“There is no empirical evidence to assume that any Danish or Greenlandic authority, or any individual healthcare professional, at any time had any intention of destroying the Greenlandic population or a significant proportion of it,” the authors of the rejected report wrote. “There was no genocide.”
The accepted report, however, did not conclude whether there was a genocide. The authors wrote that they were not able to determine if any intent to destroy the population existed solely through the forcible contraception cases, and suggested further study that encompassed other Danish practices at the time that affected Greenlandic children and families. The authors did not, unlike the other report, conclusively say a genocide did not occur.
The rejected report says no genocide. The accepted report was milquetoast on genocide. Spoiler alert, it was genocide.
I don’t get why everyone in a position of power is always so hesitant to hold genocide to account. Historians would sing your praises for centuries even for a modicum of justice. Why stint?
The rejected report says no genocide. The accepted report was milquetoast on genocide. Spoiler alert, it was genocide.
Then why were they sterilizing women? What other reason are they using in this report on eugenics?
I don’t get why everyone in a position of power is always so hesitant to hold genocide to account. Historians would sing your praises for centuries even for a modicum of justice. Why stint?
Admission means responsibility to compensate the group that suffered.
Those that did reproduce or just haven’t died yet should be compensated for the loss of the future of their culture.
Just because there is no documented reasoning for the contraception doesn’t mean it didn’t have an intention to keep a group from continuing to exist.
Definition of genocide includes: Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
I know it. I just can’t accept the cowardice.