• GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 days ago

    starved a great many by just capitalist ideology, but that’s not really genocide…

    Genocide doesn’t require bloodthirst, it does just fine with sacrifice whole populations for some other goal or accepting those deaths as “collateral”. The UN definition supports this.

    • bad_news@lemmy.billiam.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’d argue the Hooverian starvation for capitalism is substantively different in racial context than Queen Victoria starving 70 million Africans and Indians for capitalism, AFAIK there was no “and now we’ll starve out the negro menace” but I am not a scholar of american history or this era so I am open to being wrong. Biden, Blinken, and McGurk are all currently egging on the Israeli ethno state in starving out and bombing the soulless non-jew monkeys who have no souls, including Christians like former GOP congressman Justin Amash’s family and random Lebanese Maronites, Armenians, etc

      • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I am obliged to note that genocide does not need to be racial (it can target religion, sexuality, nationality, etc.), but your point stands because none of those apply either. I’ll just mark it in the Black Book of Capitalism and be content with that.

          • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Think the little red book was a bad strategy for its time because it’s essentially a collection of quotations, so it wasn’t good for systematic understanding of Mao’s thought. In the modern day the internet at least makes it somewhat better because the LRB has citations, so you can just look them up and see the context for the statement.

            I’m kind of curious how the LRB came about, since it feels pretty condescending, but Mao was perhaps the most optimistic political leader I’ve ever heard of in terms of just giving the people a small bit of advice or a revised law and letting them handle the rest (this sometimes went extremely poorly, of course).