I definitely think it’s harmful. I definitely think force and physical harm, and likely some murders would be required to actually remove them. What is being proposed is awful there’s no doubt about that.
But I cannot equate “mental harm” with “genocide”. You’re redefining an incredibly triggering word just so you can use it to attack an enemy. However redefining it is dangerous because it minimises the words true impact. You’re now, in effect, saying that Hitler “upset a few Jews” rather than he committed mass murder. You’re applying genocide to a bunch of places where it only really serves to make the word redundant.
Saying it reasonably fits the definition as established by the UN in no way equates to ‘Hitler upset a few jews’.
You can call it what you will, frankly in many ways taking everything one has and throwing them to the wilds is crueler than to just kill them outright.
I definitely think it’s harmful. I definitely think force and physical harm, and likely some murders would be required to actually remove them. What is being proposed is awful there’s no doubt about that.
But I cannot equate “mental harm” with “genocide”. You’re redefining an incredibly triggering word just so you can use it to attack an enemy. However redefining it is dangerous because it minimises the words true impact. You’re now, in effect, saying that Hitler “upset a few Jews” rather than he committed mass murder. You’re applying genocide to a bunch of places where it only really serves to make the word redundant.
Saying it reasonably fits the definition as established by the UN in no way equates to ‘Hitler upset a few jews’.
You can call it what you will, frankly in many ways taking everything one has and throwing them to the wilds is crueler than to just kill them outright.