Split Historical Genocide - Derail From Sudan Massacre

[Derec]

Just a bunch of Arabs doing what they learned from the “civilized world.”

Eh?

And don’t come at me with “violence is just part of human history”, this isn’t simply that. What’s happening here is the same colonial logic, in Arab uniforms.

What?!

Gospel always blames those of European descent for every ill in the World.
Even when it's Arab Sudanese fighting against black Sudanese while being funded by the UAE.

 

[Emily Lake]

Just a bunch of Arabs doing what they learned from the “civilized world.”

Wait, what?

Are we just gonna gloss over the whole cradle of civilization, oldest established society known to man, with millennia of conquest, slavery, and violence?

I mean... Arabs have been doing this pretty much since Arabs have been a thing. So have Mongols and Vikings and such.

 

[Tigers!]

Just a bunch of Arabs doing what they learned from the “civilized world.” And don’t come at me with “violence is just part of human history”, this isn’t simply that. What’s happening here is the same colonial logic, in Arab uniforms.

The Arabs were fighting each other long before Mohammed ever arrived. They did not learn it from anyone else. All self-taught, just like everybody else.

Our favourite pastime is fighting each other.

 

[Gospel]

How I went about making my argument was wrong. What I'm trying to say isn't. Ethnic cleansing isn’t unique to Europe or colonialism. Civilizations have been eliminating or relocating populations based on identity since the earliest empires, Assyrian deportations, Chinese frontier purges, Mongol massacres, and Ottoman relocations all fit the pattern. What changed with Europe wasn’t the idea but the infrastructure, modern states turned ethnic dominance into formal policy, justified by race science and nationalism rather than raw conquest.

The massacres in Sudan differ from Mongol or early Ottoman atrocities in motive and structure. The Mongols’ violence was a military strategy to enforce surrender, not ethnic purity. The Ottomans began as conquerors too, but by their decline were already showing the modern and learned logic of homogenizing populations, culminating in the Armenian Genocide.

What’s happening in Sudan today ain't a god damn conquest, it’s internal ethnic cleansing. It’s about erasing specific groups, not expanding rule. The pattern of mass killing repeats through history, but the ideology behind it has evolved, from imperial dominance to ethnic purification.

 

[Gospel]

Gospel always blames those of European descent

No, I don’t, that’s just not true. It’s not my fault history doesn’t always make Europeans look great. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Ya know, like when Texas was ‘sized’ under false pretenses. Me stating a fact isn’t the same as accusing every single person from an particular side of this rock of personally doing it. That's just ridiculous. You weren’t even alive back then, so I really don’t get why you’re rushing to defend people who aren’t you.

 

[Gospel]

Just a bunch of Arabs doing what they learned from the “civilized world.” And don’t come at me with “violence is just part of human history”, this isn’t simply that. What’s happening here is the same colonial logic, in Arab uniforms.

The Arabs were fighting each other long before Mohammed ever arrived. They did not learn it from anyone else. All self-taught, just like everybody else.

Our favourite pastime is fighting each other.

Great, if what’s happening in Sudan has supposedly been going on ‘forever,’ then you should be able to name an empire that completely wiped out everyone for being a specific "race" in the lands they conquered. I’m sure there would be plenty of examples if that were true.

The reality is that pre-modern empires absolutely conquered, killed, and displaced people, but that’s not the same as modern ethnic cleansing. Ancient and medieval powers didn’t exterminate entire populations simply for being the ‘wrong race’ the way we define race (a European standard btw) today. Their violence was usually tied to resistance, tribute, or power, not to erase specific groups from existence. It didn't matter to them who resisted FFS.

 

[Gospel]

Indeed, they don’t give a shit about darkies killing each other, particularly when those darkies are Christian darkies.

Muslim darkies are being killed too.

 

[TSwizzle]

Indeed, they don’t give a shit about darkies killing each other, particularly when those darkies are Christian darkies.

Muslim darkies are being killed too.

They aren't being killed by jooooos though.

 

[Gospel]

Indeed, they don’t give a shit about darkies killing each other, particularly when those darkies are Christian darkies.

Muslim darkies are being killed too.

They aren't being killed by jooooos though.

Does that make the killings better to you? I don't get why you're saying this.

 

[Derec]

No, I don’t, that’s just not true. It’s not my fault history doesn’t always make Europeans look great. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You are certainly grading Europeans on a different scale.

Ya know, like when Texas was ‘sized’ under false pretenses. Me stating a fact isn’t the same as accusing every single person from an particular side of this rock of personally doing it. That's just ridiculous.

And African or Asian or American Indian cultures never "sized"[sic] territory under false pretenses?

You weren’t even alive back then, so I really don’t get why you’re rushing to defend people who aren’t you.

Neither are the cultures for whose sins you always blame Europeans "you".

 

[TSwizzle]

Indeed, they don’t give a shit about darkies killing each other, particularly when those darkies are Christian darkies.

Muslim darkies are being killed too.

They aren't being killed by jooooos though.

Does that make the killings better to you? I don't get why you're saying this.

I thought it was obvious but unless it's Jews, it isn't news.

 

[Gospel]

You are certainly grading Europeans on a different scale.

That’s just how you feel, because you haven't offered any evidence outside of your feelings to back up the claim.

 

[Gospel]

Neither are the cultures for whose sins you always blame Europeans "you".

Oh wow, so either you're making the claim that ethnic cleansing didn’t originate with Europeans or history shouldn’t be mentioned when it involves Europeans because Derec stops feeling warm and cozy inside. Got it.

 

[DBT]

Tribal warfare is as old as humankind. Even the Chimps do it.

 

[Emily Lake]

How I went about making my argument was wrong. What I'm trying to say isn't. Ethnic cleansing isn’t unique to Europe or colonialism. Civilizations have been eliminating or relocating populations based on identity since the earliest empires, Assyrian deportations, Chinese frontier purges, Mongol massacres, and Ottoman relocations all fit the pattern. What changed with Europe wasn’t the idea but the infrastructure, modern states turned ethnic dominance into formal policy, justified by race science and nationalism rather than raw conquest.

India had formal caste systems in place for about 3000 years, not based on conquest but on ancestry. The idea itself isn't somehow uniquely european. Egyptians enslaving the Levites was similarly 3000 years ago or so. Ethnic or Caste dominance is a really, really old thing, and it's been pretty formal in many cultures for a really long time.

The massacres in Sudan differ from Mongol or early Ottoman atrocities in motive and structure. The Mongols’ violence was a military strategy to enforce surrender, not ethnic purity. The Ottomans began as conquerors too, but by their decline were already showing the modern and learned logic of homogenizing populations, culminating in the Armenian Genocide.

I genuinely think you've got this backwards, Gospel. I don't think that homogenizing the population was a learned behavior - diversifying it was learned. For a massive amount of human development, we lived in small isolated tribes that were highly homogeneous. Learning to not kill "outsiders" was a developmental step.

What’s happening in Sudan today ain't a god damn conquest, it’s internal ethnic cleansing. It’s about erasing specific groups, not expanding rule. The pattern of mass killing repeats through history, but the ideology behind it has evolved, from imperial dominance to ethnic purification.

I don't think it's changed as much as you think it has. It's sucky stupid poor human behavior across the board, yes. But genuinely, this isn't some newfangled thing that white folks came up with. Varieties of ethnic cleansing have existed pretty much for as long as we have records, and very likely before then - bear in mind that "kill that tribe" is essentially the same mechanism of us-vs-them behavior.

FWIW, many other species do the same thing - they kill other tribes or groups, they exterminate those that are similar-but-different, often with enormous hostility. Some of it is competition for resources, perhaps. But at the end of the day, it still boils down to eliminating competition for a different genetic line.

I'm not excusing the behavior mind, I'm very much opposed to it. But in order to effectively oppose it, you've also got to understand it.

 

[Emily Lake]

Just a bunch of Arabs doing what they learned from the “civilized world.” And don’t come at me with “violence is just part of human history”, this isn’t simply that. What’s happening here is the same colonial logic, in Arab uniforms.

The Arabs were fighting each other long before Mohammed ever arrived. They did not learn it from anyone else. All self-taught, just like everybody else.

Our favourite pastime is fighting each other.

Great, if what’s happening in Sudan has supposedly been going on ‘forever,’ then you should be able to name an empire that completely wiped out everyone for being a specific "race" in the lands they conquered. I’m sure there would be plenty of examples if that were true.

The reality is that pre-modern empires absolutely conquered, killed, and displaced people, but that’s not the same as modern ethnic cleansing. Ancient and medieval powers didn’t exterminate entire populations simply for being the ‘wrong race’ the way we define race (a European standard btw) today. Their violence was usually tied to resistance, tribute, or power, not to erase specific groups from existence. It didn't matter to them who resisted FFS.

I kind of feel like you're pretending jews don't exist at all. Or ancient chinese for that matter, who perpetrated war and attempted extermination of other groups more than once.

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

India had formal caste systems in place for about 3000 years, not based on conquest but on ancestry. The idea itself isn't somehow uniquely european. Egyptians enslaving the Levites was similarly 3000 years ago or so. Ethnic or Caste dominance is a really, really old thing, and it's been pretty formal in many cultures for a really long time.

Its interesting that you mention the Levites because according to the Bible they were the one Jewish group the Egyptians didn't enslave.
Actual historians say that there is no evidence that the Egyptians enslaved any specific group. It is also well known that the Exodus is entirely mythical, and one of the reasons is that whereas the story had them escaping from Egypt to Canaan, Canaan was actually part of Egypt.

 

[Gospel]

Just a bunch of Arabs doing what they learned from the “civilized world.” And don’t come at me with “violence is just part of human history”, this isn’t simply that. What’s happening here is the same colonial logic, in Arab uniforms.

The Arabs were fighting each other long before Mohammed ever arrived. They did not learn it from anyone else. All self-taught, just like everybody else.

Our favourite pastime is fighting each other.

Great, if what’s happening in Sudan has supposedly been going on ‘forever,’ then you should be able to name an empire that completely wiped out everyone for being a specific "race" in the lands they conquered. I’m sure there would be plenty of examples if that were true.

The reality is that pre-modern empires absolutely conquered, killed, and displaced people, but that’s not the same as modern ethnic cleansing. Ancient and medieval powers didn’t exterminate entire populations simply for being the ‘wrong race’ the way we define race (a European standard btw) today. Their violence was usually tied to resistance, tribute, or power, not to erase specific groups from existence. It didn't matter to them who resisted FFS.

I kind of feel like you're pretending jews don't exist at all. Or ancient chinese for that matter, who perpetrated war and attempted extermination of other groups more than once.

It’s impressive how my explanation of the difference between pre-modern conquest (which was about power, tribute, and rebellion) and modern ethnic cleansing (which is built on racial ideology and nation-state logic) somehow became, in your reading, a claim that Jews and ancient Chinese never existed. That’s a bold reinterpretation, just not one supported by anything I actually said.

 

[Gospel]

There’s an important distinction being missed here. Ancient empires, whether Roman, Chinese, or anyone else, absolutely conquered, killed, and displaced people, but their violence wasn’t identical to modern racial ideology. It was political, territorial, or tied to rebellion. Groups could convert, assimilate, or pay tribute and be absorbed. Modern ethnic cleansing is different: it’s based on racial theories, nationalism, and the idea that certain groups must be removed or eliminated because of who they are, not what they did. That ideology didn’t exist in the ancient world. So pointing to ancient conflicts doesn’t actually contradict the point I’m making, it describes a completely different system of how identity and violence operated.

Jews in ancient times were persecuted, killed, or expelled, yes, but not because of “race” or biological identity, because that concept did not exist yet.

 

[Gospel]

India had formal caste systems in place for about 3000 years, not based on conquest but on ancestry. The idea itself isn't somehow uniquely european. Egyptians enslaving the Levites was similarly 3000 years ago or so. Ethnic or Caste dominance is a really, really old thing, and it's been pretty formal in many cultures for a really long time.

Caste hierarchies and ancient forms of forced labor aren’t the same thing as modern ethnic cleansing.

The Indian caste system was a social and religious hierarchy within a single ethnic population, not an ideology about eliminating whole groups based on biological race. Likewise, ancient Egypt didn’t operate with racial categories at all, their conflicts were political, religious, or tied to rebellion. Modern ethnic cleansing is a product of racial theory, nationalism, and the idea of fixed, unchangeable identities. Pointing to ancient or caste-based systems doesn’t contradict that, because they’re entirely different frameworks.

Your whole ‘others did horrible things too’ routine isn’t an argument, it’s just a coping mechanism people use when they feel personally tied to a historical group because of their race.