The law is expected to take effect this autumn.

Let’s say better late than never.

  • LarmyOfLone@lemm.eeEnglish
    1110·
    2 days ago

    No, “cultural genocide” is not genocide. There is a pretty clear legal definition:

    … any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

    (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      84·
      2 days ago

      It’s pretty hilarious how tankies suddenly start quibbling over definitions once China is mentioned.

      Where’s that definition from?

      • idiomaddict@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        11 hours ago

        Raphael Lemkin, who first coined the term, defined genocide as “the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group” by means such as “the disintegration of [its] political and social institutions, of [its] culture, language, national feelings, religion, and [its] economic existence”.[2]During the struggle to ratify the Genocide Convention, powerful countries restricted Lemkin’s definition to exclude their own actions from being classified as genocide,[3][4] ultimately limiting it to any of five “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”.[5] While there are many scholarly definitions of genocide,[6]almost all international bodies of law officially adjudicate the crime of genocide pursuant to the Genocide Convention.[7]

        From that wiki page, and I appreciate the just barely academically masked sass about why it’s such a narrow definition