Concept MAP.

This is my concept map to go with my first essay posted below. It outlines the major factors that lead to genocide. When all these factors are in play, genocide may be the result. Please click on it to see a larger image.

Essay one: Genocide

Factors Leading to the Act of Genocide

Genocide is the systematic extermination of one ethnic group by another. It was originally described by Raphael Lemkin in 1944 as having two phases:

“...one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor.” Lemkin (1944)

This definition has at its core a potent description of the objective and method of any genocide. That is, the removal of a certain population to make way for another. While this often takes the form of mass violence and murder of the target group, this is not necessary to Lemkin’s definition. The national pattern of a group may be destroyed through other means, such as cultural oppression and forced assimilation for example through the removal of children at a young age (Abed, 2006). Similarly the United Nations has attempted to define the act of genocide as:

“...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

(Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights, 1948)

Therefore genocide is defined not by the form it takes but rather by the intention behind the act. The powerful effects of this intention prompts the need for investigation into how such intention is formed, what factors influence its development and how may it be prevented in the future.

Importantly the discussion of cause in the context of genocide is not limited to any one factor. Theorists such as Ervin Staub have repeatedly demonstrated that the culmination of several negative group traits, historical cultural influences as well as situational variables all contribute to an act of genocide (Staub, 1971, 1989, 1996). Woofle and Hulsizer (2005) following the Rwandan genocide described seven developmental stages of genocide, compiling in their description the compounded effects of all Staub’s factors. This essay will describe those factors and the psychological basis for theories that identify them as being the cause of genocidal behaviour.

Cultural Historical Factors:
It is important to note that no society or ethnic group exists without historical influences. Generally, there may be identified general historical traits of a group or culture that facilitate genocide. A strong culture of violence, stark ethnic boundaries or intercultural paradoxes can lay the foundations for further violent developments. Similarly, the dehumanisation of individuals of the opposing group and the existence of a real or perceived threat posed by that group are found consistently prior to genocide (Woofle & Hulsizer, 2005). In the Rwanda genocide for example, the two opposing groups, Tutsis and Hutu, had a history of distrust and conflict. The Hutu majority had ruled over the Tutsis minority for several years, however historically it was the Tutsis that had been the ruling class and colonised the Rwandan area (Clark, et al, 1975).

A history of dehumanisation or devaluation of the opposing group is a significant influence on the risk of genocide. The converse is also true. Often the group that may potentially commit genocide views itself as superior or ‘truly’ human. This allows the opposing group to be viewed as distinct or different. For example the ethos of the Nazi movement in Germany prior to World War II was to systematically portray the German people as a distinct “human” race, while the Jewish population was likened to rats (Woofle & Hulsizer, 2005). When a particular group is dehumanized and the other made to feel superior conflict arises when the ‘sub-human’ group is successful, as was the case with economically successful Jews in Germany prior to the Holocaust (Staub, 1996).

The Rwandan Tutsis rebels having cordoned off a section of Rwanda and established themselves as a productive if not militaristic group were therefore contradicting the historical perception of Tutsis as inferior. The reaction from the Hutu government was the same hatred and violent reaction to this demonstration of power that contradicted the view of superiority described by Staub. The interaction of historical conflict, socially perceived superiority and dehumanisation may interact to create an environment where genocide is possible.

Situational Factors:
Regardless of the adverse historical factors, often a current issue or event is needed to produce genocide. Woofle and Hulsizer (2005) identified two situational events that influence the progression of violence against a specific group, a destabilising crisis and an authoritarian leadership.

Often a national crisis will prompt individuals to seek out and stay close to their own identified ethnic group. They may have increased levels of stress and fear or look for a scapegoat for the crisis (Woofle & Hulsizer, 2005). In the Rwandan context the country was, at the time, under significant economic stress but the obvious and damaging crisis came when the presidential plane was shot down. This political crisis allowed the extremist members of the Hutu Government to take control and facilitated the beginnings of genocide.

An authoritarian leader seems to be an essential part of organised genocide (Woofle & Hulsizer, 2005). Similarly a population used to deferring to authority or that is habitually obedient may be a significant factor in allowing group violence to occur. The German people for example, have been found to have had particularly high levels of respect before the rise of the Nazi party prior to World War II (Staub, 1996). An authoritarian leader given the right circumstances can manipulate and prime the population for genocide as was seen in Rwanda were radio stations were used to broadcast degrading messages about the Tutsis.

Social Psychological Factors:
The attitudes that a group holds about others can have profound effects on their susceptibility to being manipulated, their propensity to aid other groups in times of crisis and the likelihood of accepting violent acts committed by members of the group. These attitudes are closely related to how the group perceives itself (Woofle & Hulsizer, 2005). A group tends to identify itself in the same way that an individual does. One particular effect of this is the separation of the group from other groups and a tendency towards individual attitudes that bias the group the individual belongs to (Tajfel, 1982). Therefore if the group views itself as superior and the other inferior, or itself as weakened and the other to blame for that weakness, there is an enhanced chance that the violent tendencies toward members of the opposing group will surface (Staub, 1996).

Social influences on behaviour can be powerful given the right environmental situation. One outcome of identifying strongly with a particular group is that when a crisis occurs individuals tend to seek out the group for support. The prospect of being expelled from the group can cause individuals to act in novel ways (Woofle & Hulsizer, 2005). In the case of genocide this can be particularly damaging. In Rwanda it is unlikely that all Hutu felt equally as passionate about hunting down Tutsis but large groups were formed who found themselves following the groups objective.

Genocide is the systematic eradication of one group by another. Often expressed through mass violence and killings it is a horrific and deeply disturbing social activity. The nature of it causes many to question how such a thing could occur and seek out the causes. If the factors contributing to situations such as that in World War II, the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and possibly Darfur in the Sudan are understood than these atrocities may be better predicted and possibly averted. The historical cultural backgrounds of different ethnic or cultural groups contribute to creating animosity between groups when left to simmer. A situational prompt may be enough to begin the process of hatred and violence between groups. Natural cognitive mechanisms serve to allow for strongly held beliefs that can translate into violent action and ultimately genocide. For this reason that genocide has been described as the “perfect storm” of social psychological variables, when all the factors are aligned genocide s the unfortunate and terrible consequence.

References:

Abed, M., (2006). Clarifying the Concept of Genocide. The Author Journal compilation, 37, No. 3-4, 308 – 330

Clark, D., Oliver, R., Roberts, A., and Fage, J., (1975) The Cambridge History of Africa. Cambridge University Press.

Lemkin, R., (1944). Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress. Washington, D.C. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Division of International Law.

Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights, (1948). Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Accessed at: http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm, 25/8/07

Staub, E., (1996). Cultural-Societal Roots of Violence The Examples of Genocidal Violence and of Contemporary Youth Violence in the United States. American Psychologist, 51, No.2, 117-132

H Tajfel, H., (1982). Social Psychology of Intergroup Relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1-39