French lawmakers pass genocide law on Armenians

[Capetan Mihali]

Aren't the Belushis Armenian?

Albanian, iirc. 

[Viking]

damn my slow ass google-fu

[Viking]

Yet another success for the realignment of Turkish Alliances and Relations by the AKP.

I suppose France will now join the USA and start making ritual annual condemnations of the Armenian Genocide while the Turks turn their Foreign Ministry into a Genocide Denial Institution.

[Admiral Yi]

Albanian, iirc.

You sure?  I thought the in-joke in Wag the Dog was that everyone thought they were Albanian but they're really Armenian.

[Viking]

  I await the natural successor laws concerning Australia/Britain's genocide against the Aborigines, America's against the Indians, Germany's against the Herero, Britain's against Ireland, etc.  It will make historical scholarship a lot more practicable.

None of those Genocides have been, as the french put it, outrageously denied. The Anglo-Saxon response has been, "Yes we did it and we are very sorry about it." The German Response has been "Hottentots? Oh, yes, they are 29th in magnitude of our list of genocides. We were hoping that since there aren't any left nobody would bring that up. Besides the Universe will reach heat death before we can move on from being sorry about the jews and move on to the Gypsies."

This law isn't about punishing a present population of a country for the acts comitted by the government of that country many generations ago. It is about lies, truth, hate and reality.

[Admiral Yi]

Albanian, iirc.

You sure?  I thought the in-joke in Wag the Dog was that everyone thought they were Albanian but they're really Armenian.

Nope, Wiki says Albanian.

[Razgovory]

What if they rose up to protest the conditions they were forced into?

They certainly could have, if there were more of them and they were more concentrated.  But even if they had I doubt it would have been with the symbols of the Japanese Empire, whie the Vendee was using explicitely pro-Royal symbols.

That was rather unfortunate because in the actual event Vendee was not very friendly to the coalition either IIRC it was more against the anti-clerical actions by the Republic than really pro-Bourbon but it was enough to freak the central government out.

They were using explicitly Catholic symbols because their religion was being suppressed.  They later shifted to Royalist and Catholic Symbols.  It's unfortunate because he central government was vicious, blood thirsty and paranoid at the time.  A government that is putting people on barges and then sinking them because of their religion is committing genocide.

[Valmy]

They were using explicitly Catholic symbols because their religion was being suppressed.  They later shifted to Royalist and Catholic Symbols.  It's unfortunate because he central government was vicious, blood thirsty and paranoid at the time.  A government that is putting people on barges and then sinking them because of their religion is committing genocide.

So you are just going to ignore all my points and just keep saying 'it's a genocide' over and over again hoping that will convince me?

The central government thought they would allow the coalition to land and restore the monarchy so they reacted brutally.  Just like the English government did when they thought the Irish were going to open the door to the Spanish.  In retrospect they were probably mistaken.  But as you say paranoia was really ruling the day in Paris.  For not completely insane reasons, but reasons of their own making: their dealings with the Catholic Church.

[Richard Hakluyt]

The concept of genocide seems to have weakened in recent decades. When I was a kid it was more or less restricted to the Nazis and their attempt to exterminate the Jews. At that time nobody seemed to be in denial at all (in British circles) that the Armenian Massacres (as they were known) or the destruction of the Tasmanians were appalling events, but that both these instances (and many others) were tacitly deemed to lack the purposefulness and 100% nature of the Nazi effort.

The concept was invented to describe what happened to the Armenians! 

I am probably a bit more sensitive than most to this concept, given that, growing up, my best friend was of Armenian extraction, and I had many meals at his house, in which his grandmother, a survivor of the Armenian Genocide, would describe what happened.  Armen's family was certainly not in support of the then-somewhat-popular leftist description of the event as "the Armenian Holocaust," though - for the very reason you note.

Heh, you are right (I checked), though in my defence I suspect that less than 1% of the population would know that.

Interesting that your friend managed to maintain his objectivity on the matter despite what happened, he must have been a fine fellow.

[Ed Anger]

What about System of a Down?

I wish the turk would gas them.

[grumbler]

So you are just going to ignore all my points and just keep saying 'it's a genocide' over and over again hoping that will convince me?

Why would he change tactics now? 

The central government thought they would allow the coalition to land and restore the monarchy so they reacted brutally.  Just like the English government did when they thought the Irish were going to open the door to the Spanish.  In retrospect they were probably mistaken.  But as you say paranoia was really ruling the day in Paris.  For not completely insane reasons, but reasons of their own making: their dealings with the Catholic Church.

I don't think it was possible for them to have any dealings with the Church that were not hostile, at that point, because the Church had aligned itself so closely to absolutism.  There was nothing inherently anti-Catholic about the Civil Constitution of the Clergy; it didn't go nearly so far as, say, the British Act of Supremacy and the Dissolution of the Monasteries. 

I'd argue, though, that acts of Carrier were insane, and some of the orders of the Committee of Public Safety were, as well.  The fact that pretty much everyone involved was executed by the government in 1794-95 tells us that my arguments were not mine alone.

[Razgovory]

They were using explicitly Catholic symbols because their religion was being suppressed.  They later shifted to Royalist and Catholic Symbols.  It's unfortunate because he central government was vicious, blood thirsty and paranoid at the time.  A government that is putting people on barges and then sinking them because of their religion is committing genocide.

So you are just going to ignore all my points and just keep saying 'it's a genocide' over and over again hoping that will convince me?

The central government thought they would allow the coalition to land and restore the monarchy so they reacted brutally.  Just like the English government did when they thought the Irish were going to open the door to the Spanish.  In retrospect they were probably mistaken.  But as you say paranoia was really ruling the day in Paris.  For not completely insane reasons, but reasons of their own making: their dealings with the Catholic Church.

What fantasies the Central government entertained are irrelevant.  It does not matter if they think they will bring back the King, or because they fear they will pollute their pure bloodlines, or because they think they Martians in disguise.  When a government commits crimes like this they always think they are justified.  It is the action that matters, not the excuses.  The actions of the French government go well beyond simple war and even repression.

[grumbler]

Interesting that your friend managed to maintain his objectivity on the matter despite what happened, he must have been a fine fellow.

It was his father, mother, and grandmother who maintained the objectivity, especially about what the Jews suffered.  Interestingly the dad, Avedis, was born and grew up in Palestine, so had some interesting views on the Middle East, as well.

Those dinner conversations are some of my favorite memories.  Avedis was the best devil's advocate I ever met.

Oh, and found this very descriptive tribute to him (not that anyone but me really cares): http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/6/451.full.pdf

[OttoVonBismarck]

Correct, no one cares.

[dps]

This is Marti.  He is from Poland.  They don't have a clue about freedom of speech, though they loudly claim that they do.

Well, why should freedom of speech be different than any other subject?

For the record, you sound equally insane to us when you tout death penalty, unrestricted gun ownership or the parents' right to affect school curricula.

Since the first two are not positions that anyone actually holds (insofar as I am aware) and that latter (popular input to curricula) is so common-sense, I think you should clarify that "us" in this sentence is you alone.

Excuse me, but some of us do support capital punishment.  (And the right to own guns, but given the qualifier, I don't have a problem with that part of your statement)

I'd say your eagerness to gag opposing points of view for political reasons ("we would rather gag [them] than let them win elections") is far more like "China, Saudi Arabia and Belarus" than Mihali's putative use of the death penalty is.

Agree.

The only Armenians i "know" are the Kardasians... so, yeah, i hope they all burn.

I don't know the Kardasians (and from what I know iof them, I'm glad of that).  OTOH, I used to like to watch Mannix, and Mike Connors is Armenian, so I guess Armenians are OK in my book.