The RPF was composed of over soldiers, most the sons of Tutsi refugees who had fled ethnic purges in Rwanda between and
Since it was coined by jurist Raphael Lemkin in the immediate context of the Holocaust, the term "genocide" has gained wide usage, not just as a description of those activities directly connected with the Holocaust itself, but also as a term that has been used to label events from various times and locales.
What factors and methods allow for this implicit comparison between the Holocaust and other cases of mass violence?
Jan 17, · Can Genocide be seen as a historical human practice? The question of genocide is a problem to contemporary historians, for it is hard to suggest whether genocide, under the terms of the U.N. Convention, was a part of history before the early episodes of the Twentieth Century. The use of one word in a sentence to modify two other words in the sentence, typically in two different ways. For example, in Charles Dickens's The Pickwick Papers, the sentence "Mr. Pickwick took his hat and his leave" uses the word "took" to mean two different things. ASAP Compare and contrast another instance of genocide with the Nazi Holocaust. Please compare and contrast thoroughly please. Pol Pot in Cambodia:
Certainly, it is redundant to suggest that genocide should be understood as a particular form of social evil, and thus worthy of naming. However, nations' discomfort at accepting the label as applied by the greater global community to events in their own history seems to indicate that the "evil" qualities of this activity, once so designated, in fact represent a commonly accepted demarcation for evil.
In the end, it seems that many people would like to believe that genocide is a "thing that my ancestors could never do" 2 —or, one imagines, have turned a blind eye to. For these, and other, reasons, understandings of genocide can be Comparing two instances of genocide problems for international policy.
Beneath the challenges posed by these problems lies the question of comparison. How closely must events resemble the Holocaust in order to be recognized as genocide?
Is it possible to think comparatively about multiple genocides without creating hierarchies of suffering on the one hand and shallow parallels on the other?
We next suggest that digital humanities tools can facilitate comparative research on genocide testimony, and, finally, that these tools can be made pedagogically useful for teachers and students seeking to learn about various genocides. We maintain that this methodological combination can produce a comparative approach to the study of genocide that is both analytically rigorous to scholars as well as pedagogically accessible to students.
For an example of an applied project using this methodology, please see the related essay in this volume: Genocide, Memory, and Comparison There are various possibilities for approaching the comparative study of genocide survivor testimony.
The representations could include textual, video, and audio testimonies, as well as those acquired in vastly different contexts: Comparing these various forms of testimony necessitates engaging with a range of compositional contexts, in addition to a multiplicity of memory cultures and styles of memoriography.
In some way, such a union of different memory cultures already exists, since Holocaust memory created the lexicon, scholarship, processes of working through the past, iconography, and even powerful number symbols for genocide.
Peter Carrier even credits Holocaust memory as creating its own research genre, which he calls "Holocaust memoriography"——a theoretical understanding of history, language, and memory that heavily influences memory studies of other traumatic events.
These problems of competing memory cultures and mainstream American self-perceptions speak directly to wider core humanities questions of collective memory and collective forgetting; historical justice activism; and representation in exhibitions, films, or sites of conscience and thus warrant further exploration.
Understanding the impact of diverse memorial cultures, however, also raises the question of how they integrate or refuse to integrate into American master-narratives and if they offer redemptive conclusions on the prevention of future atrocities.
The placing of Holocaust memorials such as Nathan Rapoport's Liberation statue in Jersey City within sight of the Statue of Liberty, for example, suggests the successful interplay between elements of American ideals of liberty and pluralism and the memory of the Holocaust.
The controversy around the Sand Creek Massacre memorial, for example, challenged one of the most redemptive readings of U. However, in this assertion researchers and educators must carefully consider the question of who——if anyone——bears ownership of the term genocide.
Is the word simply to be viewed as indicating an event's similarity to the Holocaust? The vast array of contemporary patterns of the term's use would seem to contradict this notion.
It follows, then, that we should ask: When should the term genocide be applied? And, along with that:The Armenian Genocide Throughout history genocide has taken place on more than one occasion, causing mass destruction and casualties.
The most commonly known genocide is the Nazi Holocaust, but the one less commonly known with an equivalent amount of brutality is the Armenian Genocide, also known as the Armenian Holocaust. Cultural genocide is also known as “symbolic genocide”, “white genocide” and “ethnocide”, and is often contrasted with “physical” or “actual” genocidal acts in research papers.
Since the Nuremberg trials, efforts have been made to position genocide as a crime in international law. The genocide of indigenous peoples is the mass destruction of entire communities of indigenous peoples.
[Note 1] Indigenous peoples are understood to be people whose historical and current territory has become occupied by colonial expansion, or the formation of a state by a dominant group such as a colonial power. An Argumentative and Comparative Analysis of Western This study will attempt to analyze the topic of genocide by comparing the denial of the Holocaust and of the Armenian Genocide.
It will be argued that those attempting to deny the genocides as such, focus on the more or less widespread denial of two cases of genocide. Comparing two instances of Genocide. then once. Genocide refers to violent crimes committed against groups with the intention to destroy the existence of the group.
The groups could be in whole or in part, a religious, racial, ethnical, or national group. Genocide: mass murder of innocent civilians. There are many instances in the bible where God ordered genocides. One is Joshua " And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.".