Is it genocide?

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

It’s not genocide because genocide implies mass killings. Cultural genocide is a poor term as it implies genocide on basis of culture, which is also not what’s happening. I’m teetering on the edge of “This isn’t wrong” and “This is forcibly erasing a culture”. There is no rule prohibiting parents teaching their children the ways of their culture, either directly or indirectly. It’s certainly a questionable move and a sign of increased authoritarianism, though.

[Heloin]

It’s called genocide. Raphael Lemkin the creator of the word genocide also suggested Ethnocide to mean exactly the same thing, it wasn’t adopted and is not held to any high regard in the field of genocide studies.

Well, let's separate these things, because murders and artificially accelerated decline of cultures are not the same thing.

No, they are the same thing. Genocide is about the destruction of a people group which can include mass murder but does not exclusively refer to such. This does not clarify this muddies the issue, it’s like the adoption of the term ethnic cleansing in the 90s, nothing is helped but the people who carried out the genocide have another layer of excuse for their actions.

It is the same only if one recognizes the intrinsic value of cultures, with the existence of which I am inclined to disagree. Those people in, let's say, 90 years are unlikely to suffer from the fact that they have lost the identity of the old people and are now Imperials.

This is a disgusting view point. Genocide is what I am an expert in, it is what I will be going back to university to get my undergrad in. Do not attempt this horrific argument used by those who excuse genocide.

[Heloin]

To promote a single cultural identity isn't genocide

It’s not genocide because genocide implies mass killings. Cultural genocide is a poor term as it implies genocide on basis of culture, which is also not what’s happening. I’m teetering on the edge of “This isn’t wrong” and “This is forcibly erasing a culture”. There is no rule prohibiting parents teaching their children the ways of their culture, either directly or indirectly. It’s certainly a questionable move and a sign of increased authoritarianism, though.

I am filled with nothing but hate.

Genocides when carried out to their full will always result in mass murder. Not everything about genocide is mass murder. Mass murder is a key component but dismissing the other components even in a “fictional” sense is actively harmful to understanding genocide.

[Ostroeuropa]

I think it depends on the manner in which the goal of a singular culture is approached. If there are unjustified restrictions on the cultural expression of other groups in order to try and utilize state violence to force them to conform to the Imperial culture, it's cultural genocide.

Your point about "No additional holidays" would qualify here, as would not recognizing their religious practices.

On the other hand the first point is probably fine. As is a end-goal of assimilation and the eradication of other cultures provided there is not a coercive element. A state can for instance propagate its own culture with its full resources and encourage others to adopt it. The question is whether there is restriction on other cultures practicing.

If the goal is purely "Imperial unity" then it will adopt the "Melting pot" approach. For instance, English as a language steals a bunch of words from those it is attempting to assimilate. This is again far less of an issue and more likely to work.

The Imperial example would be to turn to the Christians and say "Winter Festival" and have it celebrated as a national holiday with a secularized version of St. Nicholas. It would turn to the Indians cooking their weird food and say "We're going to mix this with our own ingrediants and make it a national dish", and so on.

This is distinct from "Everybody should work on Winter Solstice and here's a bunch of money poured into propogandizing the idea that you shouldn't take a holiday that day, but only on Emperors Day the week after" (Which is fine, if silly).

And Very Distinct from "If you take the day off work for Christmas and your boss fires you, its your own fault. The law does not recognize your culture and our institutions are actively trying to crush it.".

On the other hand I do think that elements of cultural genocide can be pursued in a justified manner if a groups culture is too insular through things like mandatory state secular schooling and attempting to break up their communities through housing policy. (Something like; "If you're a minority group and you live in a place where over 30% of the area is the same minority, anyone who isn't that minority will be exempt from housing taxation from then on, to encourage them to move in, and you will receive 6 months of exemption if you move to another area where your group isn't present in such numbers.").

[Ifreann]

It’s not genocide because genocide implies mass killings. Cultural genocide is a poor term as it implies genocide on basis of culture, which is also not what’s happening. I’m teetering on the edge of “This isn’t wrong” and “This is forcibly erasing a culture”. There is no rule prohibiting parents teaching their children the ways of their culture, either directly or indirectly. It’s certainly a questionable move and a sign of increased authoritarianism, though.

The aim is explicitly to destroy other cultures and ethnicities. That's genocide.

[Ostroeuropa]

It’s not genocide because genocide implies mass killings. Cultural genocide is a poor term as it implies genocide on basis of culture, which is also not what’s happening. I’m teetering on the edge of “This isn’t wrong” and “This is forcibly erasing a culture”. There is no rule prohibiting parents teaching their children the ways of their culture, either directly or indirectly. It’s certainly a questionable move and a sign of increased authoritarianism, though.

The aim is explicitly to destroy other cultures and ethnicities. That's genocide.

I don't view this as all that bad as a goal. It's akin to arguing "Christianity is genocidal because universal conversion by proselytization is an aspiration". The key is in the methods used.

[Ethel mermania]

I dont see this as genocide either. No one is getting killed or wiped out. Creating a unified cultural identity is part of any states educational process.

As described Its certainly repressive and authoritarian, but its not targeted mass murder

No. This is a baseline understanding of genocide but the term does not just cover mass murder. Genocide is the collective term referring to the destruction of people groups. Ethnic cleansing, mass murder, forced assimilation, and forced removal are all genocidal and carrying out one action almost certainly means the other actions were carried out to some extent or were meant to be.

Is this thread just IM trying to defend China?

And Canada probably.

Then I think we need a term that describes what happened to the Armenians and jews, that isn't genocide.

I will also say having an academic definition that differs from the general public understanding is a bad thing

[Heloin]

No. This is a baseline understanding of genocide but the term does not just cover mass murder. Genocide is the collective term referring to the destruction of people groups. Ethnic cleansing, mass murder, forced assimilation, and forced removal are all genocidal and carrying out one action almost certainly means the other actions were carried out to some extent or were meant to be.


And Canada probably.

Then I think we need a term that describes what happened to the Armenians and jews, that isn't genocide.

The attempt to use another term to describe the exact same process is not in fact helpful. It is genocide apologism currently used in China, the USA, Canada, and other places to excuse key components to genocide.

I will also say having an academic definition that differs from the general public understanding is a bad thing

Having a popular definition that actively muddies the waters and allows the supporters of genocide to commit genocide is what’s the fucking problem.

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

It’s not genocide because genocide implies mass killings. Cultural genocide is a poor term as it implies genocide on basis of culture, which is also not what’s happening. I’m teetering on the edge of “This isn’t wrong” and “This is forcibly erasing a culture”. There is no rule prohibiting parents teaching their children the ways of their culture, either directly or indirectly. It’s certainly a questionable move and a sign of increased authoritarianism, though.

The aim is explicitly to destroy other cultures and ethnicities. That's genocide.

what does the “-cide” in genocide mean?

genocide explicitly refers to mass murder. you can argue that this leads to genocide, but you can’t argue that it is genocide. it isn’t.

[Ethel mermania]

Then I think we need a term that describes what happened to the Armenians and jews, that isn't genocide.

The attempt to use another term to describe the exact same process is not in fact helpful. It is genocide apologism currently used in China, the USA, Canada, and other places to excuse key components to genocide.

I will also say having an academic definition that differs from the general public understanding is a bad thing

Having a popular definition that actively muddies the waters and allows the supporters of genocide to commit genocide is what’s the fucking problem.

It is not the same process. I am no fan of what China is doing to the ughar's, i agree it is evil, but to put it on a moral parallel with the Germans and turks is wrong

[Infected Mushroom]

Clear evidence that a word has been distorted beyond its original meaning and co-opted for an anti-nationalistic agenda.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category ... with_-cide

Look at this long list of words with "-cide" ("cide" = killing/to kill)

including homicide, patricide, herbicide, regicide etc... There's literally well over 100 such words. All of them require people/living things to be actually killed.

Are you telling me "genocide" is basically the only instance where an actual murder ISN'T required?

Arguing that making a few changes to education and the arrangement/presentation of cultural holidays amounts to Genocide/Cultural Genocide is like saying abolishing the monarchy is a form of Regicide or that rolling back on parental privileges is a form of Patricide/Matricide. It's a dilution/corruption of the word beyond its intended and apparent meaning for shock value.

What's next? Restricting civil rights is Homicide?

Voting against the Green Party is Herbicide?

[Thermodolia]

I dont see this as genocide either. No one is getting killed or wiped out. Creating a unified cultural identity is part of any states educational process.

As described Its certainly repressive and authoritarian, but its not targeted mass murder

It’s not genocide but it is cultural/ethnic cleansing.

[Equai]

The attempt to use another term to describe the exact same process is not in fact helpful. It is genocide apologism currently used in China, the USA, Canada, and other places to excuse key components to genocide.


Having a popular definition that actively muddies the waters and allows the supporters of genocide to commit genocide is what’s the fucking problem.

It is not the same process. I am no fan of what China is doing to the ughar's, i agree it is evil, but to put it on a moral parallel with the Germans and turks is wrong

"The original conceptualization of the crime of genocide, as presented by Raphael Lemkin, gave cultural genocide centre stage. In fact, Lemkin thought that a new legal category was needed precisely because genocide could not be reduced to mass murder. The novelty of the Nazi crime lay in the methodical attempt to destroy a group – well beyond typical war crimes and acts of repression. For Lemkin, therefore, the essence of genocide was cultural – a systematic attack on a group of people and its cultural identity; a crime directed against difference itself. Ironically, the final text of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention) does not prohibit cultural genocide as such."
-Return of the Cultural Genocide (academic.oup.com)

[Heloin]

What’s the point in being an expert on this stupid website.

[Ifreann]

The aim is explicitly to destroy other cultures and ethnicities. That's genocide.

what does the “-cide” in genocide mean?

genocide explicitly refers to mass murder. you can argue that this leads to genocide, but you can’t argue that it is genocide. it isn’t.

What does the "geno-" in genocide mean? It means a race, or a people. That is what genocide is the killing of, a national, ethnic, religious, or racial group. This can be attempted or accomplished by means other than killing members of the group. The UN definition of the crime of genocide includes transferring children of the group to other groups, or preventing births among the group.

[Sacred Earth]

No, they are the same thing. Genocide is about the destruction of a people group which can include mass murder but does not exclusively refer to such. This does not clarify this muddies the issue, it’s like the adoption of the term ethnic cleansing in the 90s, nothing is helped but the people who carried out the genocide have another layer of excuse for their actions.

There is a certain cultural image of "genocide": murders, artificial famine, forcible relocation to a barren field, and so on.
The main problem with genocide is this: massive and unjustified atrocities that cause suffering and create ethnic strife.
That's what is very important, and not the disappearance of one of the hundreds of languages, which may not even have its own library, for example.
(No, comrade major, this is not about linguistic superiority, but about the need for languages. Language can be beautiful, but nearly useless.)

Ethnic cleansing also sounds very creepy, and also has a bad history. For example, this word reminds me of the fascists released from the GULAG, who committed obscurantist crimes on the ruins of the socialist states.

This is a disgusting view point. Genocide is what I am an expert in, it is what I will be going back to university to get my undergrad in. Do not attempt this horrific argument used by those who excuse genocide.

Congratulations for getting a recognized paper, but please tell me where I'm wrong. This is simply a reference to authority on a largely ethical issue.

[Equai]

What’s the point in being an expert on this stupid website.

No frustrations. Sometimes is just hard to shake people off the mainstream papers that are edited to help and back. Even Lemkin himself would roll in his grave because people doesn't recognize cultural genocide as a genocide.

[Infected Mushroom]

What’s the point in being an expert on this stupid website.

I understand that certain segments of academia and the United Nations may well have an understanding/definition of the term that is wildly over-expansive. If you're writing a college paper or a thesis in certain circles, you are 100% correct.

But I'm saying that if the language is constructed logically, there's no system that makes sense where we could conflate literal mass murder, pogroms, and mass slaughters with the promotion of national identity and the discouragement (without killing) of Balkanization and values opposed to the nation.

You conflate it all in a giant bag to the detriment of clarity, understanding, common sense and meaningful distinction.

All nations exist today because at some point some ruler, state, or government said "hey let's promote this national identity." That played a fundamental role in creating the order we have today and to lump any and all forms of this with mass murder is fundamentally illogical.

[Infected Mushroom]

I dont see this as genocide either. No one is getting killed or wiped out. Creating a unified cultural identity is part of any states educational process.

As described Its certainly repressive and authoritarian, but its not targeted mass murder

It’s not genocide but it is cultural/ethnic cleansing.

That still sounds like you're literally killing people.

No one hears "ethnic cleansing" and thinks "Ah they stopped recognising some cultural holidays and are insisting that a certain pro national term is used instead."

They rightly think of death camps and pogroms.

[Equai]

What’s the point in being an expert on this stupid website.

I understand that certain segments of academia and the United Nations may well have an understanding/definition of the term that is wildly over-expansive. If you're writing a college paper or a thesis in certain circles, you are 100% correct.

But I'm saying that if the language is constructed logically, there's no system that makes sense where we could conflate literal mass murder, pogroms, and mass slaughters with the promotion of national identity and the discouragement (without killing) of Balkanization and values opposed to the nation.

You conflate it all in a giant bag to the detriment of clarity, understanding, common sense and meaningful distinction.

All nations exist today because at some point some ruler, state, or government said "hey let's promote this national identity." That played a fundamental role in creating the order we have today and to lump any and all forms of this with mass murder is fundamentally illogical.

If a group of people, culture or ethnic minority is so unsatisfied with the state they live in then, hear me out, let them go and have its own part of land to rule by themselves. That's what Mena's to be a good person. You do not assimilate them forcefully into your "superior" culture or force them to learn your language. That's inhumane and it's what Lemkin warned us about when he said future Hitlers. Every genocide starts by denying someone their culture.

[Ifreann]

Clear evidence that a word has been distorted beyond its original meaning and co-opted for an anti-nationalistic agenda.

The original meaning of the word genocide, as pointed out above, has not been distorted. You just don't know what the original meaning is.

[Dogmeat]

Why even bother pretending this isn't China?

[Ethel mermania]

It is not the same process. I am no fan of what China is doing to the ughar's, i agree it is evil, but to put it on a moral parallel with the Germans and turks is wrong

"The original conceptualization of the crime of genocide, as presented by Raphael Lemkin, gave cultural genocide centre stage. In fact, Lemkin thought that a new legal category was needed precisely because genocide could not be reduced to mass murder. The novelty of the Nazi crime lay in the methodical attempt to destroy a group – well beyond typical war crimes and acts of repression. For Lemkin, therefore, the essence of genocide was cultural – a systematic attack on a group of people and its cultural identity; a crime directed against difference itself. Ironically, the final text of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention) does not prohibit cultural genocide as such."
-Return of the Cultural Genocide (academic.oup.com)

From the 30 second wiki read lemkin started with the Armenian genocide. From the wiki on genocide

These five acts were: killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group.

By this definition what China is doing can be genocide. What IM describes in the OP isnt.

[Equai]

Why even bother pretending this isn't China?

Not just China. This is a perfect aplogism for USA, Australia and Canada as well who are still actively denying their cultural genocide that they committed against native people.

[Dogmeat]

Why even bother pretending this isn't China?

Not just China. This is a perfect aplogism for USA, Australia and Canada as well who are still actively denying their cultural genocide that they committed against native people.

This is IM. So it's China.