China has approved a sweeping new law which claims to help promote “ethnic unity” - but critics say it will further erode the rights of minority groups.

On paper, it aims to promote integration among the 56 officially recognised ethnic groups, dominated by the Han Chinese, through education and housing. But critics say it cuts people off from their language and culture.

It mandates that all children should be taught Mandarin before kindergarten and up until the end of high school. Previously students could study most of the curriculum in their native language such as Tibetan, Uyghur or Mongolian.

  • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    We can be both upset at what our ancestors and parents did and integrate new arrivant within the current state of the society they arrive in.

    Both aren’t exclusive. I get what you are saying, but I don’t see that as hypocrisy.

    And again, there is a distinction between integration and assimilation.

    • wpb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Holy shit you are so fucking dense. This has nothing whatsoever to do with immigrants. No one is talking about immigrants but you.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Your argument boils down to : If there is history of colonialism, requiring a basic level of the most spoken language is bad. Otherwise it’s good.

        Society at large has been multi-cultural for as long as human written history has existed through conquest, war and trade.

        There is a possibility to require people to both learn the country’s main language while keeping their culture. I live in a city where that happens on a daily basis and everyone is better for it.

        • wpb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          Your argument boils down to : If there is history of colonialism, requiring a basic level of the most spoken language is bad. Otherwise it’s good.

          Wrong. And obviously so. When I gave the US teaching Mexican immigrants in English as an example of something I’m completely ok with, what did you gather from that? Did you think “aw geeze, I guess this guy really hates it when America teaches Mexican immigrants in English”? Because that’s a pretty dumb thing to think. When I tell you the sky is blue, do you think I really mean it’s purple? There’s no talking to you. You’re doing this on purpose, you have to be