinese civilization is beautiful and its relationship with Islam has been very good, because remember China has 56 ethnic groups and although the Han society has the largest majority in the country, we must never forget the unique cultural heritage of other groups. China has only progressed forward because it has evolved and learned from its mistakes. The opium wars in the 19th century devastated the country in which millions of civilians were killed in the process, which was further enhanced by successive rebellions that virtually crippled the Ming dynasty and allowed western coalition groups to plunder the country. The Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution even to this day has a significant psychological impact on the older generation of Chinese who suffered greatly from mismanagement of resources and political oppression. China has only been allowed to evolve since 1978, when the CCP finally came to its sense and this is to their credit. Islam has no need to reform instead Muslim's must educate themselves in learning the traditions of our religion. On the other hand Muslim States have remained static because the western world primarily America will never allow us to flourish. Majority of the Muslims in the Sunni denomination hate the Al-Saud family, however they have remained in power because they have close links to Washington as it suits their agenda and its no wonder why 20,000 imams who have questioned them are tortured in prison. In the contemporary world we see part-time imams who read some knowledge on the internet then claim to become experts overnight. Historically the basic education of an imam use to last for a minimum of 10 years, however these new innovators are a curse on society.


That's why we need reforms not only on the front of radical Islam, but as a whole. Today many of the Muslim population still living in rural areas, still living an agrarian lifestyle with a simple mind. We should not only fight radical Islam but also we should invent Islam that can be integrated with an urban lifestyle. Our perception of economy, employment, politics, human rights are still problemmatic. That's why I always say that Islam should be part of an individual belief but states should be run with a secular mentality. I mean just like we don't have political Buddhism, we shouldn't have political Islam. We can be muslim majority countries. That doesn't mean that everyone should be religious, or we should reinvent every economic or social theory with Islamic norms. I think we should do the opposite. We should reinvent the role of Islam in the political and economical sphere.
!

Radical Islam has no place in society and the only way to purge such a concept is to eliminate the theology of Salafism. In addition, Western interference must stop at all costs, because they have exacerbated the problem in the first place, henceforth the reason why people in Pakistan tend to respect the Chinese is because they never poke their noisy in the domestic affairs of others in most cases. In my opinion their should be a political system revolved around Islam, because our belief system does not except the idea of interests rates and the current form of paper money, therefore the economic system must have Islamic characteristics. The reason why Muslim countries are backward economically, because of a a resource curse which increases corruption and bureaucracy within society and brings no innovation. I think our opinions will be different on this issue, however I will definitely respect your ideas since they could work in the future. Turkey has become a very robust economy and many in the Muslim world are proud to see its rise in global arena, although the recent problems in the Middle East could dampen this effect. Pakistan needs to be independent from Saudi influence and this will be achieved when we stop buying oil from them and purge all lobbyists in their favor.


Unfortunately collapse of Islamic Golden Age was more associated with the Mongol Invasion. Islamic nations had to fight in two fronts one front is the Crusades and the other one is Gengis Khan. Regarding Crusades there were a balance of power between Islam and Europe. It was clear that both sides wouldn't be able to destroy the other. However thanks to Gengis Khan the whole civilization is collapsed. Libraries were burnt. Scholars were killed. A whole generation of thinkers were perished. A civilization was erased from the face of the Earth.

The collapse of the Golden Age of Islam is associate with the Mongol invasion by Halagu Khan, however Islamic civilization was relatively prominent up until the 17th century depending on which particular region you are looking at. The Mughals for example distinctly shaped the Indian landscape and its effects can even be seen today. The Ottoman Empire and its millet system has fascinated the western world, because they were considered an economic and political superpower and the renaissance period could not have occurred without them. Sheikh Rumi work in America is gaining more prominence than even Shakespeare. True the balance of power between Europe and the East was fairly constant, however if Sultan Mehmet did not die in such a early age and Amir Timur did not defeat Sultan Bayezid I.


Definitely agree. Head of the snake is Gulf countries. Their clerics spread all those hateful, radical and barbaric ideas. They are living in the Middle Ages.

Its extremely amusing to witness the outcome how these Gulf States have individuals who are prone act pious in their own countries, but then become wild in the western world. The largest purchasers of high end escorts are the Saudi Princes and in Mayfair the amount of alcohol and money spent on luxury items can be observed by everyone. In the UK, a Saudi Prince killed his servant in a sick twisted perversion act to gain satisfaction and he was thrown back to his country with no punishment, because the rule for the powerful and rich is different to the poor masses...bloody hypocrites.

I also agree with you on this one. I've repeatedly said that our right wing lunatic friends in Turkey who supports Uyghur cause doesn't do it on the ground of religion but they do it on the grounds of nationalism. Ethnic seperatist movements are percieved much more legitimate in the West then radical Islam. CPC doesn't want :Uyghur cause to evolve into something like Tibet and they have every right to want that. That's why they are trying to find an Islamic motive behind Uyghur attacks and tell the world that it's fighting against radical Islam just like the rest.

Personally I cannot understand why some Turkish members want to support the Uighur cause, because they have been living in China for centuries and have no formal link with the current setup of the Turkish territorial boundaries. Nationalism is extremely unhealthy in my opinion because an individual develops the misconceived perception of becoming superior to another person who belongs to a different ethnic group. From my prospective this is an internal matter which China will need to resolve and since I have lived and worked in China all other Muslim communities like the Hui have no problem. This is because the Hui follow Sufism while the Uighur's have been indoctrinated with Salafism.

We should also have good relations with China. I mean think about it, many people in the forums are actually angry with China and Russia about in the grounds of Islamic sensitivity. There was a thread last week that was stating that Pakistan might have a hard time with it's Islamic neighbours because of having good relations with China. This is definitely most absurd thing I've ever heard. Think of the social dynamics. Today where would a practicing Muslim live without social preassure when living abroad? Most of the right wing in Europe and US hates Muslims. They are discriminated like hell. Take a look at China? Would any Chinese exclude you from his/her social circle if you are a practicing Muslim? Odds are very low. There is a huge group in the Western bloc that hates religious Muslims. Would we also want to ruin Far East for us?

The Muslim world in general needs to have a good relationship with China and Russia, because they are much more sincere than their western counterparts and our relationship with Beijing will never change, since the amount of mutual respect given to each other is unique A prosperous stable Xinjiang will benefit Pakistan, but more importantly the rest of the Central Asian peripheries. The Government of China understand's the assumption that Muslims are not to be blamed, however nutjobs need to be neutralized.
 
Turkey is by far the most advanced Muslim dominant country on earth. Malaysia is just a wannabe , without the ethnic Chinese and natural resources , Malaysia won't be any better than Lebanon . Lol :lol:
I have to agree with you on this one. The Muslim Malays are conducting demographic engineering on the local Chinese. The rich ones have already took their money left.

Malaysia at one time was supposed to be the successor to Japan. Thanks to Muslim took over of parliament in the early 90s, it's gone downhill from there.
 
Your article strike on the root of Turkey's problem but a lot of extremist or too nationalisticTurkish members will not admit this problem. Trust me , Turkey decades of success will go downhill if extremist and nationalism blind their vision.

But Erdogan rule Turkey more like an authoritarian. He is the wrong person to lead Turkey into the future.
Sucking on US and Zionist is always a bad idea.
 
However the Uighur problem in China, also stems from poverty, unemployment and social alienation.
(My English is not good,I hope you can understand what I say..)

Yes...And poverty gap between Han and Uighur in Xinjiang is huge.(It causes mentality unbalance)
However,let me say more...It isn't the government's fault or due to unfair treatment..
What you should know firstly.
**Most(88.15%) Uighur live in South Xinjiang.(Kashgar-36.01%,Hotan-18%+,Akesu-18%+,Kizilsu,Bayingolin)
--Resource:新疆维吾尔族人口的比例及分布图 - 社会学 - 道客巴巴

QQ截图20151205201233.jpg

In all 56 ethnic groups,Uighur is in the lower middle level(According to PQLI in many years ago,and it is said that the gap between Uighur and most other ethnic group is widening)
They are lack of education and most of them can't speak mandarin.(especially the old)
Most of them are poorly educated,so they are easy to be incited..

Why Uighur is poor?
Since Sink Road has been neglected by the world(cuz the prosperous marine transportation industry took the place of surface transport),Uighur could't earn much by trade,then they became backward.
South Xinjiang is surrounded by high mountains,transportation relies highly on road,it is a natural barrier which prevent Uighur from being rich and living well.(It's a long-lasting problem,maybe it is sloved now,but their undevelopement will last for a long time)
They are lack of big cities,which can be a demonstration center of development in many respects,such as technology,consumption,moral,culture and economy,etc.Although some of their county-cities become so-called city now,you can truely ignore their influences...(And South Xinjiang is far away from Urumqi,where Uighur lives is hard to get economic pervasion and industry transfer)
Therefore,Uighur itself is a closed ethnic group,it is lack of communication with other ethnic groups and the outside world.
They love their native land,though they will live in poverty,most of them hardly leave South Xinjiang.(Those who can get a high pay job in other provinces almost quit and go back to South Xinjiang after finishing college study)
In most cases,people in undeveloped area will move out and look for a job,especially in villages,most youth live village and head for big cities,but Uighur is different from Han.

Farmers are religious,value their religion much more than material life.
People don't set up competition awareness.(2015 there is a Uighur girl became a science champion,however she lives in Urumqi,so it can't stand for the situation of South Xinjiang...)

Incite
I remember a previous rumor,it incited ethnic relations between Uighur and other ethnic groups,and unfortunately many people believe it...It's shameful...I don't want to say what it is...
But it does harm to the Uighur people who move to inland/coastal area.
Now it's suspected that someone incites on purpose...
Well...Can you read Chinese?I can send relative article to you...

What are these flags?Is there a CCP flag?

Take a look at China? Would any Chinese exclude you from his/her social circle if you are a practicing Muslim? Odds are very low.
:p:Months before the most famous TV station in China showed great scenery in Turkey,many Chinese soon fell in love with Turkey's scenery,and wanted to travel in Turkey.However the attack shocked Chinese...
QQ截图20151205222236.jpg
QQ截图20151205222246.jpg
QQ截图20151205222311.jpg
QQ截图20151205222320.jpg

QQ图片20151205222131.jpg
 
Malaysia and Singapore should be part of Indonesia from the beginning, it was your folks who ruined our Confrontation and Nationalism Socialist agendas 8-)

@pr1v4t33r @Jakartans@PkDef

ahahahahahahahaha............Are you sure Indonesia would have been able to take good care of Malaysia and Singapore(the later due to being majority ethnic Chinese is far more advanced than any country in South East Asia and among the most developed country even in the whole of Asia).

Indonesia is barely doing well itself. So i don't think adding in Malaysia and a farrrrrrr advanced city state/country like Singapore will have made much difference on Indonesia's economic performance. So you shouldn't regret Britain's role in limiting Indonesia's influence/dominance over these countries.:partay:

After all, Western New Guinea(Papua) is still grappling with being part of Indonesia even today:guns:.:D
 
Last edited:
ahahahahahahahaha............Are you sure Indonesia would have been able to take good care of Malaysia and Singapore(the later due to being majority Chinese is far more advanced than any country in South East Asia and top tier even in the whole of Asia). Indonesia is barely doing well itself. So i don't think adding in Malaysia and a farrrrrrr advanced city state/country like Singapore will have made much difference on Indonesia's economic performance. So you shouldn't regret Britain's role in limiting Indonesia's influence/dominance over these countries.:partay:

After all, Western New Guinea(Papua) is still grappling with being of Indonesia even today:guns:.:D

I am admit, if Singapore and Malaysia is more progressive and had an advanced economy compared to us. But one must take notes. Actually they are starting with better conditions compared to Indonesia in 1945. They had a more educated masses, better infrastructure (Singapore since beginning is a seat of English crown in ASEAN and been duped as English fortress or Gibraltar of Asia), had a comprehensive tax collection system and better industrial base. (although you can see it as just my mere excuse).

Indonesia, being a large yet a very undeveloped country since beginning is more like a collection of dwelling forests people at the beginning of our Independence day (that's why i never taken seriously when people (especially the ones who had a more advanced civilization called us barbaric as that's actually hold some truth in it). Netherlands before they left actually build some decent infrastructure in Indonesia, but that's not enough and they only centered around Java and Sumatra and much of them been destroyed during our long Independence war and war against rebellions. Indonesian Kalimantan at the times of confrontation (in 1963) actually doesn't have land route to links between East Kalimantan Provinces and West Kalimantan Province. The largest city in Kalimantan at the time is actually Balikpapan an oil processing center run by Caltex and Royal Dutch Shell companies. Being a diverse in ethnics, culture and religions it doesn't always sound nice and ring on everyone ears. In the pasts (during 50 to 60's era) we had more rebellions and ethnic classes than any other country in the world. Some rebel even strong enough and have an airforce with bomber squadrons to backing up their ground forces. It took more than three decades to change all of this mess into something manageable. We need a lot of efforts and resources just to make the collections of this archipelago into what you can called a modern Country. The economic progress is just starting after orde lama (old order) liquidated....



Papua case, actually since the beginning they had different cultures with the rest of us (for being the only Melanesian culture provinces), but the problems will soon be ceased as transmigration policy had starting to bear fruits and more economic programs had been stipulate to alleviate the poor conditions of the masses and we actually learning a lot from our pasts especially after Timor case.

But actually,till this day i will always to support the idea of Pan Nusantara some says Maphilindo (our version of Megali Idea :devil:), after all of this hardship and enormous challenge upon us and our capability to get through and getting stronger after passing them, i am always wonder if God actually blessing us as the largest country and economy in this region to guide all of Malay races and country into a single entity called Indonesia. 8-)
 
Turkey is by far the most "successful" muslim nation.

As for the authoritarian argument I can agree with but there is something SERIOUSLY fucking wrong with a populace that has to be controlled via a dictator.
 
No thanks but the Chinese "system" is just a new version of the USSR system which lead to the death of thousands.
 
transformation and modernism a road to Zionism world order. although i am not against being advance just not to nwo order way.
 
I am admit, if Singapore and Malaysia is more progressive and had an advanced economy compared to us. But one must take notes. Actually they are starting with better conditions compared to Indonesia in 1945. They had a more educated masses, better infrastructure (Singapore since beginning is a seat of English crown in ASEAN and been duped as English fortress or Gibraltar of Asia), had a comprehensive tax collection system and better industrial base. (although you can see it as just my mere excuse).

Indonesia, being a large yet a very undeveloped country since beginning is more like a collection of dwelling forests people at the beginning of our Independence day (that's why i never taken seriously when people (especially the ones who had a more advanced civilization called us barbaric as that's actually hold some truth in it). Netherlands before they left actually build some decent infrastructure in Indonesia, but that's not enough and they only centered around Java and Sumatra and much of them been destroyed during our long Independence war and war against rebellions. Indonesian Kalimantan at the times of confrontation (in 1963) actually doesn't have land route to links between East Kalimantan Provinces and West Kalimantan Province. The largest city in Kalimantan at the time is actually Balikpapan an oil processing center run by Caltex and Royal Dutch Shell companies. Being a diverse in ethnics, culture and religions it doesn't always sound nice and ring on everyone ears. In the pasts (during 50 to 60's era) we had more rebellions and ethnic classes than any other country in the world. Some rebel even strong enough and have an airforce with bomber squadrons to backing up their ground forces. It took more than three decades to change all of this mess into something manageable. We need a lot of efforts and resources just to make the collections of this archipelago into what you can called a modern Country. The economic progress is just starting after orde lama (old order) liquidated....



Papua case, actually since the beginning they had different cultures with the rest of us (for being the only Melanesian culture provinces), but the problems will soon be ceased as transmigration policy had starting to bear fruits and more economic programs had been stipulate to alleviate the poor conditions of the masses and we actually learning a lot from our pasts especially after Timor case.

But actually,till this day i will always to support the idea of Pan Nusantara some says Maphilindo (our version of Megali Idea :devil:), after all of this hardship and enormous challenge upon us and our capability to get through and getting stronger after passing them, i am always wonder if God actually blessing us as the largest country and economy in this region to guide all of Malay races and country into a single entity called Indonesia. 8-)

I agree to some extent.
Back before independence, both Singapore and Malaya (as it was then) were troubled by communist insurgence. The British and Malayan forces were given the opportunity by a patient populace to neutralise his threat before full independence. I also red somewhere(cant remember.lol) that the Tunku (Tunku Abdul Rahman) deserves an enormous amount of credit for that. Other facets such as the Briggs plan, which offered citizenship, voting rights, land rights and land along with access to healthcare and education to the previously vulnerable Chinese peasants who had few rights at all.:sick:

Malaysia was a country that had democratic institutions in place, a populace that valued them and respected the sultans, and few threats to the political system. In addition, both had a strong ally in the United Kingdom and Commonwealth, and probably a lot of support from the United States.:usflag:

This political stability, in turn, led to investor confidence. Compared with other south east Asian countries, Malaysia and Singapore were blessed. China at the time was under hard-line communist rule; Vietnam had conflict; Cambodia had the Khmer Rouge; Indonesia had coups replacing Sukarno with Suharto, attempted invasions ("liberations") of Malaysian territory and charges of corruption and genocide; the Philippines had Marcos and conflict with the NPA; Burma / Myanmar was ruled by a fascist junta; Laos had problems from the Vietnam conflict.:sniper::suicide::ph34r:

The other comparatively stable areas of south east asia were Japan, Hong Kong, Macau and Thailand. These former places were also quite well developed whereas the latter was perceived as poor compared with the first three.

I would also guess that the large Chinese population of both countries tended to be quite entrepreneurial which considerably aided development.:agree:

I will agree with you that if not for political instability in the coming years, we'll probably be seeing Indonesia Economy just few years behind Malaysia and Singapore instead of tens of years like today.

First "lost opportunities" was during what Indonesians called the War for Independence.These 5 years war (1945-1950) plunged the Dutch East Indies GDP to a very deep abyss. Singapore and Malaysia were in the much more stable post World War recovery during this period(inheriting British institutional/legal system). What made it worse, rather than keeping the Dutch-owned companies run normally and continue contributing to the economy, the Indonesian nationalized them and practically killed those companies.:disagree:

Indonesia had the opportunity to recover some lost ground in the 50s and the 60s where the entire region was engulfed by communist insurgencies and, especially for Malaysia, racial tension. Again, this opportunity was squandered by the 2 decades of economic mismanagement by Sukarno, Indonesia first president. Instead of running sensible macroeconomic policy, he spent most of state budget on what Indonesian (later) called Mercusuar (light house) grandiose projects such as the Monas monument, the National Stadium, the Asian Games. The "confrontation" with Malaysia and the war for West Papua also did not help either.:butcher::(

By the time the Indonesians started making sense again in the 70s, they are already 20 years behind Malaysia and probably 50 years behind Singapore.:hitwall:
Anyway at least Indonesia today is stable and growing quite healthily , so there is hope now.:)

As for your dream of a greater Indonesia union encompasing Malaysia and Singapore, i can only say you are beginning to sound like my Vietnamese friend niceguy.:lol:
 
I agree to some extent.
Back before independence, both Singapore and Malaya (as it was then) were troubled by communist insurgence. The British and Malayan forces were given the opportunity by a patient populace to neutralise his threat before full independence. I also red somewhere(cant remember.lol) that the Tunku (Tunku Abdul Rahman) deserves an enormous amount of credit for that. Other facets such as the Briggs plan, which offered citizenship, voting rights, land rights and land along with access to healthcare and education to the previously vulnerable Chinese peasants who had few rights at all.:sick:

Malaysia was a country that had democratic institutions in place, a populace that valued them and respected the sultans, and few threats to the political system. In addition, both had a strong ally in the United Kingdom and Commonwealth, and probably a lot of support from the United States.:usflag:

This political stability, in turn, led to investor confidence. Compared with other south east Asian countries, Malaysia and Singapore were blessed. China at the time was under hard-line communist rule; Vietnam had conflict; Cambodia had the Khmer Rouge; Indonesia had coups replacing Sukarno with Suharto, attempted invasions ("liberations") of Malaysian territory and charges of corruption and genocide; the Philippines had Marcos and conflict with the NPA; Burma / Myanmar was ruled by a fascist junta; Laos had problems from the Vietnam conflict.:sniper::suicide::ph34r:

The other comparatively stable areas of south east asia were Japan, Hong Kong, Macau and Thailand. These former places were also quite well developed whereas the latter was perceived as poor compared with the first three.

I would also guess that the large Chinese population of both countries tended to be quite entrepreneurial which considerably aided development.:agree:

I will agree with you that if not for political instability in the coming years, we'll probably be seeing Indonesia Economy just few years behind Malaysia and Singapore instead of tens of years like today.

First "lost opportunities" was during what Indonesians called the War for Independence.These 5 years war (1945-1950) plunged the Dutch East Indies GDP to a very deep abyss. Singapore and Malaysia were in the much more stable post World War recovery during this period(inheriting British institutional/legal system). What made it worse, rather than keeping the Dutch-owned companies run normally and continue contributing to the economy, the Indonesian nationalized them and practically killed those companies.:disagree:

Indonesia had the opportunity to recover some lost ground in the 50s and the 60s where the entire region was engulfed by communist insurgencies and, especially for Malaysia, racial tension. Again, this opportunity was squandered by the 2 decades of economic mismanagement by Sukarno, Indonesia first president. Instead of running sensible macroeconomic policy, he spent most of state budget on what Indonesian (later) called Mercusuar (light house) grandiose projects such as the Monas monument, the National Stadium, the Asian Games. The "confrontation" with Malaysia and the war for West Papua also did not help either.:butcher::(

By the time the Indonesians started making sense again in the 70s, they are already 20 years behind Malaysia and probably 50 years behind Singapore.:hitwall:
Anyway at least Indonesia today is stable and growing quite healthily , so there is hope now.:)

As for your dream of a greater Indonesia union encompasing Malaysia and Singapore, i can only say you are beginning to sound like my Vietnamese friend niceguy.:lol:

It's better for Soeharto to get rid of Soekarno in 1965, after all if not Soeharto maybe someone from Communist Party who will replace him and Indonesia will be in more utter chaos, at least there is a prospect for a large scale Civil War between communist led government against religious centrist populace backed up by Army. But the worst case scenario is not happened and Soeharto can replace Soekarno and Indonesia banish Communist Party elements for good (and with more than 500.000 people bloods).

BTW, the UK and US good guy Soeharto is actually more imperialist (and realist at the same time) than Soekarno, under his leadership actually Indonesia can get Papua through voting and invading Timor Leste for more than 20 years. For greater Indonesia concept, actually i just starting to become a troll for a while (in which actually i starting to like this role :p:). Seriously though, what we had done in the last 70 year is kind of wonder works, arguably you will not find another country which is as large as Indonesia, as diverse as ours in the matter of religion, ethnicity and languages and race, with God bless natural challenge (we are sitting in the most active Volcano rings of Indo-Asia-Pacific area), standing across the largest archipelago in the world our total land and sea area is more than 6 million Kilometer square (so can you imagining on how to manage an area which is much larger than European Union and population of 250 million (three times of Germany population) with much less money and resources than any Western European country) and yet still manage to hold as one Country and still progressed. Just look at India-Pakistan-Bangladesh case, Soviet Union, Yugoslavia in which actually all of them had a better prospect to become a Single large entity than us but it is us who is still prevail till today.
 

Back
Top Bottom