Dude, there’s like less than 2000 billionaires in the entire world. They aren’t a race of people, or ethnic groups.
Besides, billionaires are the people sticking their boot on everybody’s neck, and creating this dupshit class war. At some point people take a stand against oppression. Violence from the oppressed toward their oppressors is not in any way the same thing.
Nobody says, well, golly, I sure wish those slaves would have found peaceful ways to revolt against their slave owners.
They are a group of people who have something in common. If you’re trying to kill them for that thing(s), that’s genocide. You can sugar coat it in anyway that makes you comfortable, I guess.
Im not trying to do anything, except correct your delusional definition of genocide. I considered including an actual definition of genocide in my comment, but ultimately didn’t. Someone else already did, and you basically threw out a non sequitur about how definitions are made up.
You’re getting down voted bcz you are wrong, and you just keep doubling down. But, I guess if it makes you feel superior to other people, keep on keeping on.
People already refuted your point, and you said the definition is made up. You’ve literally moved the goal posts of your argument so it can’t be wrong bcz in your own words “it’s a definition, like all definitions”. It’s a bad faith argument.
If you want to be against killing people, that’s fine. People are simply pointing out that murdering billionaires doesn’t meet the definition of genocide.
If you want a word for murdering billionaires, feel free to make up a new one.
The legal term “genocide” refers to certain acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
Cool. Don’t care about billionaires, and I care equally what some museums definition is.
And before you run to your search engine of choice to find the “official” definition, know I don’t care about that either. Definitions are literally (like everything else) just made up. A group of people came together and said “this word means this because we say so”. I can decide what groups fall under the definition of genocide if I so choose. And you are also welcome to accept whatever definition you so choose.
I would think the Holocaust Museum would have a better definition of what constitutes a genocide than whatever random definition some bad-faith dipshit on lemmy cooked up in their own head to support their half-baked and lazy position. nobody should take your opinion on this matter seriously.
Dude, there’s like less than 2000 billionaires in the entire world. They aren’t a race of people, or ethnic groups.
Besides, billionaires are the people sticking their boot on everybody’s neck, and creating this dupshit class war. At some point people take a stand against oppression. Violence from the oppressed toward their oppressors is not in any way the same thing.
Nobody says, well, golly, I sure wish those slaves would have found peaceful ways to revolt against their slave owners.
They are a group of people who have something in common. If you’re trying to kill them for that thing(s), that’s genocide. You can sugar coat it in anyway that makes you comfortable, I guess.
Im not trying to do anything, except correct your delusional definition of genocide. I considered including an actual definition of genocide in my comment, but ultimately didn’t. Someone else already did, and you basically threw out a non sequitur about how definitions are made up.
You’re getting down voted bcz you are wrong, and you just keep doubling down. But, I guess if it makes you feel superior to other people, keep on keeping on.
TIL downvotes = being wrong.
:/
It isn’t a non sequitur. It’s simply a made up definition like all definitions. It doesn’t mean they’re right or wrong.
You can either refute my statement, or you can’t.
People already refuted your point, and you said the definition is made up. You’ve literally moved the goal posts of your argument so it can’t be wrong bcz in your own words “it’s a definition, like all definitions”. It’s a bad faith argument.
If you want to be against killing people, that’s fine. People are simply pointing out that murdering billionaires doesn’t meet the definition of genocide.
If you want a word for murdering billionaires, feel free to make up a new one.
From the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum:
Yeah billionaires are not included, sorry.
Cool. Don’t care about billionaires, and I care equally what some museums definition is.
And before you run to your search engine of choice to find the “official” definition, know I don’t care about that either. Definitions are literally (like everything else) just made up. A group of people came together and said “this word means this because we say so”. I can decide what groups fall under the definition of genocide if I so choose. And you are also welcome to accept whatever definition you so choose.
I would think the Holocaust Museum would have a better definition of what constitutes a genocide than whatever random definition some bad-faith dipshit on lemmy cooked up in their own head to support their half-baked and lazy position. nobody should take your opinion on this matter seriously.
Cool. Thanks man.
So war is genocide because you’re trying to kill/remove from the arena the group “enemy soldiers”?
k