3 ms·
Well the problem is cultural. As i said, mafia doesn't exist because of some "boss" scares everyone into obedience, but because whole local culture is permeatin
by anovikov 6y ago
Well the problem is cultural. As i said, mafia doesn't exist because of some "boss" scares everyone into obedience, but because whole local culture is permeating it. If the culture is no longer shared by majority of people, mafia turns into just a sort of crime, and then it can be tackled by policing alone, as it was successfully done with Italian mafia in the U.S. (although not without some trial and error).
What's bad about getting to that point by mixing/diluting the population?
Back to ethnic cleansing, i think categorically criticising it is an utter hypocrisy. All stable European states are products of ethnic cleansing done at some point. And while it is ancient history for Western Europe, in case of Central and Eastern Europe e.g. Poland, Germany, Czechia, Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, it was done after 1945, mostly by decisions pushed by U.S. itself. Ethnic cleansing is good for everyone as long as it's done without too much violence. Middle East is just an example of region where formation of ethnic nationalities - process that predates ethnic cleansing - is not yet complete. There is little else fundamentally broken about Middle East - apart from territories being fragmented sometimes down to village level onto fractions of population divided by ethnic, religious and political lines with and hating each other - a process which must eventually result in some of them being butchered and others amalgamating into nations, divided by political borders and united by... something better than just force. In a piece of land where people who have nothing in common have to coexist, there is either a brutal dictatorship coercing them into bearing with each other, or unlimited all-on-all bloodshed (see pre-2011 and post-2011 Syria). Nothing can fix it apart from thorough ethnic cleansing.
Example of reverse is Poland. There is very little which could shake this country, so united in single culture, single ethnicity and single religion. It totally wasn't that way before post-1945 population transfers (ethnic cleansing).
- gnatman 6y ago"Some nations have benefited from ethnic cleansing, so it's impossible to say if it's bad or not" You comment and line of reasoning is nothing short of pathetic.
- anovikov 6y agoI'd say, it's understandable why rich/developed countries oppose ethnic cleansing in other countries: they want to deny them the benefit of stability which the rich countries have, brought long ago by ethnic cleansing, to make their position more exclusive - which results among other things, in lower borrowing costs/higher P/E ratios and attraction of investments. Same cynicism as "nuclear non-proliferation": "we have the nukes so we are safe from you, and we want to make things stay that way by denying nukes to you losers". Both things are understandable, and both are morally untenable. Also, give me a counterexample - a country that lost something because of ethnic cleansing? Not counting those that lost because of being punished for that cleansing from the outside. Nazi Germany comes to mind - they cleansed Jews and lost a lot of science and engineering skill, keeping which could probably give them a chance to achieve somewhat better war outcome (while hardly any chances to win the war in any case). But, they made a big mistake in choice of target group, it's always a bad idea to mess with the Jews. Ofc there are also cases when ethnic cleansing did not work out because they didn't have resources to pull it off, and it turned into a civil war...
- b0rsuk 6y ago> Example of reverse is Poland. There is very little which could shake this country, so united in single culture, single ethnicity and single religion. It totally wasn't that way before post-1945 population transfers (ethnic cleansing). There are two Polands since at least 2015. The right-winged, covertly pro-Russian, nationalist Poland, and the pro-EU Poland. The ruling party is using divide&conquer strategy on its own people (as opposed to on enemies, as practiced by ancient Romans).
- anovikov 6y agoIsn't this what a well-functioning democracy supposed to be? And, you can't be a Catholic and pro-Russian at same time.
- coldtea 6y ago>And, you can't be a Catholic and pro-Russian at same time. You'd be surprised...
- klibertp 6y ago> And, you can't be a Catholic and pro-Russian at same time. It's more being anti-EU than pro-Russian, but the geopolitics of Poland are brutal enough that these are both almost one and the same. And being a Catholic, at least of the variety we have here, pretty much requires you to be anti-EU. The effect is that, the warlike rethoric notwisthstanding, the right-wing Catholic nationalists are working hard to benefit Russia. I think this is where the word "covertly" comes from in the GP.