Debate & discussion: “Good” and “bad” genocides

Submitted by Anon on 22 October, 2004 - 11:28

The media’s exclusive focus on the crisis on Sudan is no accident. When it’s an “Arab” militia involved it’s a bad genocide, when it’s puppet governments doing the genocide for the benefit of western corporations, no-one gets to know about it.

Since 1997 the population of the Kalahari region of Botswana have been forcefully removed from their homes by the government and the remaining people have had their water supplies turned off. The eviction sites are known as “Places of Death”, alcoholism and AIDS is rife.

As soon as the evictions had taken place the area was carved up for diamond exploration concessions. Here De Beers, who have profited vastly from the millions dead in the civil war in the Congo, own most of the concessions.

Where are the UN and world leader condemnations of this? It seems this is a “good” genocide.

R Stewart, HMP Prison Woodhill

Add new comment

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.