Is WSJ trying to say the term can only be used to refer to when the Nazis did it now? Isn't THAT convenient.
the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
"Using the word 'genocide' is politically inconvenient because it implies that we're complicit in all of these ongoing genocides in Yemen and Palestine"
"Also there's totally a genocide happening in Ukraine you guys"
Don't forget China.
MSM already essentially memory holed that one
Apparently the genocide either
a. Already concluded silently or
b. Was total horseshit
Is it time to retire the first world?
unlimitedly so
The "Allies" won the war btw
“Is it time to retire a word that’s being used to describe something we agree with?”
I'm not a politician or anything, so maybe I'm very wrong here, but wouldn't it just be better to retire doing genocide?
I think that'd be pretty cool, just my opinion though.
Craven little worms.
Whenever a news headline is a question, the answer is almost always no. I think they make it a question because they don't have the evidence to make it the statement they want it to be.