Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ziq OP wrote (edited )

Genocide:

Genocide, defined in the genocide convention, modeled after the scholarship of Rafael Lemkin, refers to "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such."

Chomsky:

The vulgar politicization of the word “genocide,” now so extreme that I rarely use the word at all. The mass slaughter in Srebrenica, for example, is certainly a horror story and major crime, but to call it “genocide” so cheapens the word as to constitute virtual Holocaust denial, in my opinion. It amazes me that intelligent people cannot see that.

The Serbs intended to rid the land of Bosniak Muslims and finally managed to wipe out an entire town of them after a series of smaller massacres and systematic rapes starting in 1992. It meets the definition of genocide in every way. The only person who insists a genocide has to be exactly as bad as the Holocaust is Chomsky, and in doing so, he's denying all genocides that don't reach the numbers of the Holocaust and the American genocide.

Acknowledging the existence of different genocides than the Holocaust doesn't make someone a Holocaust denier, while insisting other genocides don't count as genocides because they didn't have as high a death count as the Holocaust IS genocide denial.

It's no different than when the far right claim the Holocaust was overblown and wasn't as bad as history records.

8

Styx wrote (edited )

It's such a Chomsky move. Currently, there are 2 million Bosnians living in the Balkans and another million of them living in the diaspora. We are discussing here an ethnicity that is infinitely smaller than the pre-war European population of Ashkenazi Jews (around 17 million people) and based on this simple numerical fact, their genocide -- even if every single Bosniak was killed -- could never measure up to the Holocaust.

8

roanoke9 wrote

I don't think it should be a genocide olympics but if anything, smaller groups are inherently more vulnerable to being exterminated completely. He is treating groups like this worse than endangered animals where it is generally accepted that the fewer the numbers, the more threatened the existence of the group.

6