Genocide: historical developement and necessity

Excellent post.

Originally posted by Dampier I would argue that Genocides and similar suffering bring out the best in man.

     I would argue that it brings out the worst in man. Horrible crimes and horrible suffering. Even if one is not morally inclined, genocide is even pointless from a practical point of view. In many genocides, some of the most outstanding and successful members of society had been uprooted and could not be replaced, not on the basis that they were detrimental to the state or its society, but on stupid notions of race or religion. Its basically using up state resources in order to destroy an entire people who play a role in the nation's cultural, intellectual and economic life, all for the sake of maniacal idealism. I'm not even treading on moral grounds here.

     Genocides are usually characterized by regimes with nationalist agendas. The ideas which comprise radical nationalism (racism, supremacy, homogenous nation) have no correlation with reality, and thus their actions are just a manifestation of these overly idealistic wet-dreams.

Originally posted by Dampier They also force us to evolve, shange and make life better or avoid a similar genocide- however this can ackfire and lead to another.

     If genocide really forced humanity to evolve, we'd be gods by now. Without a doubt. So far it has backfired most of the time, according to these standards.

Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 17-May-2006 at 06:33

Name me a major crime that hasn't always been around.

About 1 million French citizens (most who have actually never been to France) fled Algeria because of the guerilla warfare...thats 10% of the population...how is that different from Turks fleeing the Balkans during the Balkan wars 

excellent posts..genocide I also believe is an inherent part of human developement...probably dating to our cave man anscestors desire to maintain authority over what ever small luxuries they enjoyed vice their neighbors and the animals they fought to survive against.......

 

Genocide mainly happens why? Many reasons, I will list a few I have thought of.

(1) There happen to be certain people within our species who find human beings as catalysts. Hitler used the hatred of the Jews as a catalyst for him-self to attain greater power. He united most of the Germans under him using a common enemy, and so to make his people fell their hatred is justified he defiles, slanders and converts the image of their enemy into that of a monster or fiend, that which should be vanquished from existence, those never meant to be.  Hitler gave hope to the masses of Germans, a key tool to unlocking supreme power. He made them believe in the possibility of a great and powerful Germany where Germans are the masters of the world. The superior race (This was the Germans supposed key, their natural superior blood)

(2) It happens out of fear of a possibility. During the Black Death Jews were burned and killed partially out of fear that they were the cause of the birth and continuation of the black death. They were its support.

They were also killed because a lot of Jews were moneylenders and one way for the people to get rid of their dept was to rid of their loaner. It was also a way to reap the profits of the Jews good. It's interesting because century�s later a famous and most horrific genocide occurs involving the Jews once more, and partially for the same reason. The Jews were part of society subset, the rich during WW2. Hitler and other non-Jewish German people could become wealthier due to their new owned former possessions of some Jewish people.

(3) The human drive to fit in within a group mixed with social cowardice. Humans will often participate in stimulating the birth of genocide purely to fit in with a group who holds this genocide righteous. It can also give the sensation of power and higher purpose to take a person (S) life.

 

 

In my opinion, calling everything genocide will not make things better, as it will spread this crime and thus reduce the extremity of Nazism.

 

I agree, as the saying somewhat goes, kill one, you�re a murderer, kill millions, you�re a conqueror, kill them all, you�re a God!

 

Name me a major crime that hasn't always been around.

 

 

Theirs loads.

These are only a few main reasons why genocide occurs. I believe there are many, not only mere three.

bg_Turk

    
Dont you think that if the aim of the French government was to remove Algerians from the face off the Earth they would have done so?

Do Algerians themselves even call the Independence war Algerian genocide? The Turkish government is just propagating those claims to get back to France for its recognition of the Armenian Genocide...people arent fools.

btw, search "Algerian Genocide" on google, how many links are Turkish?

Edited by mamikon - 17-May-2006 at 15:10

Originally posted by mamikon bg_Turk      Dont you think that if the aim of the French government was to remove Algerians from the face off the Earth they would have done so?

Yes I do, and the French have indeed succeeded in removing a substantial part of that nation off the face of the Earth

What are the official numbers of the Algerian dead in the Algerian Independence War? How much was the population?

both the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide removed almost 99% of the population from the respective countries?

If the French intent was genocide, then they would have destroyed all off the Algerians or almost all, they had the capability. In contrast with the Bosnian genocide, the Serb commanders did plan Genocide but could not carry out to a grand scale since they lacked weapons...the French clearly did not.

if Algerians themselves dont have a meaning word Algerian Genocide (I think they dont), how do Turkey give it a meaning? dont you see how absurd this is?

Civil War? no...it was a war for independence.

Of course Turkish motives for the recognition of the Algerian Genocide are polical as are the French ones for the recognition of the Armenian Massacres as Genocide. But the French should know better not to throw stones at others when they are sitting in a glass house. In my eyes the Algerian Genocide is no less of a Genocide than the massacres of Armenians in 1915-20 - and if the French insist that Turkey in order to join Europe should face its history, swallow the tremendous human loss for the muslims and recognize only the deaths of Armenians as a Genocide, then they as members of the EU should set an example for "backward" Turkey to follow and should treat the massacres against Algerians on the same level as they expect massacres against Armenians to be treated. After all the life of every human being is equally valubale, or is it not?

Except that more than 20 other countries recognize the Armenian Genocide...but those same counties probably dont recognize the Algerian genocide too because everyone loves and fears the french right?

Even if they do not use the word "Genocide" specifically, and I do not know how else can you describe the death of around a million of their people, this does not make the killings less of a Genocide, as I am sure you know the defintion of Genocide better than me. Maybe you would say it was a civil war because many French died too?

Numbers dont constitute genocide. The Bosnian death tall hardly reached a million, but it is considered a case of Genocide.

Genocide is a waste of time.  Given what you loose especially in terms of intellect and resource gathering in order to gain a more harmonious community the cost benefit ratio tilts towards cost.