Valuing Genocide

[Vladimir]

Well the word "genocide" was invented to describe the Holocaust. Therefore it's only natural to equate the two.

And has been said, the Germans lost, and that counts for a lot.

[Odin]

I am coming in late to this discussion and dont have much to add to what has been said. I do however have a very unique perspective, my mother in law is german. She fled in 45 when the Russians invaded and she made her way toward the americans and by family connection in holland she got out and to the states.

She was 15 at the time of her departure and we have talked at length about Germany in the prewar and war era. The one piece that has been absent from the discussion that i see is the overwhelming guilt of the german people.

To give you the gist of her feelings, and most of us do understand this premise, hitler brought a fiercely nationalistic people back to nationalism. They all believed in him, truly, they bought in hook line and sinker. Now her story is that for her, she was told that the Jews were undesirables attempting to corrupt the new German nation (yadda yadda).

You see they had no reason not to believe Hitler, and then once at war and realizing the state they were in they were forced to believe him as there was little individuals could do, save risking thier own necks. Her brother was apart of the hitler youth, they regularly monitored thier town for jews and thier goings on.

She carries great shame over it, and she believes that the genocide in germany is most prevelant due to the true nature of the peoples shame and remorse. You see, she as a german dosent hide from it, dosent rebuttal the arguments and dosent attempt to gloss it over with time and conditions on the ground.

This attitude which she claims is now part of the German national identity contributes to the ability to keep the discussion alive. Again this is my two cents from a secondary source, but i feel its a valid point to make, that the peoples involved in this genocide arent expending thier energy attempting to justify it.

[Major Robert Dump]

The japanese rape on Nnaking and similar atrocities against China were far, far worse than the holocaust against the jews, in my opinion, but god forbid i say that in a college classroom or I'd get expelled. I'd rather be gassed than gang raped and turned into a sex slave but i guess thats not the PC way of looking at things now is it?

[Vladimir]

The japanese rape on Nnaking and similar atrocities against China were far, far worse than the holocaust against the jews, in my opinion, but god forbid i say that in a college classroom or I'd get expelled. I'd rather be gassed than gang raped and turned into a sex slave but i guess thats not the PC way of looking at things now is it?

You should have said that in my Chineese history class. You would have a lot of nodding heads. The lack of documentation (and the location) make it less understood (or cared about) but it was brutal.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Humanity's capability for inhumanity is, sadly, all too constantly reaffirmed.



Some folks have even argued that Dhaugazvili's [sic?] mass murders were less evil (or at least less "genocidal") since he didn't single out any one group but was an "equal opportunity" butcher. While likely correct, at least in a denotative sense, I really don't find that particularly comforting.

[Spino]

Humanity's capability for inhumanity is, sadly, all too constantly reaffirmed.



Some folks have even argued that Dhaugazvili's [sic?] mass murders were less evil (or at least less "genocidal") since he didn't single out any one group but was an "equal opportunity" butcher. While likely correct, at least in a denotative sense, I really don't find that particularly comforting.

You mean Stalin? Stalin may have been an equal opportunity butcher but at least with Hitler you knew where you stood. Stalin's acute paranoia inspired massive purges were based on hunches drawn from the more 'imaginative' parts of his sociopathic mind. Stalin changed his views as to which individuals and/or groups who were loyal with alarming irregularity. What began as a deliberate and calculating tactic meant to keep his enemies (real or imagined) off balance early in his rise to power wound up becoming a veritable murder lottery. Stalin eventually did single out ethnic groups as his witness by his wild claims of a 'Jewish doctors' plot just prior to his death.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Genocide has been the probably least effective way of waging war throughout history, always resulting in more or less genocide or assimilation of the aggressor once he has finally been defeated. To be a ruthless conqueror makes it a necessity for neighbors who value their lives to form strong alliances against you. I can't think of a single genocidal civilization which hasn't been genocided back, ruthlessly assimilated or otherwise got more back of their own medicine than they gave in the first place. Even when they get clementia when defeated, they've lost so many healthy soldiers from fighting hordes of enemies, that they can't prevent their women from being taken by those who finally defeated them. Genocide removes the fools from populations: namely, those fools who think they'll gain anything from carrying out genocide. The guilty suffer more than the victims.

Example, ww2:
Allied side casualties: 50M, divided over populations of around 1,500M persons = 3%
Axis side casualties: 12M, divided over populations of around 150M persons = 8%
Because of uncertainties in the figures I've biased them towards the opposite of the point I'm making. Still, they support my point very clearly: if you as leader think you'll help your country by genocide you're wrong, and if you as voter are considering to support a genocidal maniac leader, think again.

The sad thing is how skilled genocidal maniacs are at hiding what they're doing, and hiding their itentions when they are to be elected, so that even non-fools end up giving them the crucial early support they need to succeed in their undertakings.

[Ironside]

Very true. When I'm trying to explain this to people who have no grasp of history, I call it the "Kill the men, rape the women and take the sheep" style of warfare. Probably the oldest way to wage war.

Genocide of people does differ from genocide of culture. The former one use the "Kill the men, kill the women and kill the sheep just to be certain" style of warfare.

The japanese rape on Nnaking and similar atrocities against China were far, far worse than the holocaust against the jews, in my opinion, but god forbid i say that in a college classroom or I'd get expelled. I'd rather be gassed than gang raped and turned into a sex slave but i guess thats not the PC way of looking at things now is it?

On a induvidual level perhaps, but as a people... What is worse, killing 99,99% of the humanity or killing the last 0,01%? Death is somewhat permanent...

[Spino]

Well the word "genocide" was invented to describe the Holocaust. Therefore it's only natural to equate the two.

And has been said, the Germans lost, and that counts for a lot.

In fairness the word was also coined in light of the Armenian genocide which preceded the Holocaust, at the time those were two of the biggest ethnic bloodlettings in modern history.

The massive scale of murder set against the greatest war in world history is probably the contributing factor as to why the Holocaust gets the most attention. A great tragedy set within the confines of a compelling drama is, I daresay, the kind of human theater few people can forget. Humanity in general loves bookmarking examples of extreme brilliance and brutality for posterity. And as Lemur pointed out, the details of the Holocaust were well documented by those who initiated it, this is simply unprecedented in the history of human conflict.

On a politically incorrect note the fact that Hollyweird, the center of gravity for the English speaking entertainment industry, was founded by and to this day run in large part by Jews allows for a periodic recycling of Holocaust themed projects. Obviously to the average Jewish-American this topic hits close to home so its easy to see why they would be more inclined to give it coverage. While this has a unfortunate tendency to push similar acts out of the spotlight a periodic reminder of what happened and the lessons learned is not necessarily a bad thing. But scapegoating Hollyweird also comes across as a weak excuse for sloth, there is nothing keeping European or independent filmmakers from giving the Armenian genocide the coverage it deserves.