Not exactly. I have, however, seen people use this opinion to downplay the horrors of the Holocaust, which is why I agreed that you really have to make it clear that's not what your intent is.
It's common enough that when I see this take I immediately go :fry: until I can figure out the person's angle.
It reminds me of how people who use the existence and horror of slavery before and after the Atlantic slave trade to downplay the significance of the Atlantic slave trade.
where'd you get these numbers? maximum counts for both iran and bengal are in the neighborhood of 3 million, that'd be parity with jewish victims of the holocaust, and less than half of the overall non-combatant victims of the nazis.
and the highest estimates for iranian deaths both in ww1 & 2 are working from United States population estimates, which is a strange source to put faith in
For bengal ive heard 20 million as a conservative estimate. The iranian famines are estimated from 1 to 13 million. Bu we know that the qajars had a similar revenue as the otoman empire. So we asume a simiral or larger population given that the otomans probably had higher tax eficiency. Yet at some point in the early to mid 20th century iranian population is reduced by half. So that it is now similar to turkey alone. The famine probably acounts for a large portion of that.
20 million in bengal would've been a straight third of the population & i cannot find any references to such. 13 million iranians would be quite close to the entire population of iran, depending on your source.
these are wildly inconsistent numbers with any references i can find online, and while im willing to entertain some amount anglophone bias in the data the fact i can't even find 'disreputable' assertions resembling yours does not give me much confidence. i feel like you've combined/seen combined stats of fatalities over multiple events and pegged them to the ww2 churchill ministry.
there's no doubt such deaths can be blamed on the british over centuries of time, just not during ww2's duration
deleted by creator
Yeah you sure are gonna need to be careful with that take.
Fascism, especially Nazism, was only particularly possible because it learned from the atrocities of colonialism.
This doesn't diminish the horrors of either and both should be treated as evil.
Lebensarum wouldn't exist without manifest destiny.
deleted by creator
Not exactly. I have, however, seen people use this opinion to downplay the horrors of the Holocaust, which is why I agreed that you really have to make it clear that's not what your intent is.
It's common enough that when I see this take I immediately go :fry: until I can figure out the person's angle.
deleted by creator
There's that weird subset of antisemites who aren't quite nazis but have managed to contrarian themselves into something very alligned with it.
To be clear, I'm not saying that's your intent, just why being careful with ones phrasing is important when talking about this.
Edit: Gotcha, thanks for that context hah
It reminds me of how people who use the existence and horror of slavery before and after the Atlantic slave trade to downplay the significance of the Atlantic slave trade.
Churchil killed 4 indians and 1 iranianian for every jew hitler killed.
So yes both are bad.
where'd you get these numbers? maximum counts for both iran and bengal are in the neighborhood of 3 million, that'd be parity with jewish victims of the holocaust, and less than half of the overall non-combatant victims of the nazis.
and the highest estimates for iranian deaths both in ww1 & 2 are working from United States population estimates, which is a strange source to put faith in
For bengal ive heard 20 million as a conservative estimate. The iranian famines are estimated from 1 to 13 million. Bu we know that the qajars had a similar revenue as the otoman empire. So we asume a simiral or larger population given that the otomans probably had higher tax eficiency. Yet at some point in the early to mid 20th century iranian population is reduced by half. So that it is now similar to turkey alone. The famine probably acounts for a large portion of that.
20 million in bengal would've been a straight third of the population & i cannot find any references to such. 13 million iranians would be quite close to the entire population of iran, depending on your source.
these are wildly inconsistent numbers with any references i can find online, and while im willing to entertain some amount anglophone bias in the data the fact i can't even find 'disreputable' assertions resembling yours does not give me much confidence. i feel like you've combined/seen combined stats of fatalities over multiple events and pegged them to the ww2 churchill ministry.
there's no doubt such deaths can be blamed on the british over centuries of time, just not during ww2's duration
That figure might be for a longer timeframe
I didn't realize this was a hot take. I always thought "Fascism is imperialism turned inwards" was well accepted around these parts.
Nazis are the ultimate white people scapegoat, they're all trash