So you dont have a source of this definition? Because in international law its defined quite differently, which is quite obvious since your definition, as given, would not classify many real instances as genocide.
Legally they have a definition which broadens the concept to not just direct killing of a people, but also acts that lead to the eradication of a culture. For example: kidnapping the children of a group and raising the within your own culture is a genocidal act as it leads to the culture dying off, even though no actual killing has taken place.
Will you categorically stomp your foot and ignore every single argument in that comment as well? Because you’re almost there!
Blaming consumers for things that happen at least three indirections removed from them is childish. A consumer cannot know where all the resources are coming from.
Blaming EVs for this, is just as childish, if not actively evil, since the alternative would be oil extraction and that’s not exactly clean and happy either.
You’re so smart! I surrender, don’t think I’m cut out for the marketplace of ideas!
Maybe just maybe it is bad to be mining resources from uncontacted tribes who could not possibly consent to any of this, no matter how much you want to abstract it and say it’s no one’s fault for doing it.
See, if you would have read my comment and actually bothered to understand it, you would have seen, that I haven’t said no one is at fault here.
So I have to assume, you’re arguing in bad faith, you’re putting words in my mouth to defeat a straw man, while not addressing any of my actual points.
So maybe pull that infantile sarcasm out of your ass and try actually thinking about what you’re saying.
That’s a pretty ridiculous headline imo
What do you mean by your last point. Genocide only being on whole population. Where did you get this definition.
The word. Genus-cide.
It’s the killing of a genus, a race.
So you dont have a source of this definition? Because in international law its defined quite differently, which is quite obvious since your definition, as given, would not classify many real instances as genocide.
It’s the entomology of the word.
Legally they have a definition which broadens the concept to not just direct killing of a people, but also acts that lead to the eradication of a culture. For example: kidnapping the children of a group and raising the within your own culture is a genocidal act as it leads to the culture dying off, even though no actual killing has taken place.
You mean etymology.
Entomology is the study of bugs.
Yes and relevantly here it also ceases the necessity of total eradication.
I categorically disagree, and callous people like you are the reason why something like this is allowed to happen in the first place
Will you categorically stomp your foot and ignore every single argument in that comment as well? Because you’re almost there!
Blaming consumers for things that happen at least three indirections removed from them is childish. A consumer cannot know where all the resources are coming from.
Blaming EVs for this, is just as childish, if not actively evil, since the alternative would be oil extraction and that’s not exactly clean and happy either.
You’re so smart! I surrender, don’t think I’m cut out for the marketplace of ideas!
Maybe just maybe it is bad to be mining resources from uncontacted tribes who could not possibly consent to any of this, no matter how much you want to abstract it and say it’s no one’s fault for doing it.
See, if you would have read my comment and actually bothered to understand it, you would have seen, that I haven’t said no one is at fault here.
So I have to assume, you’re arguing in bad faith, you’re putting words in my mouth to defeat a straw man, while not addressing any of my actual points.
So maybe pull that infantile sarcasm out of your ass and try actually thinking about what you’re saying.