Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Genocide..... by Poncho-Juju Genocide..... by Poncho-Juju
(AS (ante-scriptum?) : Sorry, sorry again for the re-upload, but I don't quite get it. First I was getting no thumbnail, and then after awhile the entire picture had been replaced with the thumbnail. I don't know if I have to doubt about my comp or DevArt; I rather uploaded a sepia-ized version there, though I hope I won't have to re-upload it again)

AS (another one) : as I recently discovered through some commenters, this picture is featured on encyclopedia dramatica in the interesting article on "fursecution". While I did hope that my years on Internet would ensure me a place of some kind on this fine encyclopedia, I just wanted to make sure everybody understood that this picture is not about furries. Well, now you know.

---

Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to get attention by pretending I want to cut myself to empathize with the victims of genocide. I am not trying to say that genocide is bad through the pathetic representation of a victim of a genocide. The wounded char, somehow, is more an abstract representation than anything else, as well as the background (even if the machetes are supposed to identificate them with the rwandan milicias ; that is to say, genociders)

I am just somehow trying to define the nature of genocide. Not saying it's bad, which is kinda obvious. And it's not exact anyway. Genocide isn't bad. Genocide is a worst in itself.

In every society (and I think that here I'm rewording Primo Levi's analysis), murder has been condemned as something bad, if only because no life in society can be possible if anybody can kill anyone, anytime. Even when societies have been allowing murder, it was still to avoid, seen as a necesity. Civilised societies sometimes allow death penalty over the fact that it's a punishment for another murder. Dictatorships allowed murder of opponents, because they could oppose the leaders or the parties seen as a greater good. Even the killings of wars obey to some logic, killing the enemies or those who could be enemies, in order to win the war -which would be a good-. But the killing isn't good in itself, it's done for something else.

But not in a genocide. In a genocide, killing the members of the marked people is a good in itself, because the whole people is seen as noxious. To Hitler, killing Jews was a purpose in itself, which is why the trains of deportation going to Auschwitz were going before the trains of weapons or soldiers, even in the last times of the IIIrd Reich. While in a war, the enemies usually adult men, in a genocide, the enemies are everybody, and above all women, who will give birth to new members of the people, children, who are the future of that people, and though even dying elderly are seen as having to be killed.
Through this, genocide defines as the exact opposite of humanity, which is why as human the simple evocation of it should slash us as blades.

Genocide also not only destroy humanity by making murder a good in itself, but destroy the humanity in everyone involved. The attempts of genocide, at least those of the 20th century (the only ones I mentionned) all tried not only to kill people, but first to destroy them, to make them lower than crap. Why did Turkey make Armenians do such a long walk to kill them, while it could have massacred them much more fastly, if they had wanted? Why did the hutu milicias chose the machetes to coming the genocide? Why did the Red Khmers in Cambodia, and nazis in Germany, made their victims go through so much humiliations, so much suffering and starvation, so much torture, if it wasn't exactly to break the human figure within their victims, to make them look like animals, more, vermin, that they could easily kill without having to question their conscience?

But by doing so, they also killed humanity within them. Can we still find the humanity in someone who can plan cold-bloodedly the death of million person? Their commitment made of them torturers before human beings.
...And still, they were human beings, as all of us. That seed lies in humanity, maybe, far inside, within every of us.

...I had that rant in my mind for long, and it was good to write it, but that wasn't exactly what I wanted to say.

What is most important, maybe, is that those genocides were all planned mass killing. Planned for a good while.
That is to say that the international community could not ignore them, above all the last ones.
Most likely, all these genocides happened, or were that big, because the international community found convenient to look the other way while they were going on. Everybody knows how the gas chambers were never bombed, while everybody at this time knew they existed. After the shoah, it was said " never again"... And yet again happened two times, in Cambodia and in Rwanda, with nobody lifting a finger (but, in the case of France, to help the wrong force in Rwanda).
Why no reacting? I guess that it's because it happened in countries with no geopolitical importance. Whether Iraq, which holds a good share of the world's reserves of oil, is lead by this one or this one is important to everybody. But when 800 000 persons in Rwanda are killed, it affects the region only, and the interests of nobody but the forces there, and the average powers who need some supporting governments in Africa to keep having an important voice internationally. Thus the world looks away out of decency, because if they dared watching things as they are, they would be tempted to act, which wouldn't be reasonable.

So, and that may be the only important thing I'll tell you, don't look away when you hear about troubles in countries you don't know. Make your ear attentive when you hear someone telling about huge casualties in some distant country. Care to listen for more, try to see how your country is (or isn't) involved, remember it when you vote, show you care.
It's only if citizens clearly show they won't tolerate genocides and know what can be called such, that government will be forced to show attention to them before it's all too late.

Because it's so easy to say "never again" after.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconadam-walker:
Adam-Walker Featured By Owner Dec 29, 2013   Writer
Ironically I learned about the Rwandan Genocide in my last school year and watched a film about it.
Reply
:iconkeksoe666:
Keksoe666 Featured By Owner Mar 7, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I bow my head to a highly skilled artist and a person who knows how to write an extraordinary good text/describtion for this wonderful piece of art keep doing what you're doing and spread the word :)
Reply
:iconemperorkirkwall:
emperorkirkwall Featured By Owner Dec 30, 2011  Student Traditional Artist
i like how it has all the famous genocide moments in history (if not most) and to all you people who hate furries you can all go to hell we furries may not be what you call "normal" but is being a human "normal" if you hate it that much don't comment on furry art.......other wise you defeating the purpose of you ideology.
Reply
:iconblackheartzero:
blackheartzero Featured By Owner May 22, 2011
!!!DONT DELETE!!! - I WANT YOU TO SEE THIS AND HEAR YOUR REATIONS FOR ANALYSIS -

look, yes, i'm a troll, so i wouldn't know jack shit about you'r little, ahem, "oppression". BUT! i do have some friends who are, and they don't get as insane about this issue as, apparantly, you do.

i dunno, so far the only things the trolls do to you is insult you and make vauge, empty threats (I.E, "yiff in hell, furfags") what you psychos, furries who "want to rise up against the oppression", need to remember is thats all they are; VAUGE THREATS! ON THE INTERNET! THEY MOST OF THE TIME DONT COUNT AS SERIOUS THREATS!

i don't get why you would get worked up over death threats that you know they would never accomplish! they don't know where you live! and comparing your internet mockery to actual historic genocide; thats so much of a dick move i cant even laugh at the fact i just said "dick."

Poncho, i may be a troll, and you can yell at how "oppressive" i am all you want, i don't care; messing with maniacs like you has gotten boring for me! now, i just want it to end, pretty much as much as you want it to end.

now, seriously; has it ever occured to you that all this "furry pride" propiganda is actually feeding the trolls more than it's helping you cause? they'll keep mocking you because they think it's funny to see you overreact.

they know that most of the fandom gets really worked up over the smallest insults. case in point, "Genocide....." by Poncho-Juju. yes, look at this very picture and tell me, TELL ME, HONESTLY, that you actually think it's gonna stop you'r little bully problem.

if your answer is yes, then OH MY GOD, how clouded are you? this crap aint helping anyone! if anything, it will ATTRACT trolls!

bottom line; JUST ROLL WITH IT! i should know, i was picked on in my first year of high school, and i didn't make a fool of myself with fruitless "pride speeches"! there's no need to martyr yourselves over empty mockery, there's no need to declare holy war on internet bullies. this propiganda ain't helping anyone! and you better not silence me, or it will prove you truly aren't ready to move on and, in the process, stop getting mocked!
Reply
:iconblackheartzero:
blackheartzero Featured By Owner May 22, 2011
seriously though, those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. how are we going to "forget" if you keep feeding the trolls and ontinuing this vicious, yet pointless, cycle? again; JUST ROLL WITH IT! LEARN TO LAUGH AT YOURSELF!
Reply
:iconblackheartzero:
blackheartzero Featured By Owner May 22, 2011
*continuing, i mean, sorry for the error
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2011
Hey there, a little reminder (which is typed right under the picture, btw) :
"AS (another one) : as I recently discovered through some commenters, this picture is featured on encyclopedia dramatica in the interesting article on "fursecution". While I did hope that my years on Internet would ensure me a place of some kind on this fine encyclopedia, I just wanted to make sure everybody understood that this picture is not about furries. Well, now you know. "

This picture is not, and has never been about furries.

Nobody thinks that mockery about furries (about which I couldn't care less) is in any kind of way comparable to a genocide - to tell the truth, the thought seems so absurd to me that I have troubles thinking anybody could even believe that.

This drawing landed a place on encyclopedia dramatica, probably because they could not find any relevant picture to illustrate the point. I don't care.
The choice of using an anthropomorphical animal in this picture was caused because :
- that's what I drew at the time
- it avoided representing a particular ethnicity, emphasizing the universality of oppression
- it was reminiscent of graphic novels like Maus, which thankfully nobody suspects of representing fursecution.

There.
Reply
:iconblackheartzero:
blackheartzero Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2011
oh my god, i was waiting for a reply!

ok, my mistake, but i still stand by what i say about the "fursecution" garbage, you can't fight a fire with more fire.

also, taking another look at the picture, the rioters in the background... theyre anthro too! i can't believe i missed that!

one moar thing, it's "Anthropromorphic", not "anthropomorphical"
Reply
:iconleekduck:
Leekduck Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2011
The Turkish army didn't just make the Armenian's walk until they collapsed, the men where killed in the villages and the woman and children where walked out to the middle of the desert, and yes many of them died of dehydration but many more where directly killed
Reply
:iconbrutallyhonest2u:
BrutallyHonest2U Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2010
Shit like this is exactly why I hate furries.
Reply
:iconselfdestructbutton:
selfdestructbutton Featured By Owner Dec 15, 2010   Traditional Artist
hahahahaaaa
Reply
:iconmaiyo-saiga:
Maiyo-Saiga Featured By Owner Nov 18, 2010
This picture would've been great if you hadn't made the character a furry. That conveys the wrong message and is overall irritating.
Reply
:iconkaptain-kefiah:
Kaptain-Kefiah Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2010  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
you forgot the native americans genocide, and the aztec\inca\mayan\cuban one.
Reply
:iconleekduck:
Leekduck Featured By Owner Feb 6, 2011
Carib's and Aboriginals too

she also missed out a certain holocaust
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2011
Pssst : shoah = holocaust
Reply
:iconleekduck:
Leekduck Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2011
Yeah I found this out a few months after I wrote that post
Reply
:iconkrazykokonut:
Krazykokonut Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2010
If you look through the comments, you can see the point at which people started coming here off of Encyclopedia Dramatica. Lol
Reply
:iconkrazykokonut:
Krazykokonut Featured By Owner Jan 16, 2010
Your gratuitous use of a random furry, combined with you long winded pseudo-intellectual description lead me to only one conclusion.
You. Fail. It.
And yes, I did get here from the link at encyclopedia dramatica.
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2010
Well, I didn't know it was featured on encyclopedia dramatica ! (Believe it or not, they didn't ask for my permission. All due credit is given though, it's pretty interesting). Now I found it there. The commentary is pretty mild though, and it's featured with Maus, so it's not much to feel bad about. I understand better the latter "lol" comments though (and will add a comment about in in the description, wait for it).

To address the potentially valid aspects of your criticism - "gratuitous use of a random furry", so much ? I admit that this was not really chosen for the picture (as you might have noticed, there are other *gasp* furries in my gallery), but it held the interesting aspect of not representing an ethnicity in particular. So it wasn't the complete randomness that seems to have infuriated you to the point of repetition.
As for the "pseudo-intellectual" rant, I do know that rants on Internet can easily look pompeous and self-important, especially when dealing about serious subjects. But well, if you want to express something other than "lol" and/or "fail", you sometimes have to take the risk.

As a side note, did you only join to add your two cents on this kind of pictures ? Well, does it prove to be an interesting killtime ?
Reply
:iconkrazykokonut:
Krazykokonut Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2010
A very interesting killtime indeed, although I intend to add some art of my own when I can be bothered.
And I wasn't infuriated. It's just looking through Encyclopedia Dramatica for more than about half an hour leaves me thinking like a /b/tard. Sorry.
And as for the furry thing, at least he wasn't actively yiffing.
Oh, and you forgot the holocaust.
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2010
The holocaust is here, I call it the shoah. Several survivors have issues with the term "holocaust", because it implies it was made for religious reasons - but it was made for racist reasons.
Reply
:iconkrazykokonut:
Krazykokonut Featured By Owner Jan 24, 2010
Fair enough. I thought it only had one name. And you can bet it was religious. Christians have always had issues with the faith they're based off of.
Reply
:iconsodaside:
sodaside Featured By Owner Aug 1, 2009
Where's the Palestinian and Khojaly genocides? :/
Reply
:icongargu:
Gargu Featured By Owner Oct 12, 2009
In the make-believe land, I guess. Btw, who's Khojaly?
Reply
:iconiardacil:
Iardacil Featured By Owner Apr 7, 2009
featured: [link]
Reply
:iconcavywolfe:
CavyWolfe Featured By Owner Feb 17, 2009
FURSECUTION
MAKES
ME
LOL
Reply
:iconkami-henjin:
kami-henjin Featured By Owner Jan 20, 2009
AHAHAHA!!! fursecution! LOL
Reply
:iconjaimesuper:
Jaimesuper Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2008
I Lol'd
Reply
:icongargu:
Gargu Featured By Owner Nov 5, 2008
FURSECUTION
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2008
Mmmh, no, that was not the point.
Reply
:icongargu:
Gargu Featured By Owner Nov 14, 2008
It is now.
Reply
:iconmemoagomez:
memoagomez Featured By Owner May 20, 2008
A little something for you

[link]
Reply
:iconsnatchet:
Snatchet Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2007   Traditional Artist
That's a really good allegory. :)
Reply
:iconraakone:
Raakone Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2006
Very nice picture, and I like the message it's portraying. A shame it's one so conveniently forgotten (not so convenient for those at the "wrong end" of the guns and the mobs, though)

~Ra'akone
Reply
:icongamzguy:
GamzGuy Featured By Owner May 22, 2006
Don't let the Turks fool you! Turkey even today still denies that the Armenian Genocide ever happened! Just like how some people still deny the Holocaust! Or how the KKK says that we need to "put down" the black minority. It's all bullcrap! Learn the truth!

...Otherwise, that picture is really stirring. Very powerful.
Reply
:iconastarot:
astarot Featured By Owner Oct 5, 2008
Yeah Armenians deny Khojaly genocide.
My ears are deaf to the hypocrisy.
Reply
:icontelemanius:
Telemanius Featured By Owner Jan 21, 2006
Genocide denial is a crime! Stamp out intolerance and bigotry!
Reply
:iconshatteredglasses:
ShatteredGlasses Featured By Owner Jan 21, 2006
Oh please... Lay off the sentimental abuse, will you? Turks? Killing systematically 1,5 million Armenians? Genocide?!? Pfftt...
During a vacation I went to an ancient Ottoman city, Edirne. There was a museum, where I saw the map of the city (which was made in the 1800's). Guess what I saw. Is there any civilization in the world that had so much respect to the "differents"? Mosques, synagogues, churches, Ottoman, Jewish and Armenian schools in the same city? You may not know this but there were Armenian governors trough the whole Ottoman empire!
We (Turks) have evidences to prove that the so-called "genocide" is nonsense. All the supporters of that lie haven't got arguments. The Turkish governement even proposed to show its history archives to clarify the problem. But for some reason, Armenia refused to open its archives. If there is a genocide, what are they afraid of?
Also, I saw NOBODY talking about the massacres in Turkish-Muslim villages, made by Armenian bandits. Thousands of Turks have been massacred. European historians came across documents showing Turkish pregnant women with the abdomen cut open. Guess who did it?
On the other hand, approx. 30.000 Armenians (not 1,5 million. They always dramaticize things) were dead from diseases. Also, no one talks about the hundreds of Turkish, Muslim families who protected Armenian orphans during the war. And now, I'm asking you: who remembers the Turkish genocide? Apparently no one. Because everybody's busy puking on the barbaric, bloody, insane, monstrous, evil Turks.

You, my friend, are just another victim of those greedy politicians who are trying to make you eat bullshit. Kerry, Schwarzy, France and everyone who has accepted the so-called "genocide" in fact don't give a shit about Armenians or their problems. Armenians are just a ticket to presidency for the greedy bastards. I suggest you and the rest of your blind friends to do some serious History research for facts, rather than just repeating what the media tells you.I just want Turks and Armenians to live in peace, like in the old days...


Oh, and also, I read an article about an Armenian woman who spit on Orhan Pamuk's face, when he was at a restaurant, apparently. Yep.
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Jan 30, 2006
Hey, this is interesting.

Of you care to research what historians say about the Armenian genocide, you'll notice that they say it hasn't been committed by the Ottoman empire. It was committed during the first world war, when the empire was crumbling, and was committed for a good part by the Young Turks groups, the same ones that founded the modern Turkey. Which would be why Turkey now has troubles with the history of the genocide. Because it's hard to admit that the heroes who founded this modern state also had this crime on their hand.
All of this to say that the Ottoman empire may has well have been quite tolerant, this doesn't mean much about the deeds that were done when the regime was changing.

Look, the Armenian genocide is not the genocide about which I am most informed, so I'm probably not the best to talk and argue about it. But I want to clarify some points:
- I know it's a touchy subject in Turkey, but from the point of views we can have here, historians seem to show very little doubts about what happened to be a genocide or not. There are many photographies, testimonies, etc, from non involved observers. As I said, I'm not the best qualified to talk about it, but I'd suggest, if you don't already do this, that you take a look to what Europeans, Americans sites, newspapers, etc, say on the subject with some open mind. Not really what individuals say, but the sources, you know.
- You're much mistaken if you believe I want to point at Turks and say they're evil and all. One, decades have gone by and the people who live in Turkey currently are different people, not to mention that not all Turks were involved in slaughters. Two, I have decided to draw a parallel between different genocides and to speak about genocide in general for a specific reason. Because I didn't wish to say that some people were inherently evil for some unknown reason, but because I tought that any people could potentially slip and commit a genocide, and that those which happened should be a reminder and a warning for all of us. I am not Kerry, I am not Schwarzy, I am not France, I have nothing against Turkey, and the only reason why I tell about the Armenian genocide is that I am convinced it has effectively happened. I sure agree with your ideal of Turks and Armenians living in peace, but you know, in our countries, there are communities of Armenians who tell about a genocide, and that's actually why our governments are interested in the issue. I tend to think that for peace to really be, historical truth must be researched at all cost.
- It is very possible there have been slaughters perpetrated by Armenians, but to draw a parallel, in the case of Rwanda, the RPF, which stopped the genocide, also committed huge exactions. This has been used by those (in France, for instance), who supported the genocidal Rwandese government to say that all sides were bad and there was nothing to understand. But if we look at it... On one side we had barbaric exactions, but on the other side there was a cold-blooded, organized will of destroying a whole people. Does this excuse the exactions? Of course no. But to me, the genocide is another level in barbary, for the reasons I explained in my long babbling essay. So, even if Armenians committed exactions, if genocide there was upon the Armenian people, truth must be uncovered for all crimes to be fully measured.

I have heard the debate has opened in Turkey, hoping it makes things clearer for all, whatever they are.
Reply
:iconshatteredglasses:
ShatteredGlasses Featured By Owner Jan 31, 2006
My friend... You really need to seriously study Turkish history. How can you say that the "slaughters" were commited by the founders of modern Turkey? Mustafa Kemal (I suppose you're talking about him, since he's the leader and founder of modern Turkey) had Armenian friends who fought with him in the independance war. He's the one who united Muslims, Christians, Jews, Circassians, Kurds, Armenians and many others into one territory. There's no Turkish "race", only Turkish Citizens, therefore, it's absurd to blame my country's founders for "genocide".
Contrarly to what you're thinking, I cared to research about facts and impartial historians' arguments. I never jump on a subject without studying it. The strongest "proof" of the supporters of the "genocide" thesis is the Blue Book. Basically, its a book summing up Armenian witnesses' (who never existed) false testimonies. It is known that the book's writer, Arnold Toynbee was a Turk hater, and that it was published by the British war propaganda bureau. To get the full idea, take a look at Professor Justin McCarthy's arguments presented in his speech at a conference in London (he's a renowned Ottoman affairs historian, so don't worry about impartiality there): [link]
To see what *really* happened those years, here's a series of historical facts and researches about the events (again, don't worry about impartiality, all of the information and document sources are shown): [link]
Reply
:iconchapboy:
chapboy Featured By Owner Dec 3, 2005
EXCELLENT
Reply
:iconsamblob:
SamBlob Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2005
"Well, it seems like total destruction's the only solution." - from Real Situation by Bob Marley and the Wailers

Granted, the total obliteration of one's enemies is a tantalizing thought...
Reply
:icontoddmccloud:
ToddMcCloud Featured By Owner Sep 4, 2005
Very good picture indeed. I doubt most know what Shoah is!

Sadly, it's still happening in many of those nations. I believe the worst are Uganda, Somalia, and Sudan. But, that's only what I know and how my knowlege has taken me. There could be much more dire nations, but I don't know if that's something that one should consider. The fact that it's actually happening is a terrible shame. I wouldn't say it's worse today as it was one thousand years ago - but I would say it is more... well... noticable. And, as members of the human race (whether we like to admit that or not), we should attempt to have everyone under the same sky of freedom.

This rambling of mine has made me favorite your work. Good job!
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2005
Well, maybe what's happening in Sudan is a genocide. When it comes to Somalia and Uganda, that's different. In Somalia, there is chaos due to the lack of any central power and civil war, as happened in Liberia and Sierra Leone. But no planned will of exterminating anyone, so it's not a genocide. In Uganda, there is repression of opponents planned by Museveni (and the international community doesn't react much because Museveni had good press due to his good gestion and efficient campaign against AIDS), but it does not have a the scale of a genocide.
*shrugs* I know it doesn't seem it makes much sense to go into semantics. But the purpose of this would be to make sure that at least the international community doesn't fail to react when there is a definite genocide, at all costs. As it can't react strongly everytime there is something.
There is a site on Darfur if you're interested, savedarfur.org .
I haven't investigated so much on the issue myself, I'm ashamed to admit. My commitment to these issues is far from being regular.
Reply
:icontoddmccloud:
ToddMcCloud Featured By Owner Sep 11, 2005
Eeee.. I have a philosophy that wars always involve genocides, as it is one group of people trying to extinguish another group, sometimes (unless it's for an overthrow or what not). But, you're right with Somalia, I believe ^^
Reply
:iconponcho-juju:
Poncho-Juju Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2005
Well, I put it in that long rant I wrote, but I really think it doesn't work that way. To rephrase what I put (and that's a reasoning I stole from Primo Levi, should I add not to take undeserved credit), in war logic the purpose is to make the other side surrender, to dominate it. Therefore the armies mostly attack the forces of the other side - the military, the men able to fight. In some war logic women and children are attacked too ; but it's not a purpose in itself, it's a terror tactic to force the other side to lose its moral and surrender.
In a genocide, the purpose is to exterminate the marked people. Killing men, women, and children, is seen as a good in itself. For the weak, surrendering won't help - what the genociders want is for them to be all killed.
So as you can see, genocide is worst than war, it's even worst than terrorism. It's a logic that implies that killing babies is a good in itself. You have heard about the nazis deporting every jew, even the children, and sending them to gas chambers ; in Rwanda, the killers who found pregnant women would first open their stomach with machetes to kill the unborn baby as well. It's that kind of logic.
Reply
:icontoddmccloud:
ToddMcCloud Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2005
In that sense, I would intertwine both war and genocide. THe definition you used was for one side to dominate the other, or for one side to surrender and to either give up completely or come to a compromise. I like that definition :). But, I see genocide as another way to win a war. If the ultimate goal of a war is to "win" (I quote it as I believe wars don't really produce winners), then I would assume each side would emplore as many tactics, plans, and force possible to defeat the other side.

Nevertheless, I believe you nailed it with the genocides in Nazi Germany. Unlike a war, there wasn't much of a push from the side of the attacked (as a Pole, I can say that, lol). In other words, the Germans' intentions wasn't to fight them for land, money, etc - but to destroy another race. I see ^^
Reply
:iconvirulentvolition:
VirulentVolition Featured By Owner Mar 12, 2005
im going to say very little but still be enormously moved and involved in this piece...i think it may be the cover of history books one day...your a king amoung artists because your eyes, words, and heart are most definatly in the right place...art will never die because it grows from both the light and shadow of the world...
Reply
:iconhelen-namroque:
helen-namroque Featured By Owner Dec 30, 2004
Both your drawing and its explanation are very powerful, Juju. The silohuettes of the blades in the background reminds us that looking away from violence will not make it go away.
Reply
:iconkurvwerk:
kurvwerk Featured By Owner Aug 3, 2004
:omg: Powerful piece you wrought here. The caption with it only magnifies the impact. Yes, you've given one more Deviant something to think about. Why do so many of us ignore such atrocities? I knew about it, but only because it was on the news, & I honestly wasn't paying much attention other than "...Tutsis hacked to death in Rwanda, check. Scientific concern about the Gulf Stream possibly slowing down, check..." It's shameful to admit to, but your work here just stripped the bark off it. Which is a good thing.

I did not know French personnel had trained the leaders of the Hutu militias. Just goes to show you what diluted pablum passes for news in the United States. We heard about what was going on, but not about who was behind it from day one.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
October 25, 2003
Image Size
64.5 KB
Resolution
558×560
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
4,421
Favourites
43 (who?)
Comments
67
Downloads
428

License

Creative Commons License
Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
×