I'm specifically referring to how the colonial and later American governments and the nazi regime are seem in the public eye. Both were responsible for ethnic cleansing and genocide of tens of millions of people. But one gets demonized as it should but some how the other gets a "it's just what happened" in public consciousness. This also applies to other areas. A recent phenomena is portraying the mongols in a better light than their European or middle eastern counterparts yet the destruction and wholesale slaughter that they left is undescribable. This may be a more sociological question to ask but it still strikes me as so strange. People will look at a figure of millions of one specific group and chalk it up as history, then look at another figure of millions and declare how terrible and evil it was. It's estimated that 56 million native Americans died in the colonization of North America. This has just been something on my mind lately as I've been on a little bit of a world war 2 binge. To see how terrible we view the Nazis and rightfully so but genocide is genocide regardless of who commits it. Kraut in his recent video discussing the Bosnian genocide made the comment of how the Nazis did it differently in that state institutions were dedicated to committing genocide rather than assign a part of the army to do it. Americas policy if manifest destiny was literally to displace or kill anyone in their path to the Pacific ocean. As I post this I just want to make it very clear that I am not seeking to only demonize america and European nations in comparing their public image to that of the third Reich. Im just wondering why some genocides are seen as terrible depending on who commits it and why so many like the Bosnian, Cambodian or other recent genocides do not really get any attention.