The liberal will finally be scratched by their lack of access to wine.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 strikes, you’re out

Agreed, but it’s more important to them that they look like they’re fair. You see, they had this really bad PR period during the whole colonial era and they’re really working on their image.

Hard to say, I suspect people decide on a case by case basis, though I myself often hear the term genocide used after the group targeted or the location. The genocide in Germany and its occupied territories during World War II was uniquely historically bad to warrant its own terminology (hence “Holocaust” in many instances).

Most genocides actually don’t have as high a percentage of people killed as the Holocaust did, the Armenian and Greek genocides by Turkey during WW1 are actually more historically representative in that significantly more of the population are displaced, assaulted, and/or culturally destroyed than outright killed. The Holocaust combined the typical traits of genocide with a truly monstrous murder-industrial complex.

This is also why the Gaza genocide is particularly worrying, because unlike many other historical genocides (and none are acceptable), the people of Gaza are boxed in to a very small space, told to migrate to different parts of it, and then attacked in the places they move to. There is no escape for them, and this situation was entirely manufactured by Israel. Whatever the official death toll is at this moment, the real death toll might never be known and is likely significantly higher.

No one could have predicted this /s

USA: Big fan of free markets until communists enter the ring.

Israel: “We’re the good guys!” <executes literal child>

Germany: You see? We’re not antisemitic, we’re just pro-genocide! That’s better, right?