3 ms·
It is hard to draw the line, because you need first to build the concept of a "people" (or nation?) then try to find out what's the collective will. But you can
by gbog 10y ago
It is hard to draw the line, because you need first to build the concept of a "people" (or nation?) then try to find out what's the collective will. But you can't either dismiss this, as people right of self-determination is a core principle.
If a nation somewhere collectively decide they do not want, say, modern medicine, or access to Internet, I will think it is stupid but cannot come there and tell them that I know better.
- berntb 10y agoHow many percent of the population forced out and/or sent to prison camps do you think is a serious limit? Lithuania was at ~ 15% after WWII. Or does it have to be mass murders of a large fraction of the population? (And yes, 'grive' do have a point -- at the time, there were other problems. It was just not an alternative to continue WWII. After that, a new war would be nuclear. No way to win those.)
- gbog 10y agoIt's not a matter of percent. If a very corrupted country decided to get rid of all mafia at once, it could mean a high percentage of the countrymen tried. However getting rid of an ethnic minority, or of the homosexuals, is not ok. The limit is very hard to draw precisely。
- berntb 10y agoUh, in which country have the organized criminality ever been over 1%? 3%? :D Regarding Lithuania we talk about getting rid of 15% not of the "ethnic minority" but of the "ethnic majority", then replacing them with a more "dependable" population.