I’m saying that when your country is invaded, worrying about respecting the people who’s culture is the same as the invader’s is a great way to get a bunch of fifth columnists. And I’m not sure why you’re not aware of that. Similarly, despite the many British people of German heritage, in 1939, their “unique British-German culture” was not relevant and was not respected and should not have been.
You could have said the same thing about Southern Confederates in the U.S. in the 1860s. They don’t get to have their own version anymore.
Are you actually comparing Odessa to the Confederates? That’s a real decision you’re making?
Edit: trying to understand this take… Are you perhaps confused and thinking Odessa is part of Russia?
I’m saying that when your country is invaded, worrying about respecting the people who’s culture is the same as the invader’s is a great way to get a bunch of fifth columnists. And I’m not sure why you’re not aware of that. Similarly, despite the many British people of German heritage, in 1939, their “unique British-German culture” was not relevant and was not respected and should not have been.
This was the rationale behind America’s Japanese internment camps, which in my opinion, weren’t great.
I mean there’s a happy medium between not allowing things like allowing them to openly celebrate Russian stuff and putting them in internment camps…
To be clear, you think Japanese Americans shouldn’t have been allowed to speak Japanese anymore?
How long should this have persisted?
I never even came close to suggesting any such thing.
That’s a chunk of what the article is about. That’s one of the main things…
What do you think the article is about?
I thought we were trying to define what counts as genocide, not what this article is about. Which are we doing?