Does it also apply for you to terrorists that commit suicide attacks? By definition they will never be arrested nor charged. Would you say that "we will never know" if they did kill people?
It seems that the CCP admit the goal of forced assimilation. We might even say that their goal is an ethnocide. But calling it a genocide is using a definition of the term that is controversial (and not accepted by a majority of scholars). The core of the debate is on what "intent to destroy" means:
"The specific intent element defines the purpose of committing the acts: "to destroy in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such". The specific intent is a core factor distinguishing genocide from other international crimes, such as war crimes or crimes against humanity.
In 2007, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) noted in its judgement on Jorgic v. Germany case that, in 1992, the majority of legal scholars took the narrow view that "intent to destroy" in the CPPCG meant the intended physical-biological destruction of the protected group, and that this was still the majority opinion. But the ECHR also noted that a minority took a broader view, and did not consider biological-physical destruction to be necessary, as the intent to destroy a national, racial, religious or ethnic group was enough to qualify as genocide.[29]"
Facebook could do better than removing the content, they could burst the Holocaust denial bubble that some people find themselves in.
We have video archives of the liberation of the camps and testimonies from survivors. Every Holocaust denial post could have one of the many evidence of the Holocaust just next to it.
It probably won't change the mind of everyone, but it would hijack the virality of the denial posts and use their targeting to reach precisely the people that need to be reminded of the real history of the Holocaust.
Do you mean that you wouldn't oppose harming or wanting to harm practicing muslims or christians as they could stop practicing?
To be fair, I understand that your idea is mainly that there is a hierarchy in the level of intolerance. But there was some losses in explaining your idea in a quick and dirty way.
