当前位置:首页 >  域名 >  正文 > 欢场春梦

  交易 任务 SEO服务 站长团购 联盟

欢场春梦

What the West's assimilation accusations against China reveal about its own historical burdens_我的网站

苍天有泪

一 |     (ECNS)-- China's newly implemented Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion Law has elicited a predictable response from certain Western media outlets. Whenever ethnic unity is referenced, some Western critics rush to frame it as "assimilation" or a push for uniform national identity.    Fan Yichou, associate professor at the Law School of Minzu University of China, argues that such misinterpretations arise primarily from projecting Western historical nation-state building trajectories onto China's ethnic policies.    Put simply, some Western observers do not view China from the perspective of its domestic social realities, but rather judge it through the lens of their own historical experience.    Fan argued that the traditional Western nation-state model rests on a core premise: one ethnic community ought to align with one sovereign state, with political boundaries largely overlapping ethnic territories. To build culturally homogeneous nation-states, most Western powers historically sought to eradicate internal ethnic diversity through assimilation, exclusion, and other coercive measures. Such nation-building drives were often accompanied by territorial conquest, mass population displacement, and systemic violence.    He drew on arguments laid out by Canadian political philosopher Will Kymlicka, who observes that the classical European template of nation-building rested on an implicit consensus: states should strive to become culturally homogeneous, by either assimilating national minorities or expelling them. For centuries, this ideal of a mono-national state shaped state policy across almost all Western European countries, with Switzerland stands out as the only major exception.    This deep-rooted historical trajectory continues to frame contemporary discourse on ethnic governance.    A stark modern illustration emerged in 2025, when Danish local authorities took away the newly-born daughter of an 18-year-old Inuit mother from Greenland just one hour after birth following a controversial parenting competency assessment. Her case was far from isolated. According to reports by the BBC and other media outlets, another Greenlandic mother had all three of her children under state custody. She was first subjected to a so-called parenting competency test after social services raised concerns about the language development of her eldest daughter. Although the Danish government has decided to stop using such tests on Greenlandic families, local authorities have yet to halt the practice.    The enduring harm of assimilationist policies extends far beyond this Danish case. UNESCO’s Memory of the World archives document that Canada's Indigenous residential school system continuously operated for nearly 150 years, with the explicit state objective of assimilating Indigenous children into settler society. Generations of Indigenous children were forcibly separated from their families, severed from their ancestral languages, cultural traditions, and intergenerational knowledge systems.        The United States has grappled with comparable challenges. According to a 2025 Associated Press report, Native American children in California are roughly about four times more likely to enter the foster-care system than their peers.    Newborns separated from their mother shortly after birth. Generations of children torn apart from their families and ancestral languages. Indigenous youth who remain vastly overrepresented in foster-care placements to this day. All these are legacies of the West's long-standing obsession with assimilation.    That explains why, when some in the West hear China speak of "ethnic unity," they instinctively equate it with "assimilation." In reality, they are projecting their own social trauma onto China.    China's context, however, is fundamentally different.    As Fan Yichou notes, China has long been a unified multi-ethnic country. Within the Chinese tradition, political unity has not demanded cultural uniformity. Instead, unity and diversity have coexisted across most of the nation's history.    This outlook finds theoretical expression in the concept of plurality-in-unity put forward by renowned Chinese sociologist Fei Xiaotong. In his framework, China's 56 ethnic groups represent the plurality, whereas the Chinese nation embodies unity.    From this perspective, the Ethnic Unity and Progress Promotion Law is not designed to eliminate ethnic differences. Instead, it seeks to strengthen a shared sense of belonging while respecting cultural diversity.    This distinction highlights a broader divergence between China and the West in approaching identity and social cohesion.    In many Western societies, historical assimilation sought to diminish group differences and compel minority groups to conform to dominant-culture norms. By contrast, China's emphasis on forging a strong sense of community for the Chinese nation is not intended to obliterate diversity. It seeks to build shared civic and national identity, while enabling all ethnic groups to sustain their own languages, customs, and cultural traditions.        Ethnic groups may speak different languages, practice different customs, and vary in development level. Yet they can still uphold shared dedication to national progress and a common sense of belonging within a unified multi-ethnic state.    Genuine ethnic unity does not require everyone to fit into the same mold. It means ensuring that different ethnic groups can participate in national development while maintaining their own cultural characteristics and thriving with equal dignity and equitable opportunities.    So when some in the West equate China's "ethnic unity" with "assimilation," their judgment stems not from an accurate assessment of China’s reality, but from a subconscious projection of their own historical burdens, contemporary social anxieties, and deep-rooted institutional scars onto China's ethnic policies.    They are either unwilling or unable to fully comprehend China's governance philosophy and practices, yet arbitrarily pass arrogant judgment on the country. The outcome of this biased approach will be no exception of absurd narratives that fundamentally contradict objective reality.                    。    

原标题:确诊病例呈波动下降!成都疫情形势整体向好,更多发布会信息→9月13日,成都市人民政府新闻办公室举行疫情防控工作新闻发布会,通报疫情防控最新情况。近两天新增病例降到50例以下 成都疫情形势整体向好成都市人民政府副秘书长、成都市卫生健康委员会主任杨小广通报,成都市新增人数从8月26日开始呈现上升趋势,29日达到峰值,逐步下降。从9月8日开始每日新增病例都在100例以下,近两天新增病例已经降到了50例以下,成都疫情形势整体向好。当前,在全体市民的共同努力下,清零攻坚行动稳步推进。

二 | 自9月1日以来,我市已开展11轮全员核酸检测,确诊病例呈波动下降趋势,但每日仍有社会面检出确诊,疫情防控不容松懈。成都锦江区等10个区域继续每日一检,不漏一人杨小广指出,为坚决阻断病毒传播链条,请广大市民朋友按照成都市疫情防控整体部署,成都高新区(不含高新西区)、锦江区、青羊区、金牛区、武侯区、成华区、龙泉驿区、新都区、双流区、郫都区团结街道继续按照“应检必检”要求,完成全员核酸检测,每日一检,不漏一人;其他已逐步有序恢复正常生产生活秩序的区(市)县按当地要求进行核酸检测等防控措施,上下班尽量做到单位—住址“两点一线”,原则上不出本行政区域。成都9区仍处于严格管控社会流动状态 所有市民必须严格居家成都市疾控中心应急办主任范双凤表示,成都市疫情自8月29日以来,逐步下降,近两日新发病例已降至50例以下,疫情形势总体向好。

三 | 但每日仍有社会面病例检出。分析发现极个别非保供人员没有严格遵守居家要求,外出流动,导致了疫情的传播。“因此,我们再次强调,高新南区、锦江区、青羊区、金牛区、武侯区、成华区、双流区、龙泉驿区、新都区,9区仍处于严格管控社会流动状态,所有市民必须严格居家,除就近购买必备生活物资外,不可外出。尤其是个体商户等,不能违反规定外出经营,须严格遵守区域内疫情防控要求,居家不外出,不营业。区域内所有人员,每天坚持做好核酸检测,外出采购时尽量缩短时间,全程做好防护。”而天府新区(庙山社区、小桥社区除外)、东部新区、高新西区、新津区、邛崃市、青白江区、大邑县、都江堰市、彭州市、崇州市、温江区、蒲江县、郫都区(团结街道除外)、金堂县、简阳市,这些已经逐步恢复常态化防控的区(市)县市民们,要严格遵守防疫规定,除保障城市运行的工作人员持证通行外,其他市民原则上不出行政区,也不要聚集采购物品。成都恢复生产生活的区域将加大公共交通保障成都市交通运输局副局长王清宇介绍,在交通出行方面,地铁首末班次不变,有序恢复生产生活的区域将适当调整频次和地铁出入口,适当增加备用车辆数。公交方面,恢复生产生活的区域,将有序加大公交班次投放,未恢复的区域,将保障好涉及医院、农贸市场等点位的公共交通服务。在机场、火车站等交通枢纽,成都市加大对出租车的调度,保障市民游客的出行需求。确有出行需求的成都市民请尽量做到“两点一线”成都市交通运输局副局长王清宇介绍,严格落实火车站、高速公路服务区、公交封闭首末站和BRT站厅、地铁站等重点交通场站乘客测温、亮码扫码、通风消杀、口罩防护“四个100%”的防护措施。地铁、公交、出租车等运营单位增加交通运输工具通风消杀频次。地铁、公交、巡游出租车等从业人员严格落实个人防护、健康监测等疫情防控措施,凭电子通行证、工作证(含交通运输部门核发的服务资格证)或单位工作证明及24小时核酸阴性证明出入小区,提供交通运输服务保障。王清宇提醒广大市民朋友,公共交通领域严格执行成都市疫情防控指挥部关于“市民进出各类公共场所、乘坐公共交通工具等须持24小时内核酸检测阴性证明。来(返)蓉人员在完成‘入川即检’后,持始发地48小时内核酸检测阴性证明乘坐公共交通工具。”的要求。

四 | 当前疫情防控形势依然复杂严峻,确有出行需求的市民朋友们,尽量做到“两点一线”,主动配合疫情防控检查,遵守扫码、亮码、测温等各项规定,做好个人防护,守护好您和家人的健康。推动重大项目建设各行业制定细分领域务实管用措施在当前疫情形势下,如何统筹疫情防控和经济社会发展,在加强行业疫情防控的同时,有序推动重大项目建设?据成都市发改委副主任李坚峻介绍,市发改委与经信、商务、交通、邮政、市场监管等部门密切协同,建立了行业疫情防控组专班工作机制,坚持做好常态化每日调度。结合各行业特点和防控实际,科学研判各薄弱环节传播风险,加强定期通报,压实防控责任。推动各行业及时制定细分领域务实管用措施,例如工业领域推行“防疫泡泡”模式,科伦药业在成都所有生产线闭环管理高效运转,7个生产厂区均实现满负荷生产,高质高效保障社会医疗需求,通威股份三个基地生产全线开满,预计全年产能突破70GW;各行业“白名单”机制也为全市生产生活秩序有序恢复提供了有力保障。(记者 陈淋 张宇)来源:四川新闻网返回搜狐,查看更多责任编辑:

五 |

Current article:http://www.zongchaeiwengshuabaisisuofu.sbs/x5hefoc/o54ik.docx

Published on:09:59:05


    文章推荐

    分类排行榜

    专栏文章

    更多>

    服务推荐