It’s just hard, because I know the people I’m referring to are generally good, empathetic people who care about social justice. They just have unfortunately had their consent manufactured in favor of these pro-imperial/US talking points. They genuinely think there’s a humanitarian crisis and that China is killing a minority. They simply just don’t realize everywhere they’re being informed by is steeping in anti-communist, right wing sources vying to create propaganda.
It’s honestly so much easier dealing with a shitty reactionary than a liberal who simply doesn’t recognize their own biases. And you trying to reveal said propaganda to them comes off as you being a heartless freak trying to justify some terrible act, no matter how legitimate your proof against said narrative is.
Like, what if I am wrong? Idk, sometimes it just feels like I must be, because I’m so outside the narrative. For instance, people trying to justify Israel’s treatment of Palestine is complete BS to me, so isn’t that how my defense of China sounds to said liberal? I just get worried sometimes that I’m the one brainwashed and on the wrong side of history. I don’t want to be the bad guy, I’m just trying to do what I beleive to be right. But isn’t that how every shitty side in history feels?
I don’t remember the specifics, but the one-child policy was never one-child for every couple in the country. You got a bonus kid allowance for falling into certain groups, up to three (maybe four?) children.
You got a bonus kid if you lived in a rural area, you got a bonus kid if you were an ethnic minority, at certain times you could get a bonus kid if your first child was a girl. Apparently over half of Chinese were allowed two kids during most of the one-child policy.
So it’s very possible that Han Chinese in Tibet were allowed two children, and Tibetans were allowed three.