Quote:
Originally Posted by jinnzaman
Firstly, a governmental action is still a governmental action, regardless if it is local, state, or federal.
Secondly, the federal government did participate in ethnic cleansing on multiple occasions (such as using the military to forcibly relocate the Indians).
Thirdly, its ethnic cleansing because not only were they kicked out but their property and land were seized after they left.
Fourthly, who says that ethnic cleansing has to be violent?
|
In the United States, there is a definite difference between local, state, and federal government. Taking Pakistan as an example, if a Pakistani policeman got all P'Od and burned down his Hindu neighbors house without a federal mandate to do so, and it was reported in a western newspaper as "Pakistani Government Destroys Hindu Property" I'm pretty sure you would be the first to raise your hand and yell false reporting.
Ethnic cleansing against Indians is well known. There was also an order to exterminate Mormons in Utah. I'm not aware of any military action being taken against Mexicans or any other group you mentioned.
"Ethnic Cleansing" as it's used almost always means violence. If a predominantly Black neighborhood lived in a flood plain, their properties were flooded, and the government subsequently bought their flooded property (causing the people to relocate) that would not be considered Ethnic Cleansing, even though the Black Population was obviously eliminated from their land.
Again, just be careful about your definition.