daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
As for being the earliest instance of genocide in the 20th century, that is also incorrect. That title should probably go to the massacre of the Herero and Nama in German Southwest Africa in 1904. Some 50-90 percent of the population was killed. And why is the 20th century a starting point? If we are going to use the term in its broader sense, it could probably be applied to the massacre of the Albigensians in 1209 (“Kill them all. God will recognise His own."), or the 1763 killing of Native Americans by Jeffrey Amherst by giving them gifts of blankets infected with smallpox (see [[Pontiac's Rebellion]] for details).
The point is that "genocide" is a very loaded term. Use it carefully.
Sure, but there do not need to be physical murders or massacres for a genocide to happen. It can be an attempt to kill a culture as was the case when First Nations children were put into residential schools. Chinese activities in Tibet could also be considered genocidal.
Ec