Look at my quote. We were talking about who suffered most, not your relativistic bean-counting. You fail to grasp the basic point, which is that human suffering is neither subjective nor relativistic. Each and every one of the victims suffered as a full human does, but nice try at moving the goal posts. If you think the "cultural continuity" of a group of people regardless of how large or small is what determines how significant the pain or loss of each individual member is then your thinking is beyond defective.
I did. Did you?
Look at your quotes.
True, but given that 1) China suffered the most
So what are we talking about? Are we talking about every individual who suffered, if indeed that is what we are talking about then EVERYONE who died suffered EQUALLY.
Or did you forget you just said 'every one of the victims suffered as a full human does.' If that is indeed true, then a man in Iran suffered as much as a man in China if they were to suffer the same fate.
YET you suggested that China suffered more because more of their man and woman died.
So, are we talking about the aggregate of a civilization, thus the word 'China' seem to come into play quite often, or are we talking in humanitarian view point, which China should not of come into play?
Stop contradicting yourself.
Again, my point stands- you sound like one of those people who think the Holocaust was the worst event in history because apparently the lives of 6 million Jews is worth more than the lives of 12+ million Russians, simply because there are more Russians. Brainwashed.
Did I not say you jump to conclusion without ANY EVIDENCE?
I did, didn't I. Man I must read minds.
You came to the conclusion that I believe Holocaust is the worst event, from what? Your point stands how? You jump to conclusion the way I use the word 'the.'
Laughable, I am self-taught as far as everything discussed here is concerned. The only one jumping to conclusions is you - you're inured to propaganda so you see everything with a rose tint or from behind blinders, not even bothering to question the true message of an article. Critical analysis is a good thing.
My critical analysis lead me to actually understand what the author was trying to say, that there was an aggregate man made cooling.
Apparently your critical analysis led you to think the author is saying it is ok to kill millions of Han people. And I think Holocaust is the worst event in the history of mankind.
And we are way off topic. So I am stopping here.