I flagged this question

Has the majority ever seceded?

as being rude or abusive because the question concerns the removing of peoples from countries and both example refer to Muslims, as seen in the quote,

"For a hypothetical example, if China decided to, rather than forcefully assimilate Uighurs into Chinese society, it would be easier for the rest of China to secede from Uighuristan regardless of what the Uighurs thought about it (maybe they like being a part, for some reason, and don't want independence). Or if Northern Macedonia decided to force ethnic Albanians from the west of the country to secede as they would rather have a more culturally homogeneous country."

One might argue that it's just a coincidence both are Muslims but given endemic racist views against Muslims in modern society, that's not likely, or one should be at least aware of that.

One could argue that it's fair because there is actual tension with these groups, of course one could use this argument with other racial minorities in societies, exclusion is never acceptable.

If it that doesn't hit home for someone, imagine one posted something like, 'would it be easier for the rest of this country if they removed the Jewish area from the country rather than assimilate them, no matter what the Jewish people think. Or what if this country forcible removed a Jewish area as they would rather have a more culturally homogeneous country.' Or if this were replaced by another racial minority, latino, black, Asian etc. If one argues that one can't be considered racist against a religion, people are racist against whatever group they decide, it's racism, it never makes sense.

The answers and comments may not use removal of Muslims as examples, but the points have already been made, and many may not realize that the OP examples are of Muslim groups. That doesn't change anything.

I flagged this question again with these explanations and still no action was taken. The question been downvoted at least twice. Thanks for reading.

Edit, in response to answers (thank you for the responses):

By Semaphore

  1. Yes people choose wording that appears less offensive, "inner city people", "it's not a Muslim ban", "separate but equal", "final solution", "we're only against illegal immigration", the results are the same, getting rid of Muslims.
  2. The question isn't posited as, "would China really go as far as removing them?" It says maybe it would be easier for the rest of China, clearly implying that is how one should think about it. And why would north Macedonia want to be "culturally homogeneous"? Implying it's preferable to some (or many, speaking on behalf of others, without any disclaimer), as if it's the only lack of homogeneity anyways.
  3. Even if the question were posited in a way, asking if China would really take such measure, why bring up north Macedonia also? Give a little one place, then take it further, is a common method for segregation and whatnot.

By Mark C. Wallace:

It's clear to me. I don't know anyone's background but I think whether or not someone has been (or possibly would be) on the receiving end tends to affect their perception of related scenarios. The majority negatively affects a minority because people create negative perceptions of them. One could argue that the examples wouldn't negatively affect the minorities, but it says regardless what the minority thinks about it, which shows they wouldn't care if it negatively affects the minority, at best

And @Mark C. Wallace commenting on the question "if there were examples that were ideological or political rather than ethnic or religious." Is a good suggestion.


2 Answers 2

  1. I think you've misread the question. Notice the title says, "secede". It appears to be asking about forcing a minority-dominated region to become independent, as opposed to removing a minority from that region.

  2. Positing a scenario where China and Albania decides to do [something], does not equate to the OP calling for [something] to happen in real life. I'm not seeing any indication that OP is doing anything other than offer examples.

  3. It does not seem unreasonable, given that China has millions of Uighurs in concentration camps, to posit whether they would go one step further. In this case China of course would prefer brutal assimilation to giving up land, but that's besides the point.

I'm not saying you can't form suspicions based on the examples chosen, but they appear unproven given current evidence. Mods have declined the flags as a result.


Thank you for raising the issue; diversity requires constant effort.

I believe that better examples could have been chosen and that would improve the question, but I don't perceive discrimination or any agenda in the question. I don't think that the question is intrinsically flawed, and I don't think that if the question had cited my ethnic or religious background I would have been offended.

If I'm wrong, I'm willing to learn.

@user47014 finds implicit bias; I acknowledge that as valid. As above, I think the discussion is important - scrutiny is necessary.


You must log in to answer this question.