83
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2024
83 points (94.6% liked)
World News
32378 readers
471 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I feel like people in these comments didn't read the article or listen to the direct statements. Its a super political non-committal statement. If you wanted him to make a commitment about it being genocide, sure, I'd have been happy with what Singh was pushing for, a strong stance of siding with whatever the ICJ decided. But lets be clear, this isn't a statement that whats going on isn't genocide. And, frankly, whether it is genocide or not is murky. I lean towards yes, but I'm not any sort of domain expert. The ethnic cleansing and apartheid arguments are much stronger.
When discussing or qualifying genocide, we no longer require mass graves. What that means is that we take into account cultural and historic destruction as well.
Considering all the cultural and historical sites being destroyed as we speak, there is little in the way of meeting the acedemic requirement for the definition.
But certain politicians think cultural genocide isn't really a thing, because they don't really care about culture. Not saying the Canadian MP thinks like that, I'm just saying.