>not wanting your society to revert back to glorious utopian Year Zero

found the intellectual bourgeoisie cuck

I that Kim Jong Un's dad?

>>825258
No, its Pol Pot

>>825260
Got em

>>825208
I have always wondered, why is the Khmer Rogue's actions defined as "genocide"? Obviously Pol Pot and the Khmer Rogue killed a lot of people, but it seems like they mainly killed people by starving them to death and shooting anyone associated with the old regime rather than targeting any particular group.

>>828374
M8 they put them in fucking camps for death-purposes. It's Holocaust-style down to the t.

It's not like Mao "I fucked up our Agricultural system for some weird-ass Economic Plan, sorry for starving you to death" Zedong.

Better question: why the fuck is SEA such a shithole? It's not a recent thing either, the place has been garbage for thousands of years.

>>828421
>why the fuck is SEA such a shithole?
Yes...but no?

Compared to iFrica, it has a shot in life.

>>828421
>naturally multicultural, tribal area
>no framework for native empires
>yet tons of resources that all the other empires want
>violence can determine who controls the flow of goods
>oh shit colonialism!

>>828433
>no framework for native empires
Sri Vijaya
Majapahit
Brunei.
Siam
Burma
Khmers,
Vietnam

How much ass pulling do you do?

>>828374
This mindset amazes me. Literally jews get together to say that Democratic Kampuchea was not genocide and that the holocaust remains special. If Pol Pot wasnt involved in Genocide then neither was Hitler.

>>828410
Right, I'm not saying the Khmer Rogue didn't purposefully kill people. However, it still doesn't seem the same as how the Nazis targeted specific groups such as Jews, Gypsies, Gays, disabled people, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.

With the Khmer Rogue, it seems more like they ordered the urban population to the countryside and worked them till they died. And the people they shot were people associated with the old regime, monks, whoever they defined as "intellectuals:", and whoever disobeyed rather than any specific category of people.

Basically, my impression is that while the Khmer Rogue killed a shitload of people purposefully, they were pretty indiscriminate with the people they killed. So what exactly made people define the Khmer Rogue's actions as genocide rather than mere mass killing?

>>828374
It was a targeting of a group, in the same way that the Holodomor was. Democratic Kampuchea targeted intellectuals, and anyone they believed to be corrupted by education. Anyone wearing glasses was sent to a death camp, if I remember correctly. Pol Pot unquestionably presided over a genocide, and was so batshit insane it took another communist power to kick him out.

>>828451
You just have to kill shitloads of people to do genocide m8. "Identifying -isolating- dehumanizing- killing them" is just a pattern is just UN autism.

>>828442
I'm not Jewish anon. And the world does seem to consider Democratic Kampuchea genocide. What I am asking is, what led to the Khmer Rogue leaders being charged with genocide in international courts rather than just mass killing of civilians?

>>828465
I think it mostly comes down to the fact that all of the people (or the overwhelming majority) were all khmer. Sure Pol Pot and Nuon Chea were Khmer but the fact that they were systematically killing a isolated group of people, not based on political ideology, makes a good case for it to be genocide.

>>828484
The KR was also responsible for killing large amounts of ethnic Chinese, Vietnamese, Laos, and Champa peoples specifically. Personally, I think that's what pushed the UN to call it a genocide.

>>828497
Possibly, however would a person killing large numbers of their own ethnic group not be considered genocide? I'm not arguing with you, just curious if the UN would consider it genocide.

>>828484
Yeah, but the Khmer Rogue also advocated a Khmer nationalist ideology in addition to their communism. For instance, they wanted to reclaim the Mekong Delta from Vietnam and purge it of all non-Khmers. So while the majority of victims were Khmer, it's not like they were killed for being Khmer.

One ethnic group killing another ethnic group seems to be the basic criteria for genocide.

>>828514
I'm not really intimately familiar with the UN's definitions and legal proceedings for classifying genocide, but I'm fairly sure that it has more to do with motivation behind the killing rather than who died. Ex: an American bomb in WW2 killing a village full of ethnic Ainu in Japan would not be genocidal, as it was not specifically intended to kill that ethnic group, just attack Japan in general.

As >>828518 says, the Khmer ideology was steeped in racialist and nationalist language and ideas. While the killing of intellectuals and political opponents wasn't racially motivated, as those were mostly Khmers themselves, the killing of almost all of the Cambodian Vietnamese population was certainly racially motivated, and caused by the tensions and war with Vietnam proper. It is really simplifying the conflict, because, especially in much of East Asia, nationalism and anticolonialism were so deeply intertwined with politics.

Literally who gives a fuck about Cambodia.

>>829436
Cambodians? Their neighbors? People that enjoy the study of 20th century history, and the practice of ideologies?