Well perhaps, although it is true Grant doesn't want to call it "genocide" and he admits this will require a re-definition of "genocide".
But I'm surprised by your assertion that chattel slavery would be considered genocide under Thiago's definition (which as I read it is merely the UN definition.) Chattel slavery *might* be part of a strategy to eliminate a distinct culture. But unless it is somehow the purpose of enslaving people, it wouldn't be genocide.
So I don't see how you could arrive at that conclusion. Please explain?
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas *******************************************************
Hi Bill,
I can't think of instances (ignorance probably) where chattel slavery wasn't accompanied by the destruction of the slaves' cultures, once they had been transported to their owners. I was thinking of the African American experience in particular. Obviously, it was not in the interest of a slaveocracy to physically destroy their wealth producers. But in order better to dominate them, it was useful to demonize and destroy their culture and perhaps replace it with nice Christian ideology.
My understanding is that even the Nazis used their concentration camp captives to produce wealth for employers. Physical extermination though was to be the final stop of this process.
And you were right, I meant the broad, UN definition of genocide which Thiago was using.
Wobbly greetings, Mike B)
===== ***************************************************************** Those who take the most from the table, teach contentment. Those for whom the taxes are destined, demand sacrifice. Those who eat their fill, speak to the hungry, of wonderful times to come. Those who lead the country into the abyss, call ruling difficult, for ordinary folk. -- Bertolt Brecht http://profiles.yahoo.com/swillsqueal
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com