Welcome to the Genocide Club

[Vladimir]

Everybody did it, and a concentration camp is a prison with barbed wire instead of walls, I'd invent it does exactly he same thing keep them in. And no.

Quite true. "Genocide" as it is currently defined is how nations form.

Send me to Mars to found my own nation please.

[doc_bean]

Meh, iI thought this was ging to be about the 150 000 civilian casualties in Iraq, I'm dissapointed.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Quite true. "Genocide" as it is currently defined is how nations form.

There are plenty of nations which were formed without genocide. A few examples off the top of my head:
- France (was united and got its national image etc etc during their defense against the English in the 100 years war)
- England (formed by an invasion - major resistance pretty much ended after Battle of Hastings due to lacking support for Harold and the prior dynasty, the locals at that time didn't think it mattered much to become ruled by the Norman dynasty)

And a few examples of entirely peacefully formed countries off the top of my head:
- Norway (became independent by a referendum)
- Iceland (gradually became free through treaties of increasing autonomy)

[Vladimir]

There are plenty of nations which were formed without genocide. A few examples off the top of my head:
- France (was united and got its national image etc etc during their defense against the English in the 100 years war)
- England (formed by an invasion - major resistance pretty much ended after Battle of Hastings due to lacking support for Harold and the prior dynasty, the locals at that time didn't think it mattered much to become ruled by the Norman dynasty)

And a few examples of entirely peacefully formed countries off the top of my head:
- Norway (became independent by a referendum)
- Iceland (gradually became free through treaties of increasing autonomy)

If you cause the eradication of a particular culture by force, you are guilty of genocide. You can't tell me that there was only one migration into Norway. I largely ignorant about Iceland but think there must have been one there as well. The "French" nation is far older than the 100 years war. The creation of England is a good example of genocide.

People tend to "get around."

I'm basing this off the definition posted some time ago in the Monestary. It's pretty general.

I'm no advocate of it and if I understand the author's intention correctly I support him.

[LittleGrizzly]

Im not sure about genocide though maybe im using the word incorrectly, I knew of the Indian one didn't realise the scale of it. I think the problem is Brits did a few nice things, abolition of slavery and giving the colonys thier independance (i don't think they had much choice with the majority of them) and people seem to forget that we weren't nice, we were the big bad and we abused it, like every superpower.

[Geoffrey S]

I think genocide is a stretch, and overused in many cases. But that the British certainly weren't innocent of their share of vicious crimes against humanity is beyond doubt. Hyperbole however doesn't really help much. Where I think the opening post goes to far is the case of India; while it's clear the British could have, and should have done a lot more to relieve the Indians from hunger and the accompanying dangers, India certainly was not the only part of that world greatly suffering under the climate circumstances and massive failure of crops. China, for one, is a clear example of an area which wasn't under any colonial rule and suffered much the same problems, on a similar scale, one of the causes of the frequent civil strife of the late Qing dynasty.

Also, I'd like to note that as it was at the time, 'concentration camp' has no bearing whatsoever on the later crimes of the Nazis. Around the Boer war, it had the meaning of a fenced in camp for those arrested by the British where the inmates were put to work on forced labour. Harsh conditions, certainly, but the link the opening post implies isn't there.

What I'm surprised at is that anyone is surprised about these crimes. Surely while the rest of the world often stands accused on colonialist evils, there's no way the British could somehow have escaped notice, particularly in the politically correct age?

[Meneldil]

The "French" nation is far older than the 100 years war. The creation of England is a good example of genocide.

Well, here in France, the scholar term nation refers to modern (post-1789) nation-states.

Given that, France was merely a feudal state during the hundred years war, and only became a nation (and furthermore, the first one, according to our teachers) during the revolutionnary era, which - sort of - had his own genocide : the revolt in Vendée.

[Innocentius]

There are plenty of nations which were formed without genocide. A few examples off the top of my head:
- France (was united and got its national image etc etc during their defense against the English in the 100 years war)
- England (formed by an invasion - major resistance pretty much ended after Battle of Hastings due to lacking support for Harold and the prior dynasty, the locals at that time didn't think it mattered much to become ruled by the Norman dynasty)

And a few examples of entirely peacefully formed countries off the top of my head:
- Norway (became independent by a referendum)
- Iceland (gradually became free through treaties of increasing autonomy)

Although I agree that many, if not most, nations were formed without actions that fit in with the definition of genocide, I do however think that few countries in the world today who became what they are entirely peacefully. Norway for example, spent most of the medieval period and the early modern era fighting with or against either Denmark or Sweden, untill eventually ending up in a more or less forced personal union with Sweden after a brief war in 1814. The modern state of Norway didn't exist until 1905, but Norway and the Norwegians sure did.

Iceland on the other hand, took shape after centuries of more or less constant civil war, in the shape of small but endless vendettas between powerful and wealthy families.

Also, while we're discussin genocide anyway, isn't it rather amusing that the official definition of genocide (as declared by the UN in 1948) still doesn't include the determined extermination of, for example, homosexuals? Goes to show what the UN is capable of.

[Reverend Joe]

There are plenty of nations which were formed without genocide. A few examples off the top of my head:
- France (was united and got its national image etc etc during their defense against the English in the 100 years war)
- England (formed by an invasion - major resistance pretty much ended after Battle of Hastings due to lacking support for Harold and the prior dynasty, the locals at that time didn't think it mattered much to become ruled by the Norman dynasty)

I hate to nitpick, but:

-France was actually formed, not necessarily via genocide, but after decades of warfare against, and forced conversion of, the Saxon tribes to the East, during the reign of Charlemagne. Germany could trace her basis to this conquest, as well.

(Edit: if we follow Meneldil's official definition, then I guess the Saxon conquest doesn't count.)

-England was really formed during the Anglo-Saxon period, which could probably fall into the category of "genocide" if we are drawing a line in the sand; William the Bastard really just inherited an intact structure via conquest, and made a few cosmetic changes after he had to suppress several Saxon rebellions. Speaking of which, surely the "Harrying of the North" could count as genocide?

[Guildenstern]

Hello Everyone,

I’d like to join the conversation because I think this topic involves interesting aspects.
Unfortunately Italy was not immune to genocidal tendencies either, and this refers to relatively recent times.

Before entering World War II on the side of Nazi Germany in 1940, fascist dictator Benito Mussolini had planned an extremely aggressive form of nationalism in foreign policy. The invasion of Ethiopia involved several atrocities such as the use of chemical weapons (especially mustard gas), and the indiscriminate slaughter of much of the local population. The armed forces used a vast arsenal of bombs loaded with mustard gas, which were dropped from airplanes. This substance was also sprayed directly from above on to enemy combatants and villages. Mussolini and his generals tried to keep secret their use of chemical weapons, but the International Red Cross found out the truth and revealed the information to the world. The Italian reaction consisted in the falsely "erroneous" bombardment (at least 19 times) of Red Cross tents placed in the areas controlled by the Ethiopian resistance. Besides the bombs with mustard gas, the Italians instituted forced labor camps, installed public gallows, killed hostages, and mutilated the corpses of their enemies. Captured guerrillas were often eliminated by throwing them out of airplanes in mid-flight. Many Italian troops had themselves photographed next to cadavers hanging from gallows, or standing beside chests full of cut-off heads.

Although the Italian constitution obviously prohibits the reformation of the fascist party, sadly here in Italy we still have some parties clearly inspired by those principles of nationalism, racism, corporatism, strict censorship and state propaganda that were at the basis of the fascist regime. Some politicians on the far right have even defined Mussolini as “the greatest Italian statesman in the 20th century”. But the saddest thing is definitely that these right parties usually get most of their votes from the young, and not from old people who are nostalgic about the fascist period. This happens because Italian school teaches nearly nothing about Italy during World War II. Anyway Italian students are well instructed about ancient history: they have a good knowledge of daily life and culture of the ancient Romans and a deep insight into the techniques used by Caesar to conquer Gaul. It’s clear that all this can be very useful if one plans to become, say, a good RTW player… Joking aside, this is not an argument against the study of ancient history and my presence here is obviously evidence of my deep interest in the subject. I’m just saying that I can’t see the need of such a thorough analysis. I firmly believe that a good understanding of the main events that globally occurred in the last 70 years (at least) is essential in order to develop a strong civil consciousness (and the fundamental democratic values), despite the difference of ideological orientations. Well, I realize I’m a bit off topic now so I’ll just stop here for the moment.

Regards

[Samurai Waki]

Genocide is such an ugly word. I prefer the Spirit of Competition.