The worst part about this is that it wasn’t a one time sort of thing. The forced relocation was enforced until just before the Soviet Union fell. As a note, every other ethnic group that Stalin forced into relocation were allowed to begin returning home in 1956, but not the Crimean Tatars.
Stalin also tried to kill them off via famine in the 1920s.
This is bad, however, there’s some hope. From wiki,
Starting in 1967, a few were allowed to return and in 1989 the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union condemned the removal of Crimean Tatars from their motherland as inhumane and lawless, but only a tiny percent were able to return before the full right of return became policy in 1989.
The Russians committed so many genocides to natives all over Eurasia you cant even count them…yet no one today cares. There are whole groups of people basically erased because of them
Including Circassian genocide in mid 19th century. Some people in North Caucasus (also in Turkey, which received survivors) still try to keep this memory alive. If Kerch bridge survives, maybe one day it could help link Crimea and Circassia. But how far should we go back in history - what about Genghis Khan? The Mongol empire split Kievan Rus - Ivan Grozni would have argued he was fighting back. Now it’s 21st century we need general agreement not to make any empires great again.
(reminder that they aren’t alone in this. It doesn’t excuse them but one has to look at one’s own country)
Everyone killed each other in the past and comitted terrible acts but SOME countries really stand out…
Why does one have to qualify their opinion that genocide is bad?
Even with the war going on, the Soviets still had time and resources to conduct their own genocide.
Stalin was a big fan of genocide, especially in Ukraine. He also deported all the Jews to Siberia and created a “Jewish Oblast” in the middle of nowhere, the only place Soviet Jews were allowed to live unless they were extremely useful.
What a colossal bastard. His only benefit was he fought Hitler.
And he was perfectly happy to work with Hitler until Hitler betrayed him with Barbarossa. Colossal bastard doesn’t begin to describe what an absolute fuckface he was.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
God, I’d hate to see your comments on pictures of Holocaust trains without any guards in the frame.
Removed by mod
Are you seriously denying genocide rn?
It’s a tankie’s favorite pastime
deleted by creator
Call me a hippie but maybe we shouldn’t be plotting mass murder.
deleted by creator
No they haven’t stop being fucking hyperbolic.
the man is already at nearing the end of the hyperbole at this point.
Between 2006 and 2009, fewer than 1 percent of mass-casualty events — intentional, violent attacks where four or more victims are killed within a 24-hour period — had a link to extremism. Between 2018 and 2021, more than 5 percent did, according to a FiveThirtyEight analysis of two databases from the University of Maryland’s National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism and a collaboration between USA Today, The Associated Press and Northeastern University.1 This data is supported by reports from the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and the Anti-Defamation League, all of which show a marked increase in violent attacks linked to extremism in recent years.
Over the last decade and a half, the number of mass-casualty events each year has remained relatively flat. In 2006, for example, there were 38 mass-casualty events in the U.S., resulting in the deaths of 183 people, according to the USA Today/AP/Northeastern database. In 2021, there were 35 events, resulting in the deaths of 172 people; there were also an average of 31 mass-casualty events for each year from 2006 through 2021. Yet despite the total number of mass killings staying static, the number of events with extremist ties has increased, resulting in a higher percentage of extremist-linked mass killings.
There also has been a rise in the number of extremist-linked violent plots, according to the data from START. When extremists consider violent acts, they don’t always result in mass-casualty events. Sometimes perpetrators are caught by law enforcement before any violence can take place; other times fewer than four people are killed, even if the perpetrator likely intended to harm a greater number of people.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/extremism-mass-casualty-events-shootings
Nothing in that talks about Trump voters
Your point sucks too because it’s all but obvious that they’re Trump voters. However, their point also sucks because even purposeful stochastic terrorism is not the same thing as a government run extermination program.
Those are rookie numbers, kiddo. See original post.
Whether or not they’re ‘rookie numbers’, the principle remains. Please do not engage in any sort of atrocity denialism.
Yeah, I should have communicated more clearly. Sorry. I just mean that these aren’t in the same category. Scale, motivations, and government involvement are all totally different. It is a matter of principle. The two are not comparable. Even a little.
Certainly, I don’t mean to imply mass shootings are the same or on the same scale as government run murder programs. But mass shootings are still mass murders, and the far right are responsible for the lion’s share.
Genocide advocacy is not kosher here. Refrain from that in the future.
You should be banned for a month.
They really don’t burn well though
Do you just get a raging boner everytime you see a post and think " I can jam me some politics right up in here"? You people are why the Internet sucks now, if you fell in a pond with a large rock necklace the world would be much happier.
I agreed with you, until the last part. That was unnecessary.
Removed by mod
‘kys’ style comments are not welcome. This is your only warning.
deleted by creator
Champ I was referring Mr retard who decided to make this about American politics. Had you read the comment I was replying to you would have noticed that. But nah why would ya do that when you could rabbling and useless. If I had to guess you have populated and made at least 1 extra gootard to carry on you legacy of… what ever it is you are doing.
Don’t use the term ‘retard’ or its variants here as a form of disparagement. It has an ill history to it.
It’s neat how you people think you are helping with this… the Internet had a solid 20+ wild West years where it was fairly fun, inclusive, and happy. Then Facebook came around and gave the average person the chance to " have their voice heard"… in reality it was the equivalent of city folks moving to a quiet farm town and bitching that their neighbors tractor is too loud, their cows smell, and their siding is the wrong color. All that warrioring you think you are doing is doing nothing but driving a wedge between every one and building anger… take a look around, look at comments, look at any social media and notice how on edge and angry everyone is… then remember you people are the reason it is there.
Alright, well, I’m not interested in arguing the issue, going forward there will be bans handed out, so keep that in mind.
Meh
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
[David Attenborough]: notice here as the Internet incel attempts use the " no you are defense" it’s rare to see a internet commenter is such dire desperation… but such is life.
deleted by creator
O sorry your not that special, I just reply to comments and algorithms messages you to tell you about it. Nobody cares enough to talked directly to you, but just pretend you are quarantined and have some fun with it.
ah yes, that can’t happen here, not to us, we are special and inherently good!
So far over your head you thought it was a bald eagle.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Anyone else feel a very distinct narrative being pushed with these last few posts?
I seem to have touched a nerve.
First the Anne Frank graphic novel, now this comment. Fascists really hate the “narrative” of historical truth.
I don’t know, historical “truth” is all about focus, editing and which documents, details and context are hidden, lost, forgotten, censored, omitted, overlooked, not even recorded. In the end it is a narrative and can be shaped by bias like a newspaper: you need to read a few different ones to get an idea of what actually happened, unless you lived it and even then it’s interesting to see what it looked like to others. What is important is that there is free access to historical documents and information so you can ask questions that were never answered before in textbooks and still get answers instead of an uncomfortable void in some parts.
Okay, but this actually happened and is well documented. The event is not under question.
Yes, this case is pretty clear and the intentions and alternatives are clear too as far as I can tell, it’s a classic imperial strategy of homogenisation.
PS: What I was thinking of in the comment above when I wrote that was the Wikipedia article on the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and how the Soviets were apparently chummy (not just non-aggression) with the Nazis before being invaded by them (1st order correction to what I used to think: that they hated each other) and there is actually a 2nd order correction to that correction from documents found showing that Stalin tried to form an anti-nazi pact with France and the UK, but it was rejected in favour of appeasement, which puts that in a different light too…everyone comes out of it looking foolish.
this is the longest, most mentally gymnastics holocaust denial I have seen in a long time
Actually, I was talking about the way authoritarians manipulate history by denying people access to information, but you can shoehorn whatever you want, sure, lots of other people seem to have done so too looking at the downvotes, lol. The truth is what you can prove, not reality. There is proof of the Holocaust, but that is what we are aware of. Lots of other things happening at the time, like the Crimean Tatars goes unnoticed until focus moves there.
I was talking about the way authoritarians manipulate history
translated to normal: “I was talking about the way (((they))) manipulate history”
I think you’re being unfair - I legitimately think they’re talking in the abstract here.
I mean ya, sure, I agree they are referring to it in the abstract, but does simply referring to it in the abstract really change the meaning of what he is saying? other than, it allows for one to basically offhand discredit reality and atrocities by insinuating that some shadowy “they” is controlling the global narrative.
It’s true that it was official policy in soviet-colonized spaces to erase the local culture and power structures, replacing it with Russia’s, and paper over what happened with self-serving stories as the story of record. It’s also true that this is a thing they have in common with every other colonizer; just as the Europeans colonized the shit out of the Americas, Russians colonized the shit out of the Soviet republics (and their own territory).
Yes, the process of colonizing in this fashion involves the deliberate destruction of inconvenient fact- but saying “we can’t know the truth” participates in its erasure.
I didn’t say we can’t know the truth. I said the truth can’t be known if you can’t ask questions and don’t have free access to investigate the dark past. Some dude even called me a holocaust denier 🤡
Yeah, the narrative of documented historical fact.
There’s CCP and Kremlin propaganda all over Lemmy, of course people will tell the truth to counter it.
A direct result of denialism in the community,
What narrative would that be?
“Narrative” is a funny way of saying “woah I’m an idiot”
Ah yes, the narrative of, checks notes, “objective and verified facts that happened”.
Are they doctored photos?
Do you take issue with the title?
Hey you absolute idiot. This is history, not a narrative. Get the f out.
well aren’t you important!
