Stop Genocide

Goldhagen Solves Genocide in Twelve Pages

Published October 13, 2009 @ 04:54AM PT

In the world of academic smack-downs, the backlash against the positions of Holocaust scholar Daniel Goldhagen is one for the books. Goldhagen became widely-discredited in many circles for the monocausal thesis of his book on German participation in Nazi crimes.

The King of Over-Simplification is back, with an article in The New Republic written with the same arrogance of tomes-past, as if bringing the shining beacon of enlightenment to the ignorant masses. Which might be nice, if Goldhagen had offered anything other than a regurgitation of basic genocide scholarship.

His premise that genocide is "poorly understood" blatantly disregards an entire economy of academic and policy-oriented research on the subject; modern genocides from Armenia to Darfur have been repeatedly scrutinized by a diverse field that grew out of Holocaust studies after World War II. What Goldhagen offers for our education -- genocide is not an unusual event but political tool of modern states, that it seeks to eliminate groups of people as a means to consolidate power, etc etc -- is nothing that wasn't covered in my Genocide 101 class in junior high school.

His solutions -- "prevention, intervention, and punishment" -- follow in the same suit, and, frankly, seem stolen straight from the Enough Project, though with a few trades in jargon to feign the appearance of originality. Not only are his recommendations for "creating conditions" that make genocidal policies unattractive to potential mass murder nothing new, they fail to dig deeper than the level of broad platitudes to the complicated challenges of implementing an international anti-genocide regime -- challenges which Goldhagen's fellow scholars and policy wonks have been debating for years, but with far greater nuance.

The failure of genocide prevention is not due to any lack of problem identification, but to a combination of weak political will and the fact that any sort international intervention does not occur in isolation. Military intervention in Darfur, for instance, could have ripple effects that would damage any number of sensitive political concerns in Africa and the Arab World, including Israel and Palestine. Lives are at stake there, too. The United States cannot simply lead the Western powers in an international force for good, as Goldhagen suggests, as if there would be no other consequences besides triumph over mass murder.

And, good luck getting the US to "guarantee" to bomb anyone who commits or threatens to commit genocide. It might be a nice thought, but it's not always a realistic one. Assuming that putting bounties on the heads of indicted war criminals and threatening military intervention against violent regimes will solve the world's nastiest problem undercuts Goldhagen's own presumption that he understands the nature of genocide better than anyone else. Nothing is that uncomplicated.

[Photo of Rwandan genocide victims from mrflip's Flickr stream, Creative Commons License.]

Share this Post

Related Posts

Comments (3)

  1. Richard Johnson

    First off, it's pretty important to state right off the bat what we already know.  Lives are being lost!  The focus should be on the perpetrators and the victims.  Too often well meaning people fight amongst themselves.  Tragic really, and the killing keeps going on! The focus needs to be on saving lives, and not fighting about who's theory is more right! 

    We should Unite Against Injustice and Genocide.  Let's call it what it is.   Murder, Rape, Suffering, Crimes Against Humanity! 

    I have read Goldhagen's book.  And it is much, much more than what you have portrayed here.  So instead of knocking it, I think it will raise consciousness in a very important way.  First of all, most people who are not familiar with the subject do not realize that more people have died in genocidal actions than all military combat combined since the beginning of the twentieth century.  This is very important fact that brings the problem front and center.  I agree with the title, Genocide is Worse Than War.  This is not about "civil wars", per se.  This is an incredible and ongoing threat to humanity on our planet.  Most people in the West feel that it's happening to people "over there".  Out of sight, out of mind.  This fact alone is important for everyone to understand.  A local problem for others to deal with.  If Goldhagen's book just opens people's eyes to this, that is very important.  With all the talk that keeps going on about genocide, public awareness is not where it needs to be to bring on action.

    The second thing that Goldhagen's book talks about, that's really important is the mind set of the perpetrators and the role a benevolent government has in lighting a genocidal spark.  It is not about "civil wars" alone.  Killing children by the thousands is not a "civil war" action.   It is a hate crime.  One group of people hates another group of people.  And the government says, go ahead you have permission to kill the people you hate.  Goldhagen's book points this out, that the killers CHOOSE to kill. 

    The third part has to do with the role of a malevolent, self serving government that whips up the underlying prejudices to solidify it's position of power and dominance over its dominion.  This is very important to understand.  It is not "spontaneous".  Genocide is often planned, and sustained over a period of time (weeks, months, years) under the umbrella of a government to wipe out people who it decides is undesirable.  Again, this is not a "civil war" thing.  In Cambodia, China, The former Soviet Union, millions died in Genocide.  Not by civil war.  Because it served a political purpose.  Yes, it would be great to do something about 'civil war'.  These genocides would happen anyway. Civil War isn't part of the deal in these places -- and many others -- it is a political action.

    I found Goldhagen's book fascinating. It's about so much more than the issue of Genocide.  It looks at the whole enchilada. The local conditions that bring about, or do not bring about mass killing; and the international conditions that inform the local conditions.  What individuals and states are willing or not willing to do.  Ultimately, it is about the human condition.  What's in people's hearts.   To mobilize others to kill, to be a killer, to be a victim, to be a passive bystander, to become active. 

    I think this book can do a great deal to raise the consciousness of all right minded people. 

    Posted by Richard Johnson on 10/13/2009 @ 07:09AM PT

  2. Michael Bear

    Remind me not to fall on your bad side

    Posted by Michael Bear on 10/13/2009 @ 06:13PM PT

  3. Leroy Pletten

    It is difficult for the U.S. to have credibility in view of its own record of genocide / holocaust: tens of millions of (a) Indians, (b) blacks, and (c) smokers.

    a. America at Columbus' time in 1492 had had 150,000,000 natives, "cent cinquante millions d'hommes,"-Dr. Hippolyte A. Depierris, Physiologie Sociale (Paris: Dentu, 1876), p 25. By the 1890's, apparently only about 250,000 Indians survived, says Richard Thornton, American Indian Holocaust and Survival (1987), and David Stannard, American Holocaust (Oxford Univ Press, 1992), p. 146.

    b. "Robert R. Kuczynski, the world-known authority on migration statistics, estimated that a minimum of 15 million slaves landed alive. Because of the brutal treatment on transport and the conditions of crossing, the total number of people of which the African continent was depleted amounted . . . to several times more.
    "
    Carter G. Woodson, Ph.D., in 'Negro in Our History,' estimated the total at 50 million, while W. E. B. DuBois, Ph.D., in 'The Negro,' gives the figure of  60 million."-Peter M. Bergman, The Chronological History of the Negro in America [New York: Harper & Row, 1969], p 2. [Legal term: Universal Malice.].

    c. The Royal College of Physicians of London, in its book Smoking and Health Now (London: Pitman Medical and Scientific Publishing Co, 1971), p 9, has already declared the smoking-caused death toll a "holocaust" due to the then "annual death toll of some 27,500."

    "Over 37 million people (one of every six Americans alive today) will die from cigarette smoking years before they otherwise would," says the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), book, Research on Smoking Behavior, Research Monograph 17, Publication ADM 78-581, p v (December 1977).

    Wherefore, it is difficult for the U.S. to have credibility on the genocide subject!

    Posted by Leroy Pletten on 10/20/2009 @ 02:26PM PT

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author

Twitter Feed

Michelle .

Michelle became involved in the anti-genocide cause at a young age, and has been involved in various activist endeavors, including the Teach Against Genocide pilot campaigns, ever since.

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.