Jesus! What a downbeat essay.

We should be more positive about Hitler. His Mum loved him - that's one, Aye!

People who act like monsters in unusual times are rarely much different from the rest of us; in fact we could be one of them in similar circumstances.

We are already seeing “blind conformity to authority-the authority of totalitarianism”. Who knows how far it will go if our political class doesn't get its way! Australians were subjected to house arrest, police brutality and rubber bullets during Covid.

OK. So something of a far-cry from the extremes of WW2, and the extremes of current Communist China - now; but …..

‘Evil’: “profoundly immoral and wicked”. Plenty of that around in Australia and the rest of the West. Not to mention the others. How about the potential Jew-gassers allowed into this country by our morally bankrupt political class!

Hitler was one man who took Socialism and racism/anti-Semitism to an extreme. He would have died a frustrated old man had he not been aided and abetted by “normal people”. It's too easy to single out one person and keep banging on about him ad infinitum. And to use his name to describe people you don't like or just disagree with.

Talking about good and evil leads us nowhere.
Good and evil exist only in the actual words, and in your imagination.
They come about because the matter (material) around us moves and changes.
Sometimes from natural causes, and sometimes from man made causes.
Those changes mean the 'landscape' around us is different.
This might benefit us, or it might cause us loss.
Right there is our 'good' and 'bad' concept.
But either way, it is just a change taking place.
If it has a particularly bad effect, and is man made, we might call it evil.
But these are just names given to changes which take place.
And the reality is they are still just changes.
There is nothing inherently good or bad or evil in our world.
There is only change taking place.
Because we can reason, we should be able to decide which things benefit us?
And avoid those which cause disadvantage?
In this way we can plan and plot to make a smooth path through life.
And avoid stuff which is detrimental to our living in comfort.
We need to keep in mind though that that which benefits us will probably cause a disadvantage somewhere else.
When we clear land to grow crops, we de-house, and probably kill, thousands of other life forms.
So we need to discriminate when making our changes, and be careful and prudent at all times.
Just enough to sustain us, and no more.

I was sort of with the author Mamtimin Ala until he said "She welcomed the entry of mass non-white migrants into Germany and other EU countries as against 'the ideologies of white supremacy and privilege'".

At that point he lost credibility to me.

In a sense the Uyghur's are just trying to protect their own culture just like the German Prussian's were trying to do after WWI after they lost a large portion of their territory.

At different stages of history the Spanish, British, Russian cultures, etcetera removed what they considered foreign cultures from their borders. You could argue that the Christian Missionaries were devil agents of white privilege and colonialism or you could say that they were engaging in cultural exchange for common understanding and common-wealth. You could say that 'European Colonialism' was White Superiority and Supremacy but their technology was relatively objectively superior or more advanced.

You could say that the French Revolution was a seminal event of peace and democracy and brotherhood and equality or you could call it an orgy of blood.

Given that The West is one of the few cultures that cares about cultures struggling to defend themselves (The Uyghur's) it seems ironic that the author would try to deprocate their value to the world. The Marxist's see culture as slavery and class warfare (and blood) as the people rising out of slavery. The reality is that all civilizations are hierarchical- there is always a top dog in the pack- but even the top dog needs to understand the rules.

As Machiavelli observed there is a fundamental difference between the Roman/ European and Asian models of government. The Roman model has native governors and local traditional culture within the hierarchy whereas the Asian model is monolithic. Marxism seems more similar to the Asian model.

People who really only know what they've been indoctrinated with commenting on a reality they don't grasp is what caused so many to take up arms to their own detriment !

I don't know what his fellow Uyghurs think of this person, but he does nothing for me. When he or anyone else starts chuntering about 'white privilege' I write them off automatically. I would have thought that a Uyghur would have enough material to work with by way of Communist Chinese and the way those non-white privileged people treat his kind in China.

History lies at the core of every conflict.
And as we know it is usually written by the victors.
At the Nuremberg Trials the doers of evil were put on
trial while the equally evil doers the Soviets sat in
judgement.

Adolf Hitler had a death kill count of 17M deaths.
Joseph Stalin had a kill count of 23M deaths.

And history is full of many more evil doers. Ranging from
Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Mao Zedong, Slobodan Milosevic,
to currently - Vladimir Putin, to name just a few.

Let us stop allowing evil dictators to take office no
matter how "charming" they may appear. And if we do have
someone evil in office surely we can find better ways to
get them out than murder, war, or by aggression?

We've got a former US president running for office again.
An unstable man - with a deplorable record. Whose time
in office may end democracy as we know it. Will he be given
an opportunity to wreck havoc?

Time will tell whether we have learned anything from the
past.

Time will tell whether we have learned anything from the
past.
Foxy,
A lot of people have & they will vote accordingly, will you accept it ? Something tells me you won't !

And now for Banksy's completely different http://youtu.be/QtgyZ7zueYA?si=v0wEhmlYI9tqkdVb&t=1m32s

Hitler as the face of evil; that would be the face of evil in a modern sense, however, when the evil achievements of the Nazi regime en total are viewed in a human historical context, then he was a standard run of the mill personality with above ordinary ability to organise a defeated Nation into a powerhouse of productivity, made the more difficult by evil intent on the side of the victorious Allies. What creates evil is the surround sound system of plunder!
It stands as a stark example to copy for the opportunist.

The problem with genocide is that it works effectively to solve otherwise unsolvable problems. Take for example the current state Israel finds itself in now, surrounded on all sides by a ruthless enemy much loved by influential elements of the West wishing Israels elimination.
The same environment which was facing Hitler before his infamous rise to power, presenting him now as the notorious “Hitler”.

Is it a case of “what goes around comes around”. There is endless potential for the rise of many more Hitlers; don’t give up yet!

We only have to look at Israel's current government
and the war crimes that it's committing. The abused
have become the abusers. The tragedy of the Palestinians
is also the tragedy of the Jews. Israel will destroy itself.

Look at Putin and what he's getting away with. Then look
at the US. What will happen if Trump gets elected?
How will things change not only in the US but for its allies,
including us in Australia?

Imagine a world without war.
What would it be like?
Without war and conflict to whittle away at the population, it is likely that that would surge.
We would quickly become overcrowded?
One upside of war and conflict is that it helps to limit population growth.
So unrest throughout society provides a discernable benefit?
As has rightly been said; 'tis an ill wind which blows no good'.

"You could say that the French Revolution was a seminal event of peace and democracy and brotherhood and equality or you could call it an orgy of blood."

Embrace the clarifying notion of "and". Seminal event AND a bloodbath.

__________________________________________________________

The Uighurs genocide of course reveals the hypocrisy at the heart of the world leadership and the left in general. They'll turn away from the overwhelming evidence of the destruction of a largely helpless ethnic group and pretend that it doesn't happen while at the same time demanding that the Israeli's not defend themselves to avoid a similar genocide. Genocide and ethnic cleansing abounds in the world today - the Kurds, in Pakistan, Darfur, Sudan, North-West China. But only Israel's efforts at self-defence gets the attention of the world.

______________________________________________________________

Hitler is a convenient bogey-man. As has been said, he was an also-ran in the world of mass-murdering despots, outdone by Stalin and Mao in the 20th century and people like Genghis Khan in the previous periods. Yet Stalin and Mao can't be held up as evil because they were clearly of the left and are therefore exonerated if not venerated. Hitler, while also of the left, has been successful painted (!) as of the right and therefore can be called evil. And thus he is.

mhaze said- "Embrace the clarifying notion of "and". Seminal event AND a bloodbath"

Answer- My point was that from different perspectives an event can be either greatness (good) or a bloodbath (evil) based on ideology.
If someone can't bring themselves to say anything good about the other side- then that's a sign they are ideologues- and not to be trusted.
I think you followed up with this in your second and third paragraphs.
Kudos.

Of course sometimes bloodshed is necessary. This argument seems to be supported by ideologues on many sides.

mhaze

Where is the evidence of the Uyghurs genocide outside of obvious Western propaganda?

It’s interesting to balance this tale against Chinese counter propaganda on the subject.

I wasn't around when WW2 eventuated but I'm always wondering as to who really started it. The invasion of one country is just that, an invasion. When other Nations then gang up the Nation that invaded a country, aren't they then the ones who turned the whole show into a World affair i.e. World War ?

"My point was that from different perspectives an event can be either greatness (good) or a bloodbath (evil)"

Yep I got that. I think I'd say that the 1789 revolution started with the idealistic and noble intentions but devolved into a nightmare. Started with greatness - became a bloodbath.

Because of the early promise, people were prepared to try again - 1830 and 1848 - in the belief that the noble aims could be achieved and the bloodbath avoided.

The 20th century experience has pretty much put an end to that type pf utopianism.

"Where is the evidence of the Uyghurs genocide outside of obvious Western propaganda?"

There are any number of independent reports, and inquiries together with eye-witness testimony to show that the active suppression and subjection of the Uighurs is taking place. Whether that qualifies it as a genocide is in the eye of the beholder.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/6/4/uighur-tribunal-hears-evidence-of-alleged-china-abuses

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-59595952

http://www.theatlantic.com/the-uyghur-chronicles/

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-53220713

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071

and thousands of other reports.

"The invasion of one country is just that, an invasion. "

But the invasion of many countries is very different.

Hitler invaded Poland. But that wasn't a world war.
England and France declared war on Germany but did precisely nothing belligerent - the so-called 'Phoney War'. Still no world war.

Then Hitler invaded Belgium, Holland and France. That's closer to a world war. Then he invaded Africa and the Balkans and Greece. Closer still.

Then he invaded Russia and declared war on the US. And that got us a world war. Its pretty clear who started it.

Equally, Japan invaded Korea, Manchuria and the China. Not quite a world war but close. Then they attacked the US, invaded Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia, PNG (I'm using the modern names here). World war. Again pretty clear who started it

England and France declared war on Germany
mhaze,
Had they not acted in that way things could have ended with the invasion of Poland.

mhaze said "The 20th century experience has pretty much put an end to that type pf utopianism".

Answer- I agree but some still point to the French Revolution as a social good. Dostoevsky saw the French Revolution as the start of the path to Nihilism and Proto-Marxism. Marxist's seem to use it as a boogie man against the capitalist aristos even today. I think that it started earlier with The Reformation, The Renaissance, and The Enlightenment. Nietzsche would say it goes all the way back to Constantine with the Roman adoption of the Priestly Code over the Knightly Code- where virtue became associated with weakness- the corruption of production necessary for life.

Even Plato's in the Republic seemingly wanted to remove the Guardian Rulers from the requirement to be mindful of the requirements of survival. Schoepenhauer made similar comments that philosophers can't see the true universe when subject to the prison of the human condition. But Schoepenhauer had spent a fair bit of time in India and had become somewhat mystical.

But many in The West still have a strong drive to be with nature rather than the utopian urge

#Where is the evidence of the Uyghurs genocide outside of obvious Western propaganda?"#

I see this as an exaggeration of an event on Chinese soil, to be solved in a Chinese Communist Authoritarian way.

Compare the Jewish question in Germany viz 1938-1945 resulting in 6 million Jews executed.
The West was less than helpful, and allowed these deaths to occurs

The Eyghurs have more twists and turns than a dying snake before sunset.
Firstly and foremostly, the Uyghurs are Islamist: Through the Chinese eyes, Islamic terrorists.

Here is the point at which the West actually giving a toss about the welfare of Islamic terrorist in China, turn itself into Western Propaganda.

For evidence, we now visit the situation which has confronted Israel with a growing desperation, combating Islamic terrorists on multiple fronts.
International pressure from Western Countries, with a lead from the United States, has prioritised the concerns for ruthless Islamists, over and above their most trusted Allie in the ME.

I’m really surprised you would accept that the Uyghur question, in lite of simple global evidence, on face value, which is an exaggeration suitable for Propaganda of (particularly), the Democrat Administration. It’s their invention!

mhaze

I don’t get off on demonstrating yourself as either gullible or plain uneducated.

I’ve just noted the links from above you proffer as evidence:

There are three links from BBC. Avowed Antisemites meaning pro Islamist , co incidentally along it’s our own sad version, the ABC.

Next the Atlantic; an avowed mouthpiece for Democrats.

And the laugh of them all, Aljazeera. Sponsored and controlled by Qatar, the terrorist hub and major spouses of Global Islamic Terrorism. Also the sponsors of pro Palestinian rioters in Universities all across the West.

All of them are pro Islamic anti Western, anti social sponsors of lies supporting either in principle or in kind ($), pro Islamic Terrorism . Shame on you!

The media likes to focus on drama and division.
It's what sells. It isn't easy to seek out professional
journalists, academics, and others that publish articles
that inform. Many of us prefer facts to fiction. Few of
us seek various media outlets to get diverse views.

We're all influenced by our own political ideologies,
whether we admit it or not.

individual,

"Had they not acted in that way things could have ended with the invasion of Poland."

That's just historically ignorant rubbish. Even if they hadn't decided to abide by their treaty obligations with the Poles, Hitler would still have invaded eastern Europe, the Balkans and finally the USSR - ever read 'Mein Kampf'?

Indeed with no obstacles in Britain to his plans he probably would have done those things earlier than actually occurred.

Equally, the Anglo-French declaration of war had nothing to do with Italy's North African adventures and would not have stopped them, and would not have changed Japan's invasion of S-E Asian and Hawaii.

Taking one event out of a whole series of events and saying that's the sole cause is something that only someone not in the slightest versed in history could contemplate

diver dan,

All the links I showed were reporting eye-witness accounts, some from actual victims, some from people on the periphery of the genocide. Concentrating on who reported those eye-witness accounts doesn't make them wrong.

It simply reveals someone who has decided to reject all evidence they don't want to be true through spurious means. A fact doesn't cease to be a fact just because you don't like the politics of the people reporting the fact. But if you are determined to ignore all the evidence that you don't want to be true by any means at hand, then carry on as you are.

I know that there are any number of people out there who won't accept the evidence for the genocide unless Xi himself stands up and admits it - and even they they'd probably call it a deep fake.
BTW here are a couple of reports from the ABC on the same issue...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-20/chinese-authorities-change-uyghurs-village-names-/104001048
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-20/uyghur-muslims-australia-welcome-us-accusing-china-of-genocide/13072310

It'll be fun to see what excuse you use to disregard them.

It was exactly the same as regards the Holodomor and Stalin's Great Purge. Despite the overwhelming evidence for it, the communist apologists rejected it all based on the claim that ot was being reported by people hostile to Russia. Of course, it wasn't reported by people favourable to Russia because they were actively suppressing it. Even when the Russians themselves finally admitted it, that likewise was rejected.

So if you want to believe there's nothing nefarious going on in Xinjiang then clearly there's no evidence that you'll ever admit as valid. Be that as it may, don't kid yourself that you aren't being led down the garden path here or that what you're doing is anywhere near the search for the truth.

mhaze

The ABC. That’s further insult mate!
I stopped taking anything the ABC says as credible years ago. I’m in front of the pack.

If any news organisations sprout antisemitism, click, off they go forever.

You’ve already decided who’s side your on. Click.

Canem Malum,

Every event has proximal and distant causes. The France of 1789 was a product of all that had gone before it and therefore the revolution was, to some degree a result of all that had preceded. There's little doubt that the Reformation and the Enlightenment were very influential as was the expansion of learning and the dissemination of ideas as a result of the printing revolution.

But it also ought to be born in mind that the French Revolution wasn't an uprising of the people but instead a revolution of the bourgeoise, of the middle classes if you like. It was concentrated in the major cities and almost entirely in Paris. The country-side was little involved and if anything, antagonistic to the revolt.

The middle class was a new phenomena in France (not so Britain) and fell through the cracks between the peasants and the aristocracy. They believed their true value to the society was being supressed by an avarice aristocracy that ignored the needs and ambitions of this new class.

As such the revolution was a much a product of the new mercantile class, the expansion of world trade and the expanding manufacturing processes that created the middle class.

diver dan,

Oh so you'll only accept information from sites that aren't antisemitic.

Well that does rather limit your perspective. Still....

"China continues to commit genocide with impunity in 2024 as the international community fails to take meaningful actions to hold it accountable."
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/yellen-must-demand-end-to-uyghur-genocide-during-beijing-visit/

or is Times of Israel also too antisemitic for your liking. Oh I'm sure you'll find some reason to reject it.

"You’ve already decided who’s side your on. Click."
That's true. I'm on the side of the evidence.

Mhaze

“Click” your back on for a minute.

I know whose side I’m on, and it’s definitely not the side of Islamic terrorists.

There is no doubt the Uyghurs are getting their just desserts as a Chinese home spun Islamic terrorist collective.
Interestingly, I don’t hear gutless Biden preaching on to the Chinese demanding a two State solution for the Uyghurs, do you?

Think it out mate. The uyghers are getting the same rewards as Palestinians that feel entitled to murder rape and execute their peaceful neighbours.

I hope for your own sake, one day you realise that making friends with excuses for people, capable as an ethnic group, of such brutal atrocities, is like befriending a fire ant!

Ain’t gunna work mate.

Thanks mhaze for the information about The French Revolution (TFR) as being a revolution of the middle class.

Some say that LeBlanc's system of reusable parts was influential to the mass production of firearms and eventually mass production. Not sure if this affected TFR.

That's just historically ignorant rubbish
mhaze,
Well, have you bothered to look into why these events eventuated in the first place ? I don't know about your perception of things but I can see parallels happening now with the Woke.
Something will need to give soon & it won't be pleasant if history is anything to go by.
Parasitism can only push so much !

"Well, have you bothered to look into why these events eventuated in the first place ?"

I've spent many a decade studying the Nazis and the history of origins of both world wars. Indeed I spent an entire year at university devoted almost solely to those issues.

It is truly said that history doesn't repeat but it does rhyme. I don't see any real parallels today to the events leading up to the onset of WW2. There might be some parallels to the pre-WW1 years with a rising power seeking to take what it considers to be its rightful place as first among nations. But even that's tenuous.

The most important lesson to be taken from the lead-up to WW2 is that appeasement never works. Munich 1938 is a lesson every student of international affairs needs to absorb. That is why the fate of Taiwan is so vital. If China is dissuaded there, then all should be good. But if China is able to coerce the world into abandoning the Taiwanese to its tender mercies, then all beats are off.

diver dan,

"There is no doubt the Uyghurs are getting their just desserts"

So let me get your thinking straight...there's no genocide of Uighurs in Xinjiang AND the Uighurs deserve everything they get!! Okaaaay.

Just to be clear, I'm not taking sides here as to whether the Uighurs are a terrorist region. They might well be breakaway group within China and China can't afford to allow any of their subject races to breakaway. And some portion of the Uighurs might well be involved in what we'd consider terrorism.

Be that as it may, the original question you asked was for evidence of a genocide. I was simply answering that in the affirmative and have provided a small sample of that evidence.

You now seem to be saying, you think genocide is a legitimate response by the CCP, which is an entirely different question as to whether its occurring. Personally I don't accept that genocide is ever a legitimate response no matter the provocation.

mhaze,
Do you really not see the elite & the Academic elite in particular becoming increasingly a burden on the working people ?
The half dozen or so beneficial scholars aren't making up for the hordes of unproductive & generally useless among their lower ranks. The French had a gutful & later the Germans did also & now it's the first World working class who are fed up with Tax after Tax & rising costs to support the non-productive elite.
Just look how quickly the housing problem developed here where even Public Servants can't afford to rent anymore. All because the unproductive are syphoning funds courtesy of unproductive bureaucracy. That is what leads to wars ! Parasitism is the cause !

mhaze

There is confusion in your stand on genocide.

You earlier argued that Israel is hogging the international lime light, currently combating an existential threat from Islamic terrorists threatening genocide of the Jews.

Then you opine the ignorance shown internationally towards the Uyghurs and a perceived genocide of their race and culture by China. This is a left leaning view and worthy of criticism .

The Uyghurs are known to the Chinese as Islamic terrorists, and are being controlled ruthlessly in a Chinese fashion. That is not the same as the extermination of six million Jews by the German State 38-45.

You may feel all the sympathy you like, but the fact remains, the Uyghurs are no better or more worthy of sympathy than say Hamas or Hezbollah: they are classified as Islamic terrorists and are deserving of suppression. This is not genocide in the true sense. My point.

individual wrote "Do you really not see the elite & the Academic elite in particular becoming increasingly a burden on the working people ?"

Huh? What the hell ha that got to do with your original claims about Britain and France causing WW2?

That's quite a segue there.

But for what its worth, yes the unproductive classes are a drain on the society and will ultimately need to be addressed. We are seeing signs of that in pockets of the world - Melei in Argentina for example. And I've argued often in these pages that the entire Trump revolution is a reaction by the working poor against the kleptocracy of the urban elites.

Well diver dan, you originally asked for evidence of genocide in western China and I provided it.

You might want to call it something different and/or argue its justified because some of the Uighurs might be terrorists, but genocide it remains.

As such that leaves Xi Jinping in the same general class as Hitler, Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot and hardly, therefore someone to admire or offer support.

Israel does face an existential threat of genocide if it fails in in efforts to defeat Hamas and the other Iranian proxies. But the Han Chinese don't face any such threat from the Uighurs in whole or part. So the comparisons fail at the first hurdle.

mhaze

I’ll only concede one inch towards your argument for sympathy towards the Uyghurs , and that is as a comparison to the general population of Lebanon ; faced with personal existential threats to life and limb from mindless Islamic terrorist Ideologues, thankfully not all Lebanese are turned on by Hezbollah and their destabilisation of the Country. What of them, true!

With family members in both places, I hear loud and clear the personal stories of anxiety.

Clarifying ambiguity:

Both places…Israel and Lebanon!.

Posted by mhaze "Personally I don't accept that genocide is ever a legitimate response no matter the provocation."

Answer- Whenever two cultures meet- perhaps whenever two people meet- perhaps a form of genocide and racism and bias is occurring.
Clausewitz says that elements of warfare are present even in babies.
Perhaps conflict can be managed if we can come up with workable principles- in very specific situations- but not removed from the human condition.

There are also elements of cooperation- but it's naive to think that every conflict can be converted into cooperation.

It's an interesting exercise in philosophy to consider if it is still freedom if you force people to cooperate. My belief is that people have freedom in a hierarchical sandbox based on traditional social structures. All levels of hierarchies have limits to their jurisdiction. Others have said that "those that refuse limit's to their own power, shouldn't have power"- this sounds like a reasonable principle on the limits of government.

CM wrote: "Answer- Whenever two cultures meet... perhaps a form of genocide and racism and bias is occurring."

Agree with the last two but why that should led to genocide is unclear to me.

"There are also elements of cooperation- but it's naive to think that every conflict can be converted into cooperation."

Yes it is naive. Every conflict results in defeat for one or the other, or if not so resolved, the ultimate result is simply delayed for another time. If the end of a conflict doesn't result in a resolution of the original disputes in some fashion or another, then the disputes will inevitably resurface in the future. The rise of the German state in 1870 created a series of disputes with pretty much all its neighbours, a series of small wars and three major wars. the first two of those ended with a peace that didn't resolve the fundamental issues and these were ultimately only resolved with the utter destruction of the German state and its ambitions.

I'm a fan of the Athenian argument at Melos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Melos#The_Melian_Dialogue) summarised as "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must".

Strong powers act in their own perceived self-interest and those around them need to find a way to live in accommodation of that.

This, as regards the Uighurs, mean they are need to find a way to exist in the context of the dominant Han culture. For many that just means getting on with their life as best they can. For some its leaving and for some its waging a Quixotic war to get themselves out from under.

I've got no arguments against the Han targeting the latter and seeking to bring them to heal. However, why that means the entire culture needs to eradicated is fraught. The Han are obviously terrified of the possibility of a radicalised Islam on their doorstep. But genocide is a sledge-hammer approach to a walnut problem. Typical of totalitarian regimes but never justified. Which is why it puts Xi in the same class as the other totalitarian mass murderers.

Thanks mhaze for your comments on The_Melian_Dialogue.

But if 'the alpha chimp' is too aggressive they'll end up dead when two betas ambush him. Enlightened self interest.

"CM wrote: "Answer- Whenever two cultures meet... perhaps a form of genocide and racism and bias is occurring."

Agree with the last two but why that should led to genocide is unclear to me. "

Answer- Bias could be said to be a form of cultural prejudice against another culture- in woke terminology a 'micro-aggression'- over time this bias grows weight and becomes a lever to marginalize and then destroy the culture. Sometimes the culture is ideological or it can be ethnic or otherwise. According to the UN definition you don't have to actually kill people to act genocidally. Some have said for example that taking away territory is a form of genocide.

There are many interesting tactics used in politics and bureaucracy to do something while claiming to be doing something else. The OSS had The Art of Simple Sabotage.

http://www.cia.gov/stories/story/the-art-of-simple-sabotage/

This text talks about expanding project briefs and decision bodies to increase complexity and derail organizations (sounds similar to multiculturalism used to destroy cultures- mostly white anglo culture- but they won't be the last culture destroyed under the rubrick of fairness and equality).

My comments compared 'Clausewitz's warlike nature of all beings' with the concept of universal bias. ie- everyone is biased- bias is a form of war- and war is a form of genocide.

But wars are sometimes- maybe often- justified.

Many woke concepts such as multiculturalism far from being "a means of creating stability and peace" is designed rather "to create instability and conflict" so that some can exploit the chaos.

On the other hand stability is created by reducing complexity by putting borders between adversaries.

Even the strong benefit from borders in a shifting world- as strength can quickly become weakness- wisdom needs to consider enlightened self interest.

The TV series "Yes Minister" is also an example of deception in public policy and mass society.