Holocaust and genocide discussion

Hi all,

I'm interested in learning what people feel are the proper criteria for genocide. Should it be restricted to the the Armenian massacres, the Nazi crimes, Tutsi victimization in Rwanda and perhaps a few others? Should Srebrenica be considered one? What about the looming extinction of some Afro-Colombian groups in Colombia at the hand of government-paramilitary forces?

Steve

The planned extermination of a race, ethnic group, or nationality is my working definition.

Ethnic cleansing (some euphemism!) can include genocide, but it also includes expelling weaker ethnic/religious groups as Catholic Spain did to Jews and Moriscos in 1492 and 1609.

Cultural genocide is when the dominant power forces the weaker to convert, give up their language and customs, and adapt/assimilate to the dominant culture, religion, etc. -- or else.

I agree with Donald. Although a concrete definition for the word 'genocide' is still debated, to me it is as well a planned extermination, both deliberate and systematic.

The United Nations spent years debating wether the situation in Darfur could actually be catalogued as a genocide, and some people still consider the term has been used loosely through out history.

Found this interesting article that discusses the term on the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum:
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.p...

And here is one regarding Darfur:
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/...

I'd also agree and add to Donald and Loli's statements. Genocide, as defined by the UN (and still debated heavily by scholars), refers to direct killings, but also to indirect killings.

For example, in American history the U.S. military destroyed the homes and food caches of Native American Indians during the 19th century so that weather and nature's conditions would kill certain Native peoples. At other times Native Americans were penned/imprisoned into areas, given inadequate food, clothing, and shelter, so that nature and starvation would claim lives. In situations like these, actions were taken that didn't involve direct killing, but aimed at letting nature do the killing for the military.

For those interested in studies on America's Holocaust, the Native American genocide, there are many books, but one that does a very good job is that by Ward Churchill, his Little Matter of Genocide.

Thanks to all who responded. I pose the question because the term is not well defined (either in law or popularly). This makes the term ripe for abuse - it can be applied, or not, to this or that instance of atrocities based on the political utility of the label for one's agenda. The term is rarely applied consistently, following clear criteria.

Barbara Coloroso wrote a book discussing this exact issue and the problems with how it is defined called Extraordinary Evil.

I belong to the Association of Genocide Scholars and there are a handful of similar definitions that are often used in the academic community. If you take a look at Totten's "Century of Genocide" or Jones' "Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction" you will find chapters examining the more commonly used examples.

If you are interested in a possible way to identify genocide from a prevention point of view, I would recommend an article from a talk given recently by Scott Strauss entitled "Identifying Genocide and Related Forms of Mass Atrocity." You can find a pdf of the article on-line.

I will also add that scholars are often in agreement on which acts in the past century were genocide. There are always people who disagree with one assertion or another but by-and-large you can find a consensus on most of them. My advice is to always seek out those who are authorities on the subject.

Thank you for the suggestions, D and Tim. One source I found valuable when I had been investigating this question was William Schabas. I think the question is very much a live one because of how flippantly the label is often applied. Schabas, a major authority, finds, for instance, that Darfur and Srebrenica are not genocides, despite the frequency with with the term is applied to those crimes.

I also agree with who has commented. I also find it disturbing how long it took the UN to decide that there was a genocide in Sudan, which that they purposefully did so so there would be no time left to discuss interfering/stopping it. I think there should be a clear definition of a genocide/holocaust so there is little room for questioning, especially after so many genocides such as the Rwanda, Darfur, Sudanese, Cambodian, and Armenian genocidese, as well as the Holocaust. I know I missed several more, but it seems that humans haven't learned their lesson.