Enh. Common in the US, too. Shepherd’s Massacre of the Delaware after the Revolutionary War, similar massacre after the French & Indian war of the Susquehano, Sand Creek massacre of Cheyenne, systematic destruction by unknown parties of the Osage after oil was discovered on their reservation lands. Face it. It happens everywhere. The unique thing about the Holocaust was that it was done with German efficiency in an assembly-line system, and that it was done by the Germans, who were believed to be at the apex of civilization, albeit with lots of help from others, and the world’s apathy over a prolonged period, including attempts to deny it ever occurred, which continue to the present.
Yes, it does, but you give at best example exceptions that prove the norm. Small isolated incidents (never mind how common Indians fought each other and DID massacre whites). Versus massive killings without reason besides dislike, under no threat from said other side.
Of course the other thing about the German actually used them as slave labor, not simply executed en mass as many such events are.
Then one has to ask, is it really worse to be killed immediately, or used up until no longer useful? Is it better to target “groups”, or randomly kill anyone?
Arguments like this bring to the fore these questions. Often, the implication is it’s worse to target “other”, yet I’m not sure I feel better being in a society that will randomly kill anyone regardless of their status.