Genocide Poll

[Hestia11 572]

vcczar @Reagan04 @Actinguy @Patine @Conservative Elector 2 @TheMiddlePolitical @WVProgressive @SilentLiberty @pilight @admin_270 @Hestia11 @Herbert Hoover @mlcorcoran @Leuser @upandaway @jvikings1 @Rodja @Edouard @jnewt @Nentomat @Kingthero @Sunnymentoaddict @RFK/JFKfan @Mr.Blood @Zenobiyl @Wiw @MBDemSoc @ThePotatoWalrus @Alxeu @Allyn @Cenzonico @CentristGuy @Ishan @billay @wolves @RI Democrat @lizarraba @lizphairphreak @TheLiberalKitten @MysteryKnight @avatarmushi @servo75 @Mark_W

I wanted to quiz everybody on what they consider genocides. As it's a bit of a controversial topic, I'm going to be putting them on anonymous. 

The definition isn't very clear, so a lot of it is personal belief. For example, the Soviet atrocities against Ukraine aren't considered a genocide, but I would term it one. 

I'm doing a paper on it and thought it would be an interesting poll for everybody

[Hestia11 572]

May not have every one listed, but I did all I could remember and find

[Zenobiyl 209]

Although it is disgusting and wrong, I don’t think China is killing the Uighur people. Therefore, it wouldn’t be a genocide strictly speaking. Although if they are I would change my mind on this stance.

[Mark_W 136]

56 minutes ago, Zenobiyl said:

Although it is disgusting and wrong, I don’t think China is killing the Uighur people. Therefore, it wouldn’t be a genocide strictly speaking. Although if they are I would change my mind on this stance.

They don't have to kill anyone to commit a genocide. You can kill a people, without killing a single person, by preventing reproduction.

[Patine 469]

2 hours ago, Hestia11 said:

vcczar @Reagan04 @Actinguy @Patine @Conservative Elector 2 @TheMiddlePolitical @WVProgressive @SilentLiberty @pilight @admin_270 @Hestia11 @Herbert Hoover @mlcorcoran @Leuser @upandaway @jvikings1 @Rodja @Edouard @jnewt @Nentomat @Kingthero @Sunnymentoaddict @RFK/JFKfan @Mr.Blood @Zenobiyl @Wiw @MBDemSoc @ThePotatoWalrus @Alxeu @Allyn @Cenzonico @CentristGuy @Ishan @billay @wolves @RI Democrat @lizarraba @lizphairphreak @TheLiberalKitten @MysteryKnight @avatarmushi @servo75 @Mark_W

I wanted to quiz everybody on what they consider genocides. As it's a bit of a controversial topic, I'm going to be putting them on anonymous. 

The definition isn't very clear, so a lot of it is personal belief. For example, the Soviet atrocities against Ukraine aren't considered a genocide, but I would term it one. 

I'm doing a paper on it and thought it would be an interesting poll for everybody

I'd say all of them, and I can't believe you forgot the Rwandan Genocide (you got the Burundian one, but they were in two separate countries that just happened to have the same ethnic composition, but that happened at different times and under different specific background events). My Rwandan-Canadian would be quite disappointed in that. Also, despite having been gone softer on by the West for political reasons, the Croatian Army, both of the newly-independent nation proper under their President, Franjo Tudjman, as well as the Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina under his support, committed a fair number of genocidal crimes, and even, on a smaller scale, the Bosniaks did against both Serbs and Croats, as did Kosovars against Serbs and what by 2019 agreement with are now known as North Macedonians, as did the North Macedonians themselves - only Slovenia (the birth country of Melania Trump, no less) has no blood of that sort on their hands in the bloody and wretched affair that was Yugoslavian Civil Wars - though NATO military, government, and most major media groups portrayed the falsehood that all genocidal activity was by Serbs (who committed the majority, but not all) for strictly political reasons and propaganda - because Serbia was the Russian ally, and the others weren't. Also, the DRC, since Mputo Sese-Seko, the whimsical, malignant, bizarre, but bloody-handed and authoritarian cult-state leader, akin to Gadaffi, Niyazhov, and the Kim Family, but who was a Cold War Western ally (mostly U.S. and Portuguese ally - showing the U.S. does court such leaders as allies and not just condemn them and conspire against them) died and the country stopped being Zaire, Mputo's name for the DRC, their have been numerous genocidal actions within it's borders, not just against the Twa (the proper name of the "pygmies," in the Congo Rainforest and East Africa region, as opposed to Khoisians, the proper collective name of "pygmies," in Southern Africa). And about your post above, not everyone agrees, even in terms of formal government recognition, with the Soviet atrocities against Ukraine NOT being considered a genocide - given I walk, almost everyday, past the first Holodomor monument ever put up anywhere in the world, in front of Edmonton City Hall just off of Sir Winston Churchill Square (our main city square), that marks it as a genocide memorial. And finally, many of the more brutal, unjust, heavy-handed, discriminate, AND insidious tactics of the U.S. War on Drugs could be seen as potentially being definable as genocidal. And the Imperial German Genocide in Namibia in the very early 1900's.

[Patine 469]

*delete*

[Hestia11 572]

1 hour ago, Patine said:

I'd say all of them, and I can't believe you forgot the Rwandan Genocide (you got the Burundian one, but they were in two separate countries that just happened to have the same ethnic composition, but that happened at different times and under different specific background events). My Rwandan-Canadian would be quite disappointed in that. Also, despite having been gone softer on by the West for political reasons, the Croatian Army, both of the newly-independent nation proper under their President, Franjo Tudjman, as well as the Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina under his support, committed a fair number of genocidal crimes, and even, on a smaller scale, the Bosniaks did against both Serbs and Croats, as did Kosovars against Serbs and what by 2019 agreement with are now known as North Macedonians, as did the North Macedonians themselves - only Slovenia (the birth country of Melania Trump, no less) has no blood of that sort on their hands in the bloody and wretched affair that was Yugoslavian Civil Wars - though NATO military, government, and most major media groups portrayed the falsehood that all genocidal activity was by Serbs (who committed the majority, but not all) for strictly political reasons and propaganda - because Serbia was the Russian ally, and the others weren't. Also, the DRC, since Mputo Sese-Seko, the whimsical, malignant, bizarre, but bloody-handed and authoritarian cult-state leader, akin to Gadaffi, Niyazhov, and the Kim Family, but who was a Cold War Western ally (mostly U.S. and Portuguese ally - showing the U.S. does court such leaders as allies and not just condemn them and conspire against them) died and the country stopped being Zaire, Mputo's name for the DRC, their have been numerous genocidal actions within it's borders, not just against the Twa (the proper name of the "pygmies," in the Congo Rainforest and East Africa region, as opposed to Khoisians, the proper collective name of "pygmies," in Southern Africa). And about your post above, not everyone agrees, even in terms of formal government recognition, with the Soviet atrocities against Ukraine NOT being considered a genocide - given I walk, almost everyday, past the first Holodomor monument ever put up anywhere in the world, in front of Edmonton City Hall just off of Sir Winston Churchill Square (our main city square), that marks it as a genocide memorial. And finally, many of the more brutal, unjust, heavy-handed, discriminate, AND insidious tactics of the U.S. War on Drugs could be seen as potentially being definable as genocidal. And the Imperial German Genocide in Namibia in the very early 1900's.

Like I said I didnt get them all. I was skimming on Wikipedia before my class dismissed. I wonder if the one about Burundi was close or together with the Rwandan one and it blurred together. I definitely wouldve included that as a genocide. 

Feel free to make your own poll. I said at the beginning its not a complete list. 

[TheMiddlePolitical 98]

1 hour ago, Patine said:

I'd say all of them, and I can't believe you forgot the Rwandan Genocide (you got the Burundian one, but they were in two separate countries that just happened to have the same ethnic composition, but that happened at different times and under different specific background events). My Rwandan-Canadian would be quite disappointed in that. Also, despite having been gone softer on by the West for political reasons, the Croatian Army, both of the newly-independent nation proper under their President, Franjo Tudjman, as well as the Croats in Bosnia-Herzegovina under his support, committed a fair number of genocidal crimes, and even, on a smaller scale, the Bosniaks did against both Serbs and Croats, as did Kosovars against Serbs and what by 2019 agreement with are now known as North Macedonians, as did the North Macedonians themselves - only Slovenia (the birth country of Melania Trump, no less) has no blood of that sort on their hands in the bloody and wretched affair that was Yugoslavian Civil Wars - though NATO military, government, and most major media groups portrayed the falsehood that all genocidal activity was by Serbs (who committed the majority, but not all) for strictly political reasons and propaganda - because Serbia was the Russian ally, and the others weren't. Also, the DRC, since Mputo Sese-Seko, the whimsical, malignant, bizarre, but bloody-handed and authoritarian cult-state leader, akin to Gadaffi, Niyazhov, and the Kim Family, but who was a Cold War Western ally (mostly U.S. and Portuguese ally - showing the U.S. does court such leaders as allies and not just condemn them and conspire against them) died and the country stopped being Zaire, Mputo's name for the DRC, their have been numerous genocidal actions within it's borders, not just against the Twa (the proper name of the "pygmies," in the Congo Rainforest and East Africa region, as opposed to Khoisians, the proper collective name of "pygmies," in Southern Africa). And about your post above, not everyone agrees, even in terms of formal government recognition, with the Soviet atrocities against Ukraine NOT being considered a genocide - given I walk, almost everyday, past the first Holodomor monument ever put up anywhere in the world, in front of Edmonton City Hall just off of Sir Winston Churchill Square (our main city square), that marks it as a genocide memorial. And finally, many of the more brutal, unjust, heavy-handed, discriminate, AND insidious tactics of the U.S. War on Drugs could be seen as potentially being definable as genocidal. And the Imperial German Genocide in Namibia in the very early 1900's.

"Burundi mass killings of Hutus and Tutsi" Is the Rwandan Genocide, it is included within that. 

[Hestia11 572]

2 minutes ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

"Burundi mass killings of Hutus and Tutsi" Is the Rwandan Genocide, it is included within that. 

I think they were separate occasions, but I think in my error of skimming the wiki page that I missed a subsection somewhere.

[Patine 469]

4 minutes ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

"Burundi mass killings of Hutus and Tutsi" Is the Rwandan Genocide, it is included within that. 

No, that's not true. As i said above, Burundi and Rwanda, despite sharing a border and having the same ethnic make-up, and similar histories prior to independence from colonialism, had very different political and social situations afterwards, and different backgrounds and contexts. Ethnic killings ended up happening in both (and were far worse in Rwanda), but happened at different times and with different specific motivating factors from each other. They are not the same events, nor are Rwanda and Burundi the same country.

[TheMiddlePolitical 98]

I mis-remembered it then, I thought the Rwandan genocide was incapsulated in it.

[CPE 97]

Would suggest that you add in the attacks on South African farmers as well, or include the ones on Rhodesian farmers as well if you want a historical precedence for current events.  One of the least covered atrocities afflicting the world in our times.

[Patine 469]

33 minutes ago, CPE said:

Would suggest that you add in the attacks on South African farmers as well, or include the ones on Rhodesian farmers as well if you want a historical precedence for current events.  One of the least covered atrocities afflicting the world in our times.

This is true. We've had a number of immigration cases where South African Afrikaners arrived in Canada and applied for political asylum, and were basically told, circumspectly and in paraphrasing, that because they were White, and were coming from South Africa, there's no way their claim is genuine. Frankly, atrocity, injustice, and other of the worst aspects of humanity can, theoretically be committed by, and against, any inborn demographic - despite certain modern taboos and stereotypes. We are all the same species - humanity - and made of the stuff and with the same base nature.

[CPE 97]

9 hours ago, Patine said:

This is true. We've had a number of immigration cases where South African Afrikaners arrived in Canada and applied for political asylum, and were basically told, circumspectly and in paraphrasing, that because they were White, and were coming from South Africa, there's no way their claim is genuine. Frankly, atrocity, injustice, and other of the worst aspects of humanity can, theoretically be committed by, and against, any inborn demographic - despite certain modern taboos and stereotypes. We are all the same species - humanity - and made of the stuff and with the same base nature.

Yeah, it seems to be getting really bad over there right now.  It looks like South Africa is going to go full Rhodesia, or even worse.  The country may end up in an all out race war very soon.  The world is going to continue to turn a blind eye though, so the only way out of it for them is to fight.  Sickens me to see how one sided American media is in particular with these kinds of stories.

[Patine 469]

6 minutes ago, CPE said:

Yeah, it seems to be getting really bad over there right now.  It looks like South Africa is going to go full Rhodesia, or even worse.  The country may end up in an all out race war very soon.  The world is going to continue to turn a blind eye though, so the only way out of it for them is to fight.  Sickens me to see how one sided American media is in particular with these kinds of stories.

The problem in South Africa, unlike a lot of socio-political dynamics in, say, the U.S., are not as simple as "race-based." The different Bantu tribes have barely restrained rivalries and hatreds between each other, and the Khoisian people view BOTH the Afrikaners/British and Bantus as unjust conquerors and thieves of their land.

[CPE 97]

44 minutes ago, Patine said:

The problem in South Africa, unlike a lot of socio-political dynamics in, say, the U.S., are not as simple as "race-based." The different Bantu tribes have barely restrained rivalries and hatreds between each other, and the Khoisian people view BOTH the Afrikaners/British and Bantus as unjust conquerors and thieves of their land.

Yeah, the different tribes certainly do complicate matters for sure.  The Afrikaners are going to end up on the short end of the stick no matter what though, the reports that I hear on how the government is trying to disarm them in the face of all the attacks are rather sobering.  I know that they were taking the measures to court, not sure what the outcome may be.  I wish some nation would step up to the plate and give them a ticket out of there.

On another note, Zimbabwe is actually paying reparations to the white farmers that they ran off lol.  They would have to absolutely crazy to go back there given all of what has happened.

https://nationalfile.com/zimbabwe-to-pay-3-5bn-reparations-to-dispossessed-white-farmers/