I never claimed it was a secret.
The “geno-” in “genocide” comes from Greek γένος. The relevant part of the definition (from Wiktionary): 1. tribe, nation, race, as a subdivision of ἔθνος (éthnos).
It seems to me that if you commit cultural genocide, the άνθρωποι (human beings) are still alive, but their γένος is not. That is what has been killed. That is the point of the term.
Now, one quick way to do this is to murder people en masse, but that’s just one way.
No.
Yes
Doesn’t matter if you disagree. By my count, only 11 of the 41 definitions on the previously-linked wikipedia list of definitions mandate homocide as a necessary component. You are simply incorrect.
I don’t give a fuck what “normal people” think genocide means. I give a shit what it actually is.
…are you kidding me?
Was this not a clue as to which genocide I was talking about?
Bolding mine.
Or my first response you in this thread?
Or the fact that over the last year I’ve only really posted about Gaza LOL. That wasn’t a big clue?
I’ve shared the link already in this thread. But here is the genocide convention:
The important word here isn’t “killing”, but destroy.
I’ve bolded two keywords here: firstly intent, and secondly destroy.
Under the convention, “killing” is indeed, one of the five acts when, targeting a group with the intent to destroy, would be considered an act of genocide. (And in Gaza the latest UN report concludes that Israel are committing four out of five of those acts)
Two of the acts are:
In the UK they are trying to ban trans people from using the bathrooms of the gender they align with. They’ve already criminalised the use of puberty blockers for (only) trans affirming care for children, and there will be attempts to ban trans affirming care for everyone.
There is intent here. There is an irrational hatred of trans people, and some people don’t want them in society. And by banning trans affirming care for ALL people, along with making it near impossible to go out in public, trans people will be forced to de-transition.
Arguably, this is textbook genocide. People want trans people to no longer exist. So they are inflicting on the group conditions of life (removing the ability to access trans healthcare, forced de-transitions, shunning them in public, banning them from using certain facilities) to bring about their destruction in whole or in part. You aren’t killing them. But four out of five acts of genocide under the convention don’t explicitly require killing.
Considering the entire premise of this thread, and the fact that this was all explained to you weeks ago, yet you still don’t get it, I don’t think you get to dictate what words other people use, especially when they are using the words correctly.
I doubt it’ll do any good, but I just want to add one more vote for, “You don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.”
Your argument boils down to saying that I don’t get to dictate what a word means because you get to dictate what a word means. It’s not a convincing argument.
It’s pretty much the same as the argument I’ve been hearing about political views. People tell me I should support other people’s opinions in the name of anti-Trump solidarity. But they don’t feel any obligation to support my opinions for the same reason.
I get it. This is an argument about having the true faith and I’m the atheist in the temple.
But here’s the point. This thread isn’t about whether the true faith is real or not. This thread is about what works. And I can tell you right now, as a non-believer, you guys aren’t winning over any converts.
The point isn’t to sit inside a small circle of like-minded people and tell each other that you hate Trump more than anyone else hates Trump. That doesn’t accomplish anything.
What needs to be done is to go out in the world and talk to people. We need to convince people who aren’t in the anti-Trump movement now to join the anti-Trump movement.
And telling those people that they should believe the same things you believe because your beliefs are right and their beliefs are wrong isn’t going to work very well. You can’t even convince me your beliefs are right and I’m already part of the anti-Trump movement.
And it’s because I’m also a part of the anti-Trump movement that I’m telling you guys this. Don’t worry, I’m keeping this between us. I’m not going to go out and tell people on the outside about these disagreements. I’ll defend you guys to the best of my abilities.
But when it’s just us in the room, like it is here, I’m going to tell you guys you’re not holding up your end. And you need to do better because this is important.
That’s what the entire premise of this thread is.
I feel like when there’s an emotionally charged word like “genocide” that is used differently by different people, it’s better to agree that “starving a population and bombing their homes and water supplies and hospitals” is a terrible thing than it is to squabble over whether that meets this or that person’s definition of “genocide”.
Because whatever name you want to put on it, what Israel is doing to Gaza is fucking horrible.
Starvation, land stealing and mass killing abound…and apparently the solution is calmness and dictionary definitions.
You must be reading different posts than I am, because the argument as I read it is that you don’t get to object to the definition of ‘genocide’ used by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
This isn’t two people arguing about their own idiosyncratic definitions of a word. This is you arguing for your own idiosyncratic definition against numerous other people arguing that common usage from many prominent sources disagree with you.
Can you substantiate that opinion with anything other than Proof by Assertion?
After that – heads up – I’ll ask you if you can do the same for the position for which you continue to advocate.
In sum:
- Where’s your evidence that what people are doing isn’t working (remembering that correlation <> causation), and
- Where’s your evidence that your way will?
Thanks.
ETA: While I’m stacking up questions that seem awfully relevant…
A… final solution?
…it doesn’t boil down to this at all. Are you even reading anything I’m saying?
You can use the word any way you like. If you want to look stupid, I’m not going to stop you. But we are using the word correctly. And I’m going to continue to use the word if it’s the most appropriate word to use.
What is this sanctimonious bullshit?
Are you trolling? Its the only reason I can imagine for someone to write out all of this nonsense.
In other words: you think you are smarter than the rest of us and have got the whole thing figured out.
But you aren’t smarter than us. Because ultimately this isn’t about Trump. I don’t live in America. Trump isn’t my President. But I’ve got people running my country that are speed-running us down the MAGA playbook.
Because this is about a global rise in authoritarianism and it’s being driven by some of the worst people in the world. And the biggest mistake you can make right now is thinking It’s just about Trump, and that you can fix it by convincing people to just be “anti-Trump”, when at the last election the Dems essentially ran on nothing but “anti-Trump” and they ended up losing the House, the Senate and the Presidency.
Being “anti-Trump” isn’t enough. You’ve got to give people something to vote for.
Which is why the premise (as you’ve just defined it) of this thread is fundamentally flawed. The global rise in authoritarianism doesn’t end when Trump goes away.
And what you characterise as “hysteria” is barely registerable compared to the scale of over-the-top rhetoric being amplified by the alt-right media machine. What this “hysteria” comes down to is a few random’s saying stuff on the internet that personally annoy you.
And while I’m sorry it annoys you: I’m not going to join the crusade to stop it. There are more important battles to fight.
Nothing to see, don’t worry the courts won’t allow this, stop being so hysterical,
…I respectfully disagree.
What the word genocide tells us is intent.
There are a few responses in this thread from people that otherwise have perfectly uncontroversial post history that left me rather shocked.
Some quotes from that thread:
“the Palestinians are going to get little more than thoughts and prayers from me. They are not a priority for me.”
“I don’t think Palestinian babies should get to live over Israeli babies.”
“Some of us see what is happening in Gaza as something the Palestinians chose”
“how treating them as innocent brown victims”
“Stopping one genocide is simply helping another one begin.”
“The Palestinian people are less like innocent brown victims of the white judeo-christian war machine and more like white nationalists in alabama.”
“You’re assuming everyone in the democratic party views the people of Gaza as innocent civilians.”
There is a very nasty, prevailing undercurrent not just here, but basically everywhere you look, that Palestinians are somehow less than human. It’s why the decades of inhumane treatment they’ve had to live through has been tolerated. Because many believe they deserve it.
And when people hear that they are “starving a population and bombing their homes and water supplies and hospitals” they don’t fucking care. Because it isn’t happening to people. It’s happening to Palestinians. And they don’t matter as much.
What genocide defines is intent. The starvation isn’t happening “because it’s just a war.” It’s because it’s a deliberate attempt to destroy the Palestinian people.
This isn’t a mere quibble over definitions. Multiple organisations and a near complete consensus of genocide scholars are calling this a genocide. They’ve done that after a thorough examination of the evidence. And that changes things. When this all started, calling what was happening in Gaza a genocide was controversial. Now it is not.
The reality is that “being fucking horrible” isn’t confronting enough, because there are plenty of people that think Palestinians had these fucking horrible things coming to them. If you don’t want to use the word genocide, that’s fine. But what is happening to Palestinians (not just in Gaza) are attempts to destroy them. Its more than just attacks on the ground. Its what we are seeing in the West Bank, its why we are seeing the attacks on UNRWA, because they are trying to delegitimise refugee status.
It’s why I think the word genocide is not only appropriate here, but it should be used because it most accurately describes what is happening in totality.
And I think the same goes for trans people. What they are facing is genocide. What MAGA want, what the government in the UK is doing, what many Democrats want, and again it’s another case of letting people know what the stakes are. It’s just “sports” at the moment. “Protecting women” in bathrooms. “Protecting the kids” in healthcare. But they are all incremental steps with the goal of removing trans people from society. We need to put a stop to it now. Stop conceding ground.
Would you feel better or worse — or no different — if everyone you just quoted assured you, slowly and patiently, that, uh, no, we know full well that the Palestinians are, in fact, human, see?
…I just wanted to point out to everyone unfamiliar with The_Other_Waldo_Pepper that they literally support the genocide of the Palestinian people, and aren’t afraid to let everyone know.
Cite.
I don’t give a fuck what you claim you think about Palestinians.
I don’t believe I’m one of the people that you quoted just before you said that “There is a very nasty, prevailing undercurrent not just here, but basically everywhere you look, that Palestinians are somehow less than human.”
My question was how you’d feel if those people — not me, but the ones ‘you just quoted’ — assured you that they know full well that the Palestinians are, in fact, human.
…and yet: here you are. The perfect example of it. Well done on revealing yourself.
Hey everyone: this is what hatred looks like.
I think their words speak for themselves. And I don’t think
“I don’t think Palestinian babies should get to live over Israeli babies”
needs any clarification here?
I think you’re making a factual error.
You seem to think that various people believe Palestinians are “somehow less than human.” I think that you’re incorrect: I think that they do, in fact, believe Palestinians are human.
If you’re correct, then, sure, you could presumably make a big difference by mentioning something they don’t already know — but if you’re incorrect, if they of course already know that, then what the heck have you accomplished by telling them what they already know?