I don’t necessarily disagree with you. Obviously, the UN has had a hard time coming up with a definition of genocide that is both inclusive and impactful. I think your counter-examples actually underscore my point that there are some concepts that are hard to adequately capture under a single category. That’s why, for example, we have different categories for different types of homicide: first-degree murder, second-degree murder, felony murder, manslaughter, negligence resulting in death, etc.
Definitions are hard and somewhat arbitrary, but we all have an intuitive sense of degree. My point is that the expansive definition dilutes it’s effect.
My point is that the expansive definition dilutes it’s effect.
Are you sure that that’s your point? Because to me it sounds like you nitpicked this one genocide here (maybe because it’s painful to believe) and decided it can be excluded from a definition over a self-proclaimed technicality that you just came up with?
It feels like everything you are saying is just because it rubs you wrong to say the Jewish state of Israel is committing a genocide and a continued ethnic cleansing. I am not saying that this is your argument, I’m just saying that that is how you come off.
Yes, it does rub me the wrong way when we classify the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as “genocide”. That’s why I’m arguing about it.
In another part of this thread, myself and another commenter went back and forth with a bunch of other examples of mass killings in the past, and I think it shows that it isn’t so easy to define what is genocide and what isn’t. Using the UN definition, could you, for example, classify what Hamas did on October 7 as genocide? I wouldn’t, but read the definition again and ask yourself whether it fits.
In the case of Israel and Palestine, I don’t believe that Israel intends to wipe out the Palestinian people. Maybe Netanyahu and his right-wing cronies would if they could, but the Israeli population doesn’t want that. Hamas also wants to wipe out Israel, but I doubt the Palestinian people as a whole would support that.
The Israelis have negotiated with Palestinian governments, turned over land to them, provided them with aid and utilities and even included them at all levels of Israeli government. That doesn’t sound like genocide. Now, it is true that Palestinians don’t have equal rights in Israel, but there is a big difference between that and actual genocide. I don’t understand where this impulse for exaggeration comes from. It is very short-sighted.
I don’t believe that Israel intends to wipe out the Palestinian people
Right. I think it takes a special kind of blindness to not see the collective punishment and attempt to kill Palestinians. Just today they intentionally prevented an ambulance from reaching an Al Jazeera journalist and he eventually died, his colleague was injured from an Israeli attack. Why? Why does Israel ALWAYS prevent ambulances and ALWAYS bombs schools sheltering thousands of civilians? It’s because they want them to die. On top of that, they say it in the Knesset and on the street and in private and public and you still don’t believe them.
I think there’s more to it with you. It’s not normal to deny a genocide like that.
It’s nice that you claim to be neutral and just someone having a “disagreement” but you don’t look like that at all, sorry.
Why are you even here if you don’t want to have a good faith debate and perhaps hear another perspective? Do you think shouting “genocide” into the ether will change anything? You are making assumptions about me and basing your points on that rather than engaging with the actual issues. That is simply bad faith argument.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you. Obviously, the UN has had a hard time coming up with a definition of genocide that is both inclusive and impactful. I think your counter-examples actually underscore my point that there are some concepts that are hard to adequately capture under a single category. That’s why, for example, we have different categories for different types of homicide: first-degree murder, second-degree murder, felony murder, manslaughter, negligence resulting in death, etc.
Definitions are hard and somewhat arbitrary, but we all have an intuitive sense of degree. My point is that the expansive definition dilutes it’s effect.
Are you sure that that’s your point? Because to me it sounds like you nitpicked this one genocide here (maybe because it’s painful to believe) and decided it can be excluded from a definition over a self-proclaimed technicality that you just came up with?
It feels like everything you are saying is just because it rubs you wrong to say the Jewish state of Israel is committing a genocide and a continued ethnic cleansing. I am not saying that this is your argument, I’m just saying that that is how you come off.
Yes, it does rub me the wrong way when we classify the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as “genocide”. That’s why I’m arguing about it.
In another part of this thread, myself and another commenter went back and forth with a bunch of other examples of mass killings in the past, and I think it shows that it isn’t so easy to define what is genocide and what isn’t. Using the UN definition, could you, for example, classify what Hamas did on October 7 as genocide? I wouldn’t, but read the definition again and ask yourself whether it fits.
In the case of Israel and Palestine, I don’t believe that Israel intends to wipe out the Palestinian people. Maybe Netanyahu and his right-wing cronies would if they could, but the Israeli population doesn’t want that. Hamas also wants to wipe out Israel, but I doubt the Palestinian people as a whole would support that.
The Israelis have negotiated with Palestinian governments, turned over land to them, provided them with aid and utilities and even included them at all levels of Israeli government. That doesn’t sound like genocide. Now, it is true that Palestinians don’t have equal rights in Israel, but there is a big difference between that and actual genocide. I don’t understand where this impulse for exaggeration comes from. It is very short-sighted.
Right. I think it takes a special kind of blindness to not see the collective punishment and attempt to kill Palestinians. Just today they intentionally prevented an ambulance from reaching an Al Jazeera journalist and he eventually died, his colleague was injured from an Israeli attack. Why? Why does Israel ALWAYS prevent ambulances and ALWAYS bombs schools sheltering thousands of civilians? It’s because they want them to die. On top of that, they say it in the Knesset and on the street and in private and public and you still don’t believe them.
I think there’s more to it with you. It’s not normal to deny a genocide like that.
It’s nice that you claim to be neutral and just someone having a “disagreement” but you don’t look like that at all, sorry.
Why are you even here if you don’t want to have a good faith debate and perhaps hear another perspective? Do you think shouting “genocide” into the ether will change anything? You are making assumptions about me and basing your points on that rather than engaging with the actual issues. That is simply bad faith argument.
Pointing out the compelling evidence of the genocide of Palestinians ≠ shouting “genocide”
I think you’re dishonest. Have a nice evening!
Thanks for reinforcing my point about you!
I really don’t care