Institutionalized Mass Murder the Roots

Institutionalized Mass Murder

The roots of genocidal behavior and how civilized people can become involved in institutionalized mass murder.

Genocide has been perpetrated all over the world, and therefore culture and geography have little bearing on how or when institutionalized mass murder will emerge. However, institutionalized mass murder evolves in response to various situational variables, most of which pose threats to the cohesiveness of a community. For example, low morale after World War One fomented anti-Semitism that led to the Holocaust. Scapegoating is thus one of the most common reasons for a genocide campaign. Moreover, propaganda is necessary to bolster that campaign. Usually institutionalized mass murder occurs in societies under authoritarian rule such as with Pol Pot or Hitler. In other cases, such as the mass genocide of the Native Americans, institutionalized mass murder occurs in the absence of a clear centralized authority. Rather, the genocide is condoned by a combination of unique cultural factors including a warped sense of cultural superiority and war over the possession for land. Institutionalized mass murder is usually used to preserve, however artificially, social and cultural integrity and to eliminate minority groups. The minority group poses some sort of threat. In the post-modern world, external intervention is a viable means to squelch instances of genocide; in the past, genocide was often considered a part of warfare as it was in the pre-Columbian Central American empires.

Discussion 2:

Even in the post-modern world, genocide has occurred without any external stops. Pol Pot was virtually left alone; Hitler managed to kill millions too before any clear stops to his regime were set up. Failure to intervene generally stems from several factors. One, intervention could lead to regional conflicts or the outbreak of a broader war. Countries or leaders who cannot afford to engage in way might resist intervention on these grounds. Two, countries or world leaders might act with selfish motives. For instance, genocide might be ignored if that country is a valuable trading partner or a member of a strategic alliance.

Non-Violent Civil Disobedience

Discussion 1: Mahatma Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr. And Nelson Mandela all organized massive movements based on non-violent solutions to major social crises. In each of these cases, non-violent solutions resulted in positive social change. Ghandi secured India's independence from British colonial rule; King bolstered the Civil Rights movement and helped break down institutionalized racism in the United States; and Nelson Mandela fought against apartheid even from within his prison cell. Each of these cases demonstrates the effectiveness of non-violence as a means to secure social change. Moreover, in each of these cases the non-violent movement brought the cause into the public arena. Ghandi, King, and Mandela garnered tremendous support for their causes by refraining from the use of force.