The 20th-century stands out for being the millennium when the social and politic landscapes were most upheaved. The many genocides, wars and other violent incidents that occurred in this era portray a world of conflict where elites use violence to retaliate against those whom they perceive as weak. Genocide scholars are divided on the cause of genocide. There is little consensus on the justification of such atrocities. Scholars are focused on the question, “Why has genocide happened and why does it continue to happen?” This question is so vast and complicated that it was necessary to focus on less complex issues. This includes identifying the causes of a mass killing, identifying which groups are targeted as well as why innocent bystanders observe. Genocide scholars are concerned about why politicians choose genocide as a policy rather than other less drastic measures.
Scholars have observed that many crises occurred before the genocides which took place in the 20th Century. These crises were therefore the basis for the terrible events. The destabilization in national security, economics, and politics are all part of these crises, which make the dominant or elite community view a certain group negatively. In many countries, political violence is a result of this group’s radical response to crises. Although the weaker sides such as the minorities and poor can start violence, they will often claim that the majority or elites are responsible for the crisis. Understanding why genocide takes place requires that we understand how the elites/majorities respond to these crises. We can do this by conceptualizing who the victims are, what their interests are, and what they might do. When formulating genocidal policy, perpetrators conceptualize and believe that the victim group poses a threat to the dominant or elite community.
Genocide is a terrible and irrational act. Humanity is always going to wonder why Nazis, Young Turks or Khmer Rouge regimes exterminated women, men and children simply because they were a part of a group. Genocide observers and researchers agree that the acts of genocide are driven by irrational prejudices, stereotypes, and fears. Helen Fein is a sociology professor who observes from the perspective that the perpetrators have, “‘a rational decision'” to commit genocide as a way of achieving a specific goal. According to the author, genocide can be rationalized not by the beliefs and ideas that are the basis of it but rather the decision-making processes that lead to its execution. Doris L. Bergen describes genocide in War and Genocide : A Concise Holocaust as a strategy based on goals. Bergen claims that the dominant or elite community uses genocide against a group to achieve radical policy objectives. Bergen asserts that, in order to achieve these goals, perpetrators will use extermination strategies against a targeted group in order to force its members into a reaction that they wouldn’t normally consider. The target group may respond to mass killing policies by abandoning their homes and submitting to radical changes in lifestyle, or stopping to support opposition political and military groups. Genocide perpetrators are also motivated to stop perceived threats that a group poses. Fein states that politicians choose genocide only when all other options, such as political suppression and limited concessions for victim groups, have proven ineffective. The elite or dominant group believes the victims are a threat and can only be dealt with by extermination. Holocaust is Hitler’s campaign of extermination against Jews.
Scholars who study genocide pay close attention to three key factors. The factors are the characterization of a victim group that is foreign or subhuman to the dominant or elite community, their characterization as dangerous or as an “enemy inside” whose existence threatens the survival of those in the dominant or elite group, and their characterization as a group of people who must be eliminated. Genocide perpetrators conceptualize the target group based on these three main factors. In nearly every genocidal event of the twentieth century, these conceptualizations were crucial in setting up mass executions. Bergen, by examining the Holocaust and its historical, political and social contexts, examined how the Nazis were able to exterminate close to 6 million Jews. The author, in order to do genocide justice, does not just stop at the mass killings of Jews by Nazi Germany and Nazi controlled regions of the Soviet Union. He examines the Nazis’ terrorization of homosexuals and disabled people as well as Soviet POWs. Bergen explained that Nazis thought of Aryans and their race as inferior, wanted its purification, wished to expand the space they lived in. Bergen gives an explanation of why the Nazis invaded other countries. Fein explained the terror the Nazis inflicted on Jews. By focusing on the Holocaust in Germany, Third Reich atrocities were extended to the Soviet Union, lands which Hitler was able to control.
The Nazi genocide against the Jewish people was not the only one that occurred in the 20th Century. Deborah Dwork, Robert Jan Pelt and others argue in the book Holocaust: A History that the Holocaust wasn’t so much the antisemitic laws of Europe as it was the intent of the perpetrators to purify society, the slaughter of more than 1.5 million Armenians during the French Revolution and the Terror of the French Revolution. Instead of viewing the Holocaust in isolation, the authors place it within a broader historical and cultural context. The authors, for instance, focused on the Poles’ perception of the Holocaust as a sign of what was to come when they were subjugated by Germany. This perspective puts the genocide of the Jews in a wider context, as it occurs before other genocidal acts that occur in Europe. The authors comment on the French Revolution, and how they deemed anyone of noble blood as an obstacle to social and political change. This perspective challenges that only elites commit genocide. In any case, Hitler’s campaign was foreshadowed by the Reign of Terror. Hitler’s war machine viewed Jews as a racial menace. Timothy Snyder explores the genocide of Europe in Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin by focusing on Poland, Ukraine and Belarus. Hitler and Stalin staged horrifying experiments based on race or class to commit mass murders in these areas. Stalin’s intention was to subjugate Soviet Union’s peasantry – the largest social class. Stalin chose to subjugate the peasantry, which was the largest social group in Soviet Union. Stalin was able to achieve rapid industrialization through this method. Together, Hitler’s Third Reich, Stalin’s Soviet Union, and Belarus, Ukraine and the Baltic States murdered more than 14 million people. Snyder says that while these regions experienced genocide, the Holocaust is the most important in terms of understanding genocide today. This selective attention has undermined the ability to understand the cultures and histories that have been characterized by murder and annihilation throughout the world.
The Holocaust has traditionally been associated with Nazis’ campaign to exterminate Jews, but several scholars have used the term in reference to mass killings that occurred around the globe. Paul Preston, author of The Spanish Holocaust, describes how Francisco Franco implemented a brutal, fascist backed policy that included detention, torture and forced disappearances. The author used a term called “holocaust”, which referred to the mass murders committed with cold blood on a scale comparable to Hitler’s Germany, and Stalin’s Soviet Union. In genocide books, it is difficult to tell the difference between atrocities against Jews committed by Third Reich and Tutsi militia mu Hutu. Scott Straus, in The Order of Genocide, Race, Power, and War in Rwanda, uses a social-science lens to explain the 1994 Rwandan genocide. Author provides fresh insights by using primary and supplementary sources in conjunction with systematic interviews. The book revealed how a great deal of political unrest and chaos existed before the violence was unleashed on the Tutsi. The conflict between Tutsi fighters and the government was to blame for creating this political atmosphere. Strauss claimed that in this case conflict was the driving force behind the genocide, legitimized killings and empowered perpetrators. The author, by comparing Hutu’s war machine to Nazism, argues that Rwandans who killed were not haughty, cruel, and economically disadvantaged. They were ordinary people, afraid of the dangers a Tutsi defeat would pose for their own safety. This revelation challenges the idea that the dominant or elite community is responsible for genocide.
In some cases, the genocide story did not reflect the reality. Adam Jones, in Genocide: a Comprehensive Introduction, examines political violence across the globe to try and clarify this perspective. Author Adam Jones identifies genocides that are perpetrated by those who are oppressed in Mexico and Bolivia. Genocidal attacks committed in revenge, retribution, and/or revolutions are unlikely to receive the same condemnation of those perpetrated at the hands of political elites. Like racial purification. Jones argued genocidal attacks like Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the bombings on German cities are justified by the fact that they were a retaliation of undeserved aggression. This justification is also applicable to the fates of ethnic Germans who lived in Poland, Czechoslovakia or other Central European countries after World War II. They could claim that they were responsible for the events.
Genocide, in my opinion, is the worst form of violence committed by a political leader during modern times. Holocaust is the most important and historically significant genocide event of the 20thcentury. The Soviet Union’s mass killings, Rwanda’s genocide, Spain’s political conflict, Haiti and Bolivia were examples of the lengths to which a group of people would go in order to suppress or subjugate a different group. Scholars observed that genocide relied on the way the dominant group or elite conceptualized the victim. When formulating their policies of genocidal violence, perpetrators conceptualize and believe that the existence of a victim group threatens the existence of an elite or dominant group. While there are examples where oppressed populations have committed genocide, it is important to remember that the majority of genocides are those that are the result of a policy rather than a revenge.
Bibliography
Doris L. Bergen. War & Genocide: a Concise history of the Holocaust. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016.
Dwork, Deborah, et Robert Jan Pelt. Holocaust: A History. New York: WW Norton & Company.
[bookmark: _Hlk3199428]Fein, Helen. Genocide: a Sociological Perspective. London, UK: Sage, 1993.
Jones, Adam. Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction. Routledge published a book about New York in 2016.
Manus I. Midlarsky is a renowned scholar. The Killing Trap – Genocide during the 20th Century. Cambridge University Press. 2005.
Preston, Paul. The Spanish Holocaust. Inquisitions, exterminations and the twentieth-century Spain. WW Norton & Co., 2012, published in New York.
Snyder, Timothy. Bloodlands : Europe between Hitler & Stalin. Random House of New York published the work in 2011.
