Armenian Genocide (?)

Do you believe?

  • Yes

    Votes: 208 61.7%
  • No

    Votes: 129 38.3%

  • Total voters
    337

Users who are viewing this thread

funny, that. it's almost like a forum and a university are different things. i did not expect that. ?
I agree with you, but I do not agree with your tone nor your method. You're just mean*. Hobeto does have a point. When you refute a source/proof, you have the burden of proof, no matter how right you are. Things will never change because you're right, they change because you can prove you're right.

* I can agree to returning the favour, to some extant, to people like Humman, who gladly use words like poisonous weapons, but I can't agree doing the same thing to people who have been frank and civilized like Hobeto.
 
Analogy does not imply that you have to put same effort for your every post but if you want people to not assume that you just write your argument because you felt so and you don't care to contribute discussion, you have to put same effort. Otherwise it's just plain spam and it is better you would not post it at the first place.

But again, same applies to reading the posts. It is just easy to nitpick one analogy you don't get rather than fully understand what one meant at there. If you don't want to waste effort, you can just ignore it instead of posting spam.
 
i've already said it might've been preferable if an explanation had been posted in the first place.
however, not posting an explanation is not the same as spam.

similarly, just because i think an analogy is stupid doesn't somehow imply i don't get it. and expressing that opinion, coincidentally, is also not spam. :smile:
 
Denying the Armenian Genocide's existence is spam.
I disagree! It is entertaining to see deniers do mental gymnastics. Their ideas twist and untwist with the agility of a penguin and the grace of a worm. Their reasoning is poetically epic. Their facts comparable to inspiring stories of heroic nationalism. You must admire the creativity of their minds. Their arguments give birth to the most entertaining of fictions. Credit must be given where credit is due. The Turkish mind is brilliant and it should be celebrated.
 
If you say so.

I think Armenian Genocide does not exist rather people use the fact that people died during the relocation process as a political material to gain ethical leverage on world politics. There's no evidence of systematic killings perpetrated by Turkish people to cleanse ethnically the area, rather there are people who suffered through hard conditions and died whether they are being Armenian, Turk or other ethnical profiles. It's a negligence of contemporary coup government which they were suppose to shoulder the responsibilty which they did not. In either case people from both ethnical groups suffered the same fate but basic fact that government which decided on relocation decision consisted of Turks made whole Turks being responsible of all the deaths even though government itself formed upon a coup, not an elected one by the people of country. I can accept that people suffered and died but it was not a systematical ethnical cleansing perpetrated by Turkish people.
 
Can we stop scratching our heads over something that may or may not happened in the past and get along in the present and future? What's done is done, and there is no use of blaming the young'uns over something their ancestors are guilty of.

Denying the Armenian Genocide's existence is spam.

So is telling people to accept it, because you are literally asking people to change their opinion of something which is highly debatable and hardly provable, which they will, of course, not change their opinions about. Did I also mention saying that qualifies as backseat moderation? :razz:
 
This article addresses all points against Armenian Genocide. For future reference, from now on, I will take the liberty to lazily take quotes and sources from it since the same arguments are always repeated for both sides.

I think Armenian Genocide does not exist rather people use the fact that people died during the relocation process as a political material to gain ethical leverage on world politics.
That's the thing, it isn't political. That's a lie the turkish world has told itself many times. There will be no consequence acknowledging the events. In fact, an acknlowdgement may even restore some of Turkey's reputation, which is not great at the moment.

There's no evidence of systematic killings perpetrated by Turkish people to cleanse ethnically the area, rather there are people who suffered through hard conditions and died whether they are being Armenian, Turk or other ethnical profiles.
There is plenty of evidence. Any serious internet search will yield results which definitely provide hard evidence of the event occurring. Also, many big non turkish libraries contain excellent books on the subject matter and I encourage you to educate yourself.

there is no use of blaming the young'uns over something their ancestors are guilty of.
The only thing we blame the younger generations is wilful ignorance.

So is telling people to accept it, because you are literally asking people to change their opinion of something which is highly debatable and hardly provable, which they will, of course, won't change their opinions about.
There is plenty of evidence. Any serious internet search will yield results which definitely provide hard evidence of the event occurring. Also, many big non turkish libraries contain excellent books on the subject matter and I encourage you to educate yourself.
 
I did not even mention political consequences, rather ethical leverage even right now you are using against me. I don't care whether people want some land or some apology. I did not kill those people neither Turkish people did, systematically and aimed just for one ethnical profile. A coup government neglected the wellfare of those people and they are the responsible for all those deaths whether if the dead is Armenian, Turk or other ethnical profile. If you think i'm uneducated, it's pure assumption that you are holding against me because i think not the way you think. Well, what can i say? You can "educate" yourselves with any kind of source whether non-turkish or turkish as long as the author is credible and source is reliable.

Also i can send some sources about how to make a proper source research since it was helpful while i was preparing my papers on Bosnian Genocide with western sources back then 3 years ago. So i'm not really unfamiliar with terms like genocide.
 
Last edited:
The only thing we blame the younger generations is wilful ignorance.

I wish that was the only point of blaming in this field of subject for all parties involved, then this entire debate would be much more rational. This is kind of a topic people tend to bring up for unleashing personal grudges, political issues or racist tendencies (by that I mean against the Turks and by the Turks). Hell, I'd say we should rather look into the fact if it happened or not, not if one should acknowledge it or not. Because at the end of the day, acknowledging some historical event changes nothing. We learn history that we might not repeat the mistakes we did.

There is plenty of evidence. Any serious internet search will yield results which definitely provide hard evidence of the event occurring. Also, many big non turkish libraries contain excellent books on the subject matter and I encourage you to educate yourself.

Well, I, personally, am ready to take in any knowledge from any party offered about the subject, but - I know I will ruffle some feathers with this-, you can't expect most of the Turkish populace to actually take in that kind of knowledge sadly. Some will, woefully, keep thinking that the entire world consists only of Turkey, and they are on the right all the time. The day where a big chunk of the Turkish populace will learn that they have a place in the world, have to think objectively and they have to learn about the place they own, is the day we will automatically ditch these kind of debates anyway.
 
Last edited:
I wish that was the only point of blaming in this field of subject for all parties involved, then this entire debate would be much more rational. This is kind of a topic people tend to bring up for unleashing personal grudges, political issues or racist tendencies (by that I mean against the Turks and by the Turks). Hell, I'd say we should rather look into the fact if it happened or not, not if one should acknowledge it or not. Because at the end of the day, acknowledging some historical event changes nothing. We learn history that we might not repeat the mistakes we did.
To learn from parts of history, you need to acknowledge that they happened.
 
Sry for me is not English such a important Language but atleast i can communicate a less which "Whatevers" like you.
Yet you chose to post on the English language side. I don't come to the Turkish language side using Google Translate. Thus, you should strive to post in a manner that other people can understand what you're saying.

For example, you could use Grammarly, a free add-on for Chrome (and probably Firefox and others too), that will perform the same task as a spell checker in Word. It will help you with punctuation and capitalization as well. If you can take the time out of your busy life to write something while expecting others to read it, please spend a few minutes to make sure your message gets through.

Now, having said that-

MEGA LUL @HUMMAN for so lazily copy-pasting from Turkish sub-reddit that he couldn't even fix the formatting and layout. That's like copy-pasting from r/Sino fAcTuaL iNfOrMaT10n about Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Uighurs.

And surprise surprise, Hobeto13 refuses to accept facts and engages in a spam chain of pointless posturing instead. Poor nationalistic ego, so fragile, so vulnerable. You can see the exact moment when he became emotional as his writing got noticeably worse in the heat of the moment.
 
And surprise surprise, Hobeto13 refuses to accept facts and engages in a spam chain of pointless posturing instead.
I critisized the people who just writes their argument without any kind of support and expects us to accept their arguments as "facts". It does not work that way. If you don't want to contribute discussion, you don't have to post anything. It's no excuse to posting spam and i felt the responsibility to explicitly state so that we can go back to discussion.
Poor nationalistic ego, so fragile, so vulnerable. You can see the exact moment when he became emotional as his writing got noticeably worse in the heat of the moment.
Maybe this one will be a real surprise for you because i feel no connection between my argument and Turkish nationalism. I just refuse to bear the responsibility of a coup government's inhumane decision. I don't carry any responsibility over this neither Turkish people do. But even then i don't think it is a genocide. Not in the sense there was no violance, rather it was not systematical and in a level that whole society contributed into this.

If you think the pictures of dead and sick people as an evidence of genocide, you cannot point out every death in the world in the same way just because you feel like it is a genocide of another ethnical profile because you have no prior knowledge about it. I haven't done any big research specifically on the topic of Armenian Genocide or whatever people call it, thus i just stated my opinion. I don't claim them as "facts" like you do for your arguments. But i made both research and took a course on the topic of genocide and perpetrators of genocides and mass murders so at least i hope i can contribute in those parts. So please don't turn it into a personal discussion with Ad hominem. :smile:
 
But if you have taken a course on genocide you must know it doesn't require a "whole society" to contribute.
It's also wrong when you say it wasn't systematic. It's one of the main characteristics of the genocide.

I think you're right when it comes to responsibility. No one today bears any responsibility.
 
I don't carry any responsibility over this neither Turkish people do. But even then i don't think it is a genocide. Not in the sense there was no violance, rather it was not systematical and in a level that whole society contributed into this.
Ah, yes. Since you don't agreed with the past politics of your country it must mean that the country did nothing wrong at all!
Sweden is currently trying to repatriate the sámi people. They could've used the same argument: ''Hurrdurr! We didn't do the foul acts and the responsibility isn't ours and we won't recognize anything since it was a government prior to ours causing the issues!'' But the government is better than that. Acceptance and recognition of the past is the path to redemption. Countries are responsible for everything occurring on their soil. It's the very basic idea of sovereignty. Criminal acts doesn't disappear just because the guilty does.
 
@Hobeto13

I don't understand. Who, what and for what reason is using the genocide for 'political gain'? Also, you should know that everything is politics.

I know I've said it before, but there's a reason why we scrutinize things like the holocaust. It's not merely a guilt trip, we do it because excusing and denying it erodes the belief that it happened, and if normalized, permits the repetition thereof (this happens even today). Holding that Nazism (or the undesirable, associated facets thereof) was really not that bad or that the holocaust didn't happen means that you are going to start tolerating and not sufficiently scrutinizing the associated patterns (such as antagonism, e.g.: this ethnic group really should stop being thieving bastards) which, if normalized, can lead up to justifications for discriminatory conduct, or, in the worst case, ethnic cleansing.

You are not being held responsible for the actions of your predecessors per se (although if the harm is still felt, you should be), but for not taking a hard stance. You will be held responsible if you (personally, as well as the Turkish people) are in the best position to prevent it from happening again. Ethnic cleansings may seem like a fairy tale to us because none of us experienced it in close proximity, but we are in an uncomfortable reality where it is happening right now. Who would've ever thought that China, one of the fastest developing, stable countries in the world would be by definition committing genocide in 2020? Every one of us has some sort of responsibility here. It's an uncomfortable strain for living in an interconnected society. Your actions, passive or not, have consequences. And I sure as **** don't want to live in a world where genocides are happening, if not for purely selfish reasons.

The burden of proof lies with the person who makes a claim, usually, but an average person is not able to have a conversation on the available data of the holocaust unless he's done prior research. It's irresponsible to have that conversation when you haven't, because, you will only reinforce the notion that the holocaust is bogus by providing non-arguments and wrong information (because you haven't done any prior research). The denier is at an advantage because the absence of proof is his proof, hence he only needs to sit back and watch the average person try to scramble together a sentence in response to 'Oh yeah, if 6 million Jews died, then where's your proof?'. No one is ever equipped with sufficiently definite information to prove that claim unless it's their field. This is dangerous, as this type of rhetoric is used to excuse (past) wrong-doings.

In the events that data is inaccessible, the burden of proof is reversed, because, we can measure that holocaust denial results in undesirable attitudes and harm. The same standard is held, for example, for accusations of discrimination, because, it is not possible to prove discrimination as it is impossible to get into someone's head to find out their underlying (subconscious) motivations and sentiments. Still, discrimination is harmful and undesirable to the degree that it is scrutinized to the point of a reversed burden of proof (but even with this standard, it is still difficult to prove discrimination). So, the qualifications for a reversed burden of proof are 1. in- or difficult accessibility of proof and 2. harmful consequences if not sufficiently scrutinized.

That doesn't mean that you cannot talk about it or, in good faith demand proof. This level of discussion can happen anywhere, even on a gaming forum. Intellectual discourse should be open to anyone, anywhere (I think). However, it is entirely possible that such a discussion is shut down, because, none of the participants is able to have the discussion in a responsible manner where not too much misinformation is disseminated.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom