Tag Archives: holocaust

Globalizaiton and Genocide

My friend Jason of SDP emailed me yesterday, asking about genocide, globalization, and ideology. Specifically, considering that neither race nor society are going away, does globalization have a chance to end genocide?

My answer: Yes.

Genocide — purposefully killing a large fraction of your own population — only works when you can get away with it. This means that it has to be either profitable or at least not terribly costly. In Rwanda, for instance, the massacred Tutsis didn’t just leave bodies behind — they also had farmland that needed to be disposed of. (In parts of Rwanda where there were no Tutsis, the Hutu hordes helpfully killed fellow Hutus, accomplishing the same land reform without the ethnic overtones).

Likewise, the German attacks against the Jews in the 1930s and 1940s were enabled by the disintegrating world economy that allowed Germany to “go it alone” away from the discipline of international capital markets. In the first phase, the Nazi regime confiscated wealth from the Jewish upper-class to fund a growing welfare state. (If 1990s Rwanda was “land reform,” then 1930s Germany was “capital reform.”) After the War had started, Hitler’s regime faced roughly equal costs in interning Jews and killing them. They chose the latter.

Certainly there are genocides — mass butchery — today. In Darfur, a nasty party of the nasty non-integration gap — people kill each other as they have for the past few thousand years. In much of the western world, late-term abortion puts Herod to shame. But a Darfuri and an infant a month from birth have the same economic value to you — zero — so they aren’t protected by the globalized order.

Dan tdaxp: Holocaust Denier?

An interesting discussion about , , and reason:

Original Claim, by Forbush:

Many people know that Pope John Paul II declared the Iraq War an unjust war before he died. Many Anti-War activists have argued that the Iraq War was not a “Just War,” since it was proposed at the end of 2002.But most people don’t even know what a “Just War” is and how the Iraq War matches up to the ideas behind “Just War Theory.”

Question, by me:

” Pope John Paul II declared the Iraq War an unjust war before he died”

Reference?

Somehow, I expect you’ll either refuse to cite on, or give a reference to something else…

His first reply:

From here as one source, but there are many. You really should learn to use Goggle.

http://www.catholicpeacefellowship.org/nextpage.asp?m=2199

“Just before the war, the pope sent an envoy, Cardinal Pio Laghi, to ask Bush to exhaust every last means of diplomacy and work through the United Nations for a peaceful solution. The Vatican called the war illegal and unjust. But before the cardinal even touched down in Washington, the administration said the meeting would not matter. The White House countered the pope’s claim that an invasion was unjust with apocalyptic visions of needing to stop a Hitler.”

My second reply

So to back-up your unsourced allegation you give… another unsourced allegation?

Where did the Vatican Say this? Was it by the Papal Nuncio? By a formal letter? Through the Vatican Secretary of State?

Please, provide a reference, or do not make such claims about my faith.

His second reply

I’m sure you don’t believe in the Hollacaust either, deal with it!

For the record, here’s Godwin’s Law

Godwin’s law (also Godwin’s rule of Nazi analogies) is an adage in Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states that:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1 (i.e. certainty).”

There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. In addition, it is considered poor form to invoke the law explicitly. Godwin’s law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. Many people understand Godwin’s law to mean this, although (as is clear from the statement of the law above) this is not the original formulation.