From Natives to Foreigners: The Mechanisms of Modernity
Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians? This question sets the tone, of the overt “events ”of 1915 in the Ottoman Empire, which begs the question, how can these “events” be recognized by both, the Armenian Republic and the Turkish State; but, does not create a discourse to clearly answer what transpired? Regardless of the label used, the result was destruction of virtually every Armenian community in the Ottoman Empire, which collapsed after the war. What was left of the country transitioned into the modern-day Republic of Turkey, while a community left devastated, that before was not a target. This sudden shift from fellow brethren to enemy status, is perplexing, …show more content…
423) I retrospect this campaign of annihilation was fueled by the contest between the Turkish republic and the Armenian community claiming control over the Anatolian countryside in which, both parties claimed ownership of; in which as Mann, describes “these claims seem to have sustainable validity and legitimacy, making it plausible chance of being implemented” (Mann pg502) In which case the Turkish republic attempt a multifaceted approach to rid themselves (The Turkish Community) of the Armenian Question at hand by population exchange, ethnic cleansing, and forced assimilation; in essence erasing the Armenian identity from history and making use of state-entities such as Museums, Schools and media to solidify this view …show more content…
215) while; at home they could speak in their native tongue and engage in rite Armenians held dear; thus, begging the question how is the French identity different of that of the Turkish? Moreover, The Armenian had a distinctiveness that other refugee did not pose; this idea of being
Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians? This question sets the tone, of the overt “events ”of 1915 in the Ottoman Empire, which begs the question, how can these “events” be recognized by both, the Armenian Republic and the Turkish State; but, does not create a discourse to clearly answer what transpired? Regardless of the label used, the result was destruction of virtually every Armenian community in the Ottoman Empire, which collapsed after the war. What was left of the country transitioned into the modern-day Republic of Turkey, while a community left devastated, that before was not a target. This sudden shift from fellow brethren to enemy status, is perplexing, …show more content…
423) I retrospect this campaign of annihilation was fueled by the contest between the Turkish republic and the Armenian community claiming control over the Anatolian countryside in which, both parties claimed ownership of; in which as Mann, describes “these claims seem to have sustainable validity and legitimacy, making it plausible chance of being implemented” (Mann pg502) In which case the Turkish republic attempt a multifaceted approach to rid themselves (The Turkish Community) of the Armenian Question at hand by population exchange, ethnic cleansing, and forced assimilation; in essence erasing the Armenian identity from history and making use of state-entities such as Museums, Schools and media to solidify this view …show more content…
215) while; at home they could speak in their native tongue and engage in rite Armenians held dear; thus, begging the question how is the French identity different of that of the Turkish? Moreover, The Armenian had a distinctiveness that other refugee did not pose; this idea of being