AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
For context Libs on Bsky are passing aroudn this fascists shithead’s bullshit book “On Tyranny” as a manual for “resisting authoritarianism” THE CALL IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE YOU LIBERAL SHITWIPES!
Yeah, its not like anyone who matters has ever actually given a shit about genocide, by any definition heretofore proposed.
Yeah fun fact that I just wanted to look it up. Naimark has basically gone on an Israeli podcast and has toed the academic line, about how you can’t just destroy Palestinians because you want to. He didn’t call it a genocide, he explicitly denied it was a genocide but said it was ethnic cleansing. And he also used the term “the so-called Nakba”.
The host by the end of it looks so sad because he really thought he was gonna get this Jewish Genocide Studies scholar to definitively say, YOU CAN TREAT THE PALESTINIANS LIKE DOGS.
Ugh. So many former humans choosing to join a ‘protocols of the elders of Zion’/‘the turner diaries’ crossover LARP, and everyone just keeps kayfabe. Like they can be neutral on this shit.
everyone just keeps kayfabe. Like they can be neutral on this shit.
TBF this was the “center-right” and polite position in academia all along.
The consensus has been there for a long time.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
My understanding is “ethnic cleansing” is a euphemism for genocide with no distinct meaning. It’s used to launder certain genocides as “less bad”. Is that a fair assessment?
In terms of a distinct meaning, ethnic cleansing is a descriptor of generally dispossessing a people, where genocide is a descriptor of destroying a people. You can ethnically cleanse people without destroying them.
Genocide itself used in the IR sense is a legal charge according to the genocide convention. Not all ethnic cleansing counts as genocide in the genocide convention.
