Apologies in advance if it is offensive/antisemitic to you, and thanks in advance for your vote and if you are willing to answer in the comments.
For further context, I’m not Jewish but I understand the impact of the Holocaust/Shoah on the Jewish population is greater than most or all of the examples that follow of applying the word “holocaust” to peoples whose populations have mostly recovered to or surpassed their populations prior to these events (at least at the genetic granularity these books likely cover).
The book titles I’ve noticed this trend in are “Late Victorian Holocausts” (Davis, regarding India and others), “The Perfect Holocaust” (Fogarty, regarding Ireland), and “A Victorian Holocaust” (Gholi Majd, regarding Iran).
This is an honest question. I understand it is possible these authors have used the word to sensationalize their works. But the one book I did read was very emotional experience, being persuasive and thoroughly cited with primary sources. However, I wonder if using the word “holocaust” is hurting rather than helping dialogue on historical events.