Yesterday’s New York Times illustrated its coverage of the Uyghur uprising in western China with a map titled “Minorities in China”. The print edition had a similar map.
Move the dial up to 50 percent and you’ll notice a funny thing: according to the Times, Uyghurs are actually a majority in Xinjiang (or, as they call it, East Turkestan). Same thing with Tibet: Tibetans are a majority in Tibet.
(Actually, neither of these statements are probably true. The Chinese government has sent so many Han Chinese colonists to the West that Uyghurs and Tibetans may have already lost their majority status. But I digress.)
The point is: Where they live, Uyghurs are a majority. Yet they’re dubbed–in the title–minorities.
Imagine a state that was 55% African-American. When discussing the regional struggle for control WITHIN that state, would it be accurate to call African-Americans a minority? A national minority, sure. But not just a plain old minority.




