learntoquestion ltq discussions

Because the Turkish government responded so harshly in their correspondence with St. John, it is a rather difficult task to think of a way to confront them on their actions without an abrasive and angry response. In my opinion, the best response might come in the form of a presentation of all of the overwhelming evidence to the Turkish government. A court hearing also came to mind, in which the government of Turkey would be placed on trial for their crimes and asked to pay reparations to the Armenian people. I'm not sure if that is something that could or would actually happen but I feel like things like that have happened in the past.

Originally posted by toneloc on February 09, 2023 17:55

I have no doubt in my mind that the events that occurred was a genocide. There was overwhelming evidence through documentation by contemporary sources, including government and military officials, diplomats, and missionaries, as well as through survivor testimony and photographic evidence. The only thing that I question is the Turkish response to the genocide. They deny it ever occurring which is puzzling to me. How do you deny something so strongly with clear evidence of the occurrence in your face?

In order to differentiate between “real history” and what isn't “real” it is important to consult multiple sources, including primary sources such as government documents, letters, and journals, to ensure the accuracy of the information. Secondly, the historical context in which an event occurred should be taken into consideration to understand its significance and potential biases. For example a primary source from Turkey would claim that the Armeians were violent and that they had not committed a genocide, which is not the truth. Thirdly, the credibility of the source making the historical claim should be evaluated, with caution given to claims that lack evidence or come from unreliable sources.

Because the Turkish government responded so harshly in their correspondence with St. John, it is a rather difficult task to think of a way to confront them on their actions without an abrasive and angry response. In my opinion, the best response might come in the form of a presentation of all of the overwhelming evidence to the Turkish government. A court hearing also came to mind, in which the government of Turkey would be placed on trial for their crimes and asked to pay reparations to the Armenian people. I'm not sure if that is something that could or would actually happen but I feel like things like that have happened in the past.

I agree that context is extremely relevant in considering the significance of potential biases in "real" vs "false" history. However, there is even more nuance to the question of bias when you have to consider the biases the context you're offering inherently has as well.

Originally posted by toneloc on February 09, 2023 17:55

I have no doubt in my mind that the events that occurred was a genocide. There was overwhelming evidence through documentation by contemporary sources, including government and military officials, diplomats, and missionaries, as well as through survivor testimony and photographic evidence. The only thing that I question is the Turkish response to the genocide. They deny it ever occurring which is puzzling to me. How do you deny something so strongly with clear evidence of the occurrence in your face?

In order to differentiate between “real history” and what isn't “real” it is important to consult multiple sources, including primary sources such as government documents, letters, and journals, to ensure the accuracy of the information. Secondly, the historical context in which an event occurred should be taken into consideration to understand its significance and potential biases. For example a primary source from Turkey would claim that the Armeians were violent and that they had not committed a genocide, which is not the truth. Thirdly, the credibility of the source making the historical claim should be evaluated, with caution given to claims that lack evidence or come from unreliable sources.

Because the Turkish government responded so harshly in their correspondence with St. John, it is a rather difficult task to think of a way to confront them on their actions without an abrasive and angry response. In my opinion, the best response might come in the form of a presentation of all of the overwhelming evidence to the Turkish government. A court hearing also came to mind, in which the government of Turkey would be placed on trial for their crimes and asked to pay reparations to the Armenian people. I'm not sure if that is something that could or would actually happen but I feel like things like that have happened in the past.

I think that's a really interesting and cool idea––a court hearing. I think the Turkish government would be destroyed in court. I also talked about bias in my post, and I think it is super hard to distinguish real from fake. I agree that the historical claim should be heavily evaluated. I think it would be pretty hard to lie about the massacre of millions of people...

Originally posted by ReginaldWindowWasherKitchenSink on February 09, 2023 19:02

There is not a doubt in my mind that the events in Ottoman Turkey beginning in 1915 can be classified as genocide. The deliberate killing of the Armenian people by the Ottoman government during and after World War I is an indisputable atrocity, and a horrific precursor to the nightmares of the Holocaust. Firstly, I believe the dictionary. I believe the dictionary when it defines a genocide as the systematic destruction of all or a significant part of a racial, ethnic, religious or national group. I also believe the Armenian people are demographically, a majority Orthodox Christian society, who during the war in Ottoman Turkey, were a religious minority compared to the empire’s predominantly Muslim population. I believe the Armenian people in Turkey were no doubt, a proud nationalist community; respectful of their Ottoman culture, yet independently proud and boastful of the individual heritage and Armenian community. Last but not least, I believe that the Armenian people’s autonomy, their versatility, their strength, and their compassion, threatened the Turkish government. So they were killed. Like animals. They were butchered and massacred without consequence, and to this day, the perpetrators assume full deniability for their actions, unopposed by other world powers.

I tend to identify “real history” from what isn’t “real” based on the reactions by other nations to the historical events in question. The actions and positions taken by foreign powers in response to significant world events speak volumes to the “factuality” of any given occurrence. The opinions of the powers that be are directly influenced by the consequences of addressing history’s most contended issues. In effect, however a nation feels about an event influences their people’s knowledge of the event and skews their perceptions of reality for better or worse. When debating the “realtiy” of genocide, I judge silence and bystanderism as telltale signs that what’s being argued actually occurred. In the case of the Armenian people, the most powerful weapon the Turkish government and other western powers hold in neglecting the plight of one million slaughtered people is silence. Silence enables deniability, and deniability enables memories to be forgotten and crimes to go unpunished. In this modern age of information, rarely will political powers admit to their faults and take ownership for the consequences of some rather heinous actions. Usually their sins are uncovered or revealed to the public. But of course, the second anyone speaks out, as easy as it was for the public to uncover the information, it is just as easy for that same political authority to shoot down the claims and write them off as nonsense. “Real” history is the stuff they don’t want you reading in their textbooks. “Real” history is the stuff they’ll go to lengths to bury and hide without letting out a peep if they can help it.

In response to the Turkish government’s position on these events, based on the correspondence with St. John, I feel nothing but pity for the proud Turkish citizens exposed to the continued dissemination of lies surrounding the genocide of the American people during the war. I believe that the war in Ukraine, especially as it relates to human rights violations, has brought attention to other horrific events throughout history on a global level. I only hope that President Biden’s acknowledgment of the Armenian genocide will inspire other NATO allies to do the same and shed light on the tragedy. I feel embarrassed and upset for the people of Turkey who are fed lies and in turn perpetuate those lies for not knowing any better. What the Turkish government is doing by denying the genocide is an abuse of their people’s trust and faith. It is sickening, and I only hope more young people in Turkey, Armenia, and around the world come together to address this frightening past so that we can heal and learn in time.

One thing that I failed to take into account is that pride and cultural patriotism is a very strong thing––especially when this hatred is generational. You pointed this out in your post, the fact that some Turkish people do not know any better. I share your disappointment and embarrassment for this fault. I really cannot understand why Turkey is still trying to cover this up. It will never go away, and the fight is only getting stronger. This goes back to education, and what truly needs to be taught to younger children.

Originally posted by toneloc on February 09, 2023 17:55

I have no doubt in my mind that the events that occurred was a genocide. There was overwhelming evidence through documentation by contemporary sources, including government and military officials, diplomats, and missionaries, as well as through survivor testimony and photographic evidence. The only thing that I question is the Turkish response to the genocide. They deny it ever occurring which is puzzling to me. How do you deny something so strongly with clear evidence of the occurrence in your face?

In order to differentiate between “real history” and what isn't “real” it is important to consult multiple sources, including primary sources such as government documents, letters, and journals, to ensure the accuracy of the information. Secondly, the historical context in which an event occurred should be taken into consideration to understand its significance and potential biases. For example a primary source from Turkey would claim that the Armeians were violent and that they had not committed a genocide, which is not the truth. Thirdly, the credibility of the source making the historical claim should be evaluated, with caution given to claims that lack evidence or come from unreliable sources.

Because the Turkish government responded so harshly in their correspondence with St. John, it is a rather difficult task to think of a way to confront them on their actions without an abrasive and angry response. In my opinion, the best response might come in the form of a presentation of all of the overwhelming evidence to the Turkish government. A court hearing also came to mind, in which the government of Turkey would be placed on trial for their crimes and asked to pay reparations to the Armenian people. I'm not sure if that is something that could or would actually happen but I feel like things like that have happened in the past.

I agree that their response was really harsh and defensive and the best way to respond to them would to use the same attitude and present them with hard undeniable evidence.

Originally posted by NotATRex on February 09, 2023 19:38

First off, the Armenian Genocide is unequivocally true. The fact that millions were sent to the desert to starve, is true. The fact that the Armenian peoples were brutally slaughtered––slitting throats, beaten to death, raped to exhaustion, and abducted––is true. Forced “turkification” and assimilation really did happen. Their marches to death is a true fact as well. Personally, I believe there is absolutely nothing to doubt. There are written facts, statements, records, interviews, artifacts, and even bones (as we saw today in class) to prove this. How can you possibly deny any of this happened? It began as a religious battle, and turned into a bloody one at the hands of the Turks. This is not an allegation.

When determining if something is false or not, you must consider biases. Yet, even primary sources (for example coming from Turkish leaders) can be manipulated. You must consider who had a dominant position, and those who didn’t. In this instance, the Turkish had a clear ruler and government who enacted the extermination of the Armenians, but the Armenians did not. I believe it’s quite clear that the Turkish were the oppressors, and the most compelling evidence yet, are true accounts from those who survived––those who took photographs, wrote biographies, and told their stories. How can this be denied?

My response to Turkish government (with a bit of zest):

Dear Turkish government,

The points you made simply avoided responsibility altogether. I believe this is called a “straw-man fallacy.” Nevertheless, your first contention focuses on Armenian resistance. You mention the Defense of Van, but it was called defense for a reason. The city of Van was mainly an Armenian populated-city that the Ottomans first attacked. I believe this was the first and final act of resistance on the Armenian’s part, as they were left helpless. Furthermore, there is no causal link between a Russian and Armenian alliance. As I have learned, this was a blatant attempt at massacre––the Ottomans did not want Christianity, and it seems their solution was to exterminate it. Secondly, you argue that this result was a “reality of the war,” but this was not the Armenians’ fight to begin with… The Armenians were not even a part of the Entente Powers. Your statement that “there was no systematic murder, or genocide, inflicted on the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire” is ludicrous. There are statements, documents, and people to prove this. You present a strident and ignorant argument regarding your responsibility in the Armenian genocide: “there was no intent to destroy the Ottoman Armenians.” Massacres, rapes, throat-slitting, abduction, and forced displacement do not just happen without reason––and for so long. Therefore, we cannot simply “move on.” You are right, however, that there can never be genuine closure, but this is because responsibility has not yet been taken. If it is a matter of pride for your government and country, it is a null one.

Sincerely,

A disappointed student

I enjoyed your response!!!! I also agree that it is important to evaluate even primary sources for bias especially when there is a motive to misreport.

Originally posted by NotATRex on February 09, 2023 19:38

First off, the Armenian Genocide is unequivocally true. The fact that millions were sent to the desert to starve, is true. The fact that the Armenian peoples were brutally slaughtered––slitting throats, beaten to death, raped to exhaustion, and abducted––is true. Forced “turkification” and assimilation really did happen. Their marches to death is a true fact as well. Personally, I believe there is absolutely nothing to doubt. There are written facts, statements, records, interviews, artifacts, and even bones (as we saw today in class) to prove this. How can you possibly deny any of this happened? It began as a religious battle, and turned into a bloody one at the hands of the Turks. This is not an allegation.

When determining if something is false or not, you must consider biases. Yet, even primary sources (for example coming from Turkish leaders) can be manipulated. You must consider who had a dominant position, and those who didn’t. In this instance, the Turkish had a clear ruler and government who enacted the extermination of the Armenians, but the Armenians did not. I believe it’s quite clear that the Turkish were the oppressors, and the most compelling evidence yet, are true accounts from those who survived––those who took photographs, wrote biographies, and told their stories. How can this be denied?

My response to Turkish government (with a bit of zest):

Dear Turkish government,

The points you made simply avoided responsibility altogether. I believe this is called a “straw-man fallacy.” Nevertheless, your first contention focuses on Armenian resistance. You mention the Defense of Van, but it was called defense for a reason. The city of Van was mainly an Armenian populated-city that the Ottomans first attacked. I believe this was the first and final act of resistance on the Armenian’s part, as they were left helpless. Furthermore, there is no causal link between a Russian and Armenian alliance. As I have learned, this was a blatant attempt at massacre––the Ottomans did not want Christianity, and it seems their solution was to exterminate it. Secondly, you argue that this result was a “reality of the war,” but this was not the Armenians’ fight to begin with… The Armenians were not even a part of the Entente Powers. Your statement that “there was no systematic murder, or genocide, inflicted on the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire” is ludicrous. There are statements, documents, and people to prove this. You present a strident and ignorant argument regarding your responsibility in the Armenian genocide: “there was no intent to destroy the Ottoman Armenians.” Massacres, rapes, throat-slitting, abduction, and forced displacement do not just happen without reason––and for so long. Therefore, we cannot simply “move on.” You are right, however, that there can never be genuine closure, but this is because responsibility has not yet been taken. If it is a matter of pride for your government and country, it is a null one.

Sincerely,

A disappointed student

I also wrote about "Turkification" and how it rubbed me so poorly. I find it so sad that they were going through this, while also being stripped of their identity. As you mentioned, the bones we saw in the video today in class also really stuck with me. It was even worse when the Turkish official said "there are bones everywhere" or something ridiculous like that- so utterly ridiculous.

Originally posted by ReginaldWindowWasherKitchenSink on February 09, 2023 19:02

There is not a doubt in my mind that the events in Ottoman Turkey beginning in 1915 can be classified as genocide. The deliberate killing of the Armenian people by the Ottoman government during and after World War I is an indisputable atrocity, and a horrific precursor to the nightmares of the Holocaust. Firstly, I believe the dictionary. I believe the dictionary when it defines a genocide as the systematic destruction of all or a significant part of a racial, ethnic, religious or national group. I also believe the Armenian people are demographically, a majority Orthodox Christian society, who during the war in Ottoman Turkey, were a religious minority compared to the empire’s predominantly Muslim population. I believe the Armenian people in Turkey were no doubt, a proud nationalist community; respectful of their Ottoman culture, yet independently proud and boastful of the individual heritage and Armenian community. Last but not least, I believe that the Armenian people’s autonomy, their versatility, their strength, and their compassion, threatened the Turkish government. So they were killed. Like animals. They were butchered and massacred without consequence, and to this day, the perpetrators assume full deniability for their actions, unopposed by other world powers.

I tend to identify “real history” from what isn’t “real” based on the reactions by other nations to the historical events in question. The actions and positions taken by foreign powers in response to significant world events speak volumes to the “factuality” of any given occurrence. The opinions of the powers that be are directly influenced by the consequences of addressing history’s most contended issues. In effect, however a nation feels about an event influences their people’s knowledge of the event and skews their perceptions of reality for better or worse. When debating the “realtiy” of genocide, I judge silence and bystanderism as telltale signs that what’s being argued actually occurred. In the case of the Armenian people, the most powerful weapon the Turkish government and other western powers hold in neglecting the plight of one million slaughtered people is silence. Silence enables deniability, and deniability enables memories to be forgotten and crimes to go unpunished. In this modern age of information, rarely will political powers admit to their faults and take ownership for the consequences of some rather heinous actions. Usually their sins are uncovered or revealed to the public. But of course, the second anyone speaks out, as easy as it was for the public to uncover the information, it is just as easy for that same political authority to shoot down the claims and write them off as nonsense. “Real” history is the stuff they don’t want you reading in their textbooks. “Real” history is the stuff they’ll go to lengths to bury and hide without letting out a peep if they can help it.

In response to the Turkish government’s position on these events, based on the correspondence with St. John, I feel nothing but pity for the proud Turkish citizens exposed to the continued dissemination of lies surrounding the genocide of the American people during the war. I believe that the war in Ukraine, especially as it relates to human rights violations, has brought attention to other horrific events throughout history on a global level. I only hope that President Biden’s acknowledgment of the Armenian genocide will inspire other NATO allies to do the same and shed light on the tragedy. I feel embarrassed and upset for the people of Turkey who are fed lies and in turn perpetuate those lies for not knowing any better. What the Turkish government is doing by denying the genocide is an abuse of their people’s trust and faith. It is sickening, and I only hope more young people in Turkey, Armenia, and around the world come together to address this frightening past so that we can heal and learn in time.

I also find it really disheartening when I observe the Turkish citizens that truly do not understand what actually happened. It shows that the nation has unfortunately done a great job of erasing it within its own borders- and the erasure of what happened will only cause harm and embarrassment. Whether the ignorance is voluntary or forced is tricky.

Originally posted by ReginaldWindowWasherKitchenSink on February 09, 2023 19:02

There is not a doubt in my mind that the events in Ottoman Turkey beginning in 1915 can be classified as genocide. The deliberate killing of the Armenian people by the Ottoman government during and after World War I is an indisputable atrocity, and a horrific precursor to the nightmares of the Holocaust. Firstly, I believe the dictionary. I believe the dictionary when it defines a genocide as the systematic destruction of all or a significant part of a racial, ethnic, religious or national group. I also believe the Armenian people are demographically, a majority Orthodox Christian society, who during the war in Ottoman Turkey, were a religious minority compared to the empire’s predominantly Muslim population. I believe the Armenian people in Turkey were no doubt, a proud nationalist community; respectful of their Ottoman culture, yet independently proud and boastful of the individual heritage and Armenian community. Last but not least, I believe that the Armenian people’s autonomy, their versatility, their strength, and their compassion, threatened the Turkish government. So they were killed. Like animals. They were butchered and massacred without consequence, and to this day, the perpetrators assume full deniability for their actions, unopposed by other world powers.

I tend to identify “real history” from what isn’t “real” based on the reactions by other nations to the historical events in question. The actions and positions taken by foreign powers in response to significant world events speak volumes to the “factuality” of any given occurrence. The opinions of the powers that be are directly influenced by the consequences of addressing history’s most contended issues. In effect, however a nation feels about an event influences their people’s knowledge of the event and skews their perceptions of reality for better or worse. When debating the “realtiy” of genocide, I judge silence and bystanderism as telltale signs that what’s being argued actually occurred. In the case of the Armenian people, the most powerful weapon the Turkish government and other western powers hold in neglecting the plight of one million slaughtered people is silence. Silence enables deniability, and deniability enables memories to be forgotten and crimes to go unpunished. In this modern age of information, rarely will political powers admit to their faults and take ownership for the consequences of some rather heinous actions. Usually their sins are uncovered or revealed to the public. But of course, the second anyone speaks out, as easy as it was for the public to uncover the information, it is just as easy for that same political authority to shoot down the claims and write them off as nonsense. “Real” history is the stuff they don’t want you reading in their textbooks. “Real” history is the stuff they’ll go to lengths to bury and hide without letting out a peep if they can help it.

In response to the Turkish government’s position on these events, based on the correspondence with St. John, I feel nothing but pity for the proud Turkish citizens exposed to the continued dissemination of lies surrounding the genocide of the American people during the war. I believe that the war in Ukraine, especially as it relates to human rights violations, has brought attention to other horrific events throughout history on a global level. I only hope that President Biden’s acknowledgment of the Armenian genocide will inspire other NATO allies to do the same and shed light on the tragedy. I feel embarrassed and upset for the people of Turkey who are fed lies and in turn perpetuate those lies for not knowing any better. What the Turkish government is doing by denying the genocide is an abuse of their people’s trust and faith. It is sickening, and I only hope more young people in Turkey, Armenia, and around the world come together to address this frightening past so that we can heal and learn in time.

I think there is a certain sense of patriotism and nationalism that contributes to the Turkish denial of the Armenian genocide. In a sense, they are too ashamed to admit such events ever occurred in fear that they will face unrepairable punishments from global powers. However, whatever it is, I feel as though it's a real shame that the Turkish people will never be taught the truths about the history. Consequently, there is no possible way for them to confront their past mistakes to learn from, unfortunately presenting the risk of events such as this to occur again. Considering the fact how they never really faced any punishment from their first perpetration, there may be some precedent that causes them to feel as though such actions can go unpunished again, too.