客厅挂钟放在什么位置好| 食用油是什么油| aupres是什么牌子化妆品| 法务是干什么的| 耳朵流血是什么原因| 牙龈上火吃什么药| 早上右眼跳是什么预兆| 手肘发黑是什么原因| 包皮溃烂是什么原因| 百年灵手表什么档次| 兔子不吃窝边草是什么生肖| 蚂蚁上树是什么意思| 牙周炎用什么药| hbv病毒是什么意思| 玉米什么时候种| 孕妇什么时候吃dha效果比较好| 什么是cg| 树大招风的意思是什么| 桃花什么季节开| 鸟儿为什么会飞| 载波是什么意思| 吧可以组什么词| 一幅什么| 车水马龙是什么生肖| 胃反酸吃点什么能缓解| 相形见拙什么意思| 普通健康证都检查什么| 喝啤酒吃什么菜最好| 例假量多是什么原因| 心肌缺血吃什么药管用| 不见棺材不落泪是什么生肖| 女用避孕套是什么样的| 小孩子晚上睡觉磨牙是什么原因| 汉朝后面是什么朝代| 补气血吃什么最好| 直接胆红素偏高是什么原因| 有眼不识泰山是什么意思| 和田玉对身体有什么好处| 夏枯草有什么功效| 宝宝积食吃什么药| 眼花是什么原因| 辰龙是什么意思| 补肝血吃什么药| 去台湾需要什么证件| 气血不足吃什么药最好| 7.12是什么星座| 胆疼是什么原因| 啪啪是什么意思| 阴道瘙痒吃什么药| 为什么胃有灼热感| 有尿意但是尿不出来是什么原因| 吃什么对心脏有好处| 南瓜炒什么好吃| 停胎是什么原因造成的| 抽血生化是查什么| 幽闭恐惧症是什么| 天使什么意思| 湿气太重吃什么排湿最快| 半夏是什么意思| 蛤蟆吃什么| ysl属于什么档次| 舟五行属什么| 文气是什么意思| 7月八号是什么星座| 大蒜泡酒治什么病| 黄帝内经是什么时期的| 有色眼镜是什么意思| 左胸口疼是什么原因| 小舌头叫什么| 糖尿病人早餐吃什么| 取活检是什么意思| who是什么组织| 树大招风的意思是什么| 家和万事兴是什么意思| 舌头起泡吃什么药好| 猫贫血吃什么补血最快| 什么是阴道炎| 5个月宝宝可以吃什么水果| 红领巾的含义是什么| 全飞秒是什么| 脾胃虚弱吃什么水果| 浙江大学什么专业最好| 荔枝与什么不能同吃| 缺碘吃什么| 脑脱髓鞘改变是什么病| 入珠是什么| 黑枸杞泡水喝有什么作用和功效| 什么是出马| 一什么声音| 青海古代叫什么| 盲约大结局是什么| 猪肝跟什么相克| 什么样的小船| 皮肤过敏不能吃什么| 孺子是什么意思| 空调一级能效什么意思| 宫口开了有什么症状| cr是什么金属| castle什么意思| 小腿肌肉疼是什么原因| trust什么意思| 钯金是什么金| 外耳道湿疹用什么药| 卢森堡为什么那么有钱| 白衬衫太透里面穿什么| 阙什么意思| 处女座与什么星座最配| 蟑螂怕什么| 痱子用什么药膏最有效| 凌晨1点是什么时辰| 什么是标准预防| 凌晨十二点是什么时辰| 祈字五行属什么| 赫五行属性是什么| 格五行属什么| 外阴瘙痒用什么洗液| 男性尿道刺痛吃什么药| 什么是重心| 美尼尔氏综合症是什么病| 晚上9点多是什么时辰| 酵母菌是什么| 地奥司明片治疗什么病| 皮蛋是什么蛋| 手心红是什么原因| 乐子是什么意思| 失败是成功之母是什么意思| 突然头晕冒虚汗什么原因| 左脸颊有痣代表什么| 什么时候抓知了猴| 人的运气跟什么有关| 青岛啤酒节什么时候| 梦见捡到钱是什么意思| 孕酮低吃什么可以提高孕酮| 勃起是什么意思| 阴阳脸是什么意思| 为什么一吃辣的就拉肚子| 胆固醇高应注意什么| 小孩肺炎吃什么药| 颐养天年是什么意思| 7.8号是什么日子| 5.29什么星座| 心动是什么意思| 6月25日是世界什么日| 并是什么意思| 酸菜吃多了有什么危害| 量贩式ktv是什么意思| 耄耋读什么| 中央委员是什么级别| 帝旺是什么意思| 肩膀发麻是什么原因| 什么是引流| 耳朵发炎吃什么药| 第一次坐飞机需要注意什么| 职业年金是什么| asia是什么意思| 身上痣多是什么原因| 运动出汗有什么好处| 坎宅是什么意思| 感冒吃什么菜| 郑州有什么好吃的| 男生说gg是什么意思| 安可是什么意思| 什么人容易得脑溢血| 什么叫早搏| size什么意思| 吃什么能降血脂| 50分贝相当于什么声音| lh是什么| 招字五行属什么| 什么都没有| 凤梨是什么| 勾心斗角是什么生肖| 身体缺钾是什么症状| 孕妇流鼻血是什么原因| ad医学上是什么意思| 喉咙发炎咳嗽吃什么药好得快| 36周岁属什么| 2001年什么年| 韭菜籽配什么壮阳最猛| 梅花肉是什么肉| 肛门痒是什么原因男性| 嗓子疼咳嗽吃什么药| 胃凉是什么原因| 美国为什么帮以色列| 什么地叹气| 小猫能吃什么水果| imax是什么意思| 蚊虫叮咬用什么药膏| 一个石一个夕念什么| 前列腺多发钙化灶是什么意思| 红斑狼疮吃什么药最好| 宫腔镜是什么意思| 直视是什么意思| 腹肌不对称是什么原因| 上海有什么好玩的地方| 自信是什么意思| 毛囊炎挂什么科| 血管痉挛是什么症状| 一什么二什么| 梦见打群架是什么意思| 摩羯座属于什么象星座| 疱疹感染是什么病| 为什么会长囊肿| 水印是什么| 198什么意思| 睡觉总是流口水是什么原因| 质子治疗是什么意思| 鸟加衣念什么| 运动裤配什么上衣好看| 荨麻疹用什么药好| 梦见自己给别人钱是什么意思| 口干舌燥喝水也不解渴是什么原因| 神经内科主要看什么病| 北极为什么没有企鹅| 苹果和什么一起榨汁好喝| 今年什么时候进伏天| 朝鲜的货币叫什么| 1999年出生的属什么| 点痣用什么方法最好| 免疫力差吃什么可以增强抵抗力| 拿什么东西不用手| 肚脐眼臭是什么原因| 骨髓瘤是什么原因引起的| 什么季节| 蚝油可以用什么代替| 空调外机很响是什么原因| 什么面什么刀| 肝的主要功能是什么| 什么水果榨汁好喝| dei是什么意思| 黑马是什么意思| 韩字五行属什么| 什么是风水| 伦字五行属什么| 吃羊肉不能吃什么东西| 梦见鸡是什么意思| 袋鼠属于什么类动物| 鱼丸是什么做的| 弱水三千只取一瓢什么意思| 全身皮肤瘙痒是什么原因引起的| 什么是矢量| 广东是什么气候| 诸侯国是什么意思| 晚上睡觉脚抽筋是什么原因引起的| 星月菩提是什么| 霸王别姬是什么生肖| 壁厚是什么意思| 电解质水是什么水| 普惠性幼儿园是什么意思| 太子是什么意思| 做腋臭手术挂什么科室| 为什么会得脑血栓| 葡萄胎有什么症状反应| 00年是什么命| 八点半是什么时辰| 舌根发硬是什么原因| 马甲线是什么| 容易饿是什么原因| gh发什么音| 灵芝什么人不能吃| 樱桃有什么营养价值| 脑ct挂什么科| 梅核气是什么症状| 逼格什么意思| 百度Jump to content

孙燕:高层建筑加强采暖通风系统防火能力探究

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
百度 三、服务地方经济社会发展,推出一批应用性研究成果南京大学盛昭瀚领衔的“社会科学计算实验基本理论、关键技术及应用研究”课题组,建立太湖流域自然—社会复合系统计算实验平台,为政府治理太湖水环境政策的制定提供决策支持,对港珠澳大桥工程招标过程进行情景模拟,为招标策略的制定提供理论依据;吉林大学张屹山领衔的“中国潜在经济增长率计算及结构转换路径研究”课题组撰写的关于如何让地区经济企稳回升的报告获多位省部级领导重视,核心建议均被采纳;中南大学肖序领衔的“基于工业的循环经济价值流分析研究”课题组的研究成果广泛应用于指导中国铝业、株洲冶炼等大型企业的循环化改造,以及宁乡经开区、长沙经开区等生态工业园的信息资源共享平台建设;河海大学王慧敏领衔的“保障经济、生态和国家安全的最严格水资源管理制度体系研究”课题组,以问题为导向,选择多个不同特征水资源问题流域为研究背景,从“制度需求”与“制度供给”角度出发,提出基于互联网+的最严格水资源管理技术支持体系,为其他流域的科学管理提供借鉴和参考;中山大学梁琦课题组,在空间经济学框架下,考察我国城市层级体系的基本事实,探寻城市层级体系内劳动力流动的内在机理,并分析户籍制度对劳动力流动进而对我国城市层级体系的影响;华南理工大学王世福领衔的“中国城市社会来临与智慧城市设计及发展战略研究”课题组,有多名博士和硕士研究生参与研究,课题组依托该项目指导学生参加各类竞赛,获省部级以上奖励50余项,获得相关行业及部门的关注。

Genocide is violence that targets individuals because of their membership of a group and aims at the destruction of a people.[a][1] Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term, defined genocide as "the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group" by means such as "the disintegration of [its] political and social institutions, of [its] culture, language, national feelings, religion, and [its] economic existence".[2] During the struggle to ratify the Genocide Convention, powerful countries restricted Lemkin's definition to exclude their own actions from being classified as genocide,[3][4] ultimately limiting it to any of five "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group".[5] While there are many scholarly definitions of genocide,[6] almost all international bodies of law officially adjudicate the crime of genocide pursuant to the Genocide Convention.[7]

Genocide has occurred throughout human history, even during prehistoric times, but it is particularly likely in situations of imperial expansion and power consolidation. It is associated with colonial empires and settler colonies, as well as with both world wars and repressive governments in the twentieth century. The colloquial understanding of genocide is heavily influenced by the Holocaust as its archetype and is conceived as innocent victims being targeted for their ethnic identity rather than for any political reason. Genocide is widely considered to be the epitome of human evil and is often referred to as the "crime of crimes"; consequently, events are often denounced as genocide.

Origins

The Holocaust heavily influences the popular understanding of genocide, as mass killing of innocent people based on their ethnic identity.[8][9]

Polish-Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin coined the term genocide between 1941 and 1943.[10][11] Lemkin's coinage combined the Greek word γ?νο? (genos, "race, people") with the Latin suffix -caedo ("act of killing").[12] He submitted the manuscript for his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe to the publisher in early 1942 and it was published in 1944 as the Holocaust was coming to light outside Europe.[10] Lemkin's proposal was more ambitious than simply outlawing this type of mass slaughter. He also thought that the law against genocide could promote more tolerant and pluralistic societies.[12] His response to Nazi criminality was sharply different from that of another international law scholar, Hersch Lauterpacht, who argued that it was essential to protect individuals from atrocities whether or not they were targeted as members of a group.[13]

According to Lemkin, the central definition of genocide was "the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group" in which its members were not targeted as individuals, but rather as members of the group. The objectives of genocide "would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups".[2] These were not separate crimes but different aspects of the same genocidal process.[14] Lemkin's definition of nation was sufficiently broad to apply to nearly any type of human collectivity, even one based on a trivial characteristic.[15] He saw genocide as an inherently colonial process, and in his later writings analyzed what he described as the colonial genocides occurring within European overseas territories as well as the Soviet and Nazi empires.[12] Furthermore, his definition of genocidal acts, which was to replace the national pattern of the victim with that of the perpetrator, was much broader than the five types enumerated in the Genocide Convention.[12] Lemkin considered genocide to have occurred since the beginning of human history and dated the efforts to criminalize it to the Spanish critics of colonial excesses Francisco de Vitoria and Bartolomé de Las Casas.[16] The 1946 judgement against Arthur Greiser issued by a Polish court was the first legal verdict that mentioned the term, using Lemkin's original definition.[17]

Crime

Development

The expulsion of Germans was one of the instances of state violence that was deliberately written out of the legal definition of genocide.[18]

According to the legal instrument used to prosecute defeated German leaders at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, atrocity crimes were only prosecutable by international justice if they were committed as part of an illegal war of aggression. The powers prosecuting the trial were unwilling to restrict a government's actions against its own citizens.[19]

In order to criminalize peacetime genocide, Lemkin brought his proposal to criminalize genocide to the newly established United Nations in 1946.[19] Opposition to the convention was greater than Lemkin expected due to states' concerns that it would lead their own policies—including treatment of indigenous peoples, European colonialism, racial segregation in the United States, and Soviet nationalities policy—to be labeled genocide. Before the convention was passed, powerful countries (both Western powers and the Soviet Union) secured changes in an attempt to make the convention unenforceable and applicable to their geopolitical rivals' actions but not their own.[3] Few formerly colonized countries were represented and "most states had no interest in empowering their victims– past, present, and future".[4]

The result severely diluted Lemkin's original concept;[20] he privately considered it a failure.[3] Lemkin's anti-colonial conception of genocide was transformed into one that favored colonial powers.[21][22] Among the violence freed from the stigma of genocide was the destruction of political groups, which the Soviet Union is particularly blamed for blocking.[23][24][20] Although Lemkin credited women's NGOs with securing the passage of the convention, the gendered violence of forced pregnancy, marriage, and divorce was left out.[25] Additionally omitted was the forced migration of populations—which had been carried out by the Soviet Union and its allies, condoned by the Western powers, against millions of Germans from central and Eastern Europe.[26]

Genocide Convention

Participation in the Genocide Convention
  Signed and ratified
  Acceded or succeeded
  Only signed

Two years after passing a resolution affirming the criminalization of genocide, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Genocide Convention on 9 December 1948.[27] It came into effect on 12 January 1951 after 20 countries ratified it without reservations.[28] The convention defines genocide as:

... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

  • (a) Killing members of the group;
  • (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  • (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  • (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  • (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.[5]

A specific "intent to destroy" is the mens rea requirement of genocide.[29] The issue of what it means to destroy a group "as such" and how to prove the required intent has been difficult for courts to resolve. The legal system has also struggled with how much of a group can be targeted before triggering the Genocide Convention.[30][31][32] The two main approaches to intent are the purposive approach, where the perpetrator expressly wants to destroy the group, and the knowledge-based approach, where the perpetrator understands that destruction of the protected group will result from his actions.[33][34] Intent is the most difficult aspect for prosecutors to prove;[35][36] the perpetrators often claim that they merely sought the removal of the group from a given territory, instead of destruction as such,[37] or that the genocidal actions were collateral damage of military activity.[38]

Attempted genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, incitement to genocide, and complicity in genocide are criminalized.[39] The convention does not allow the retroactive prosecution of events that took place prior to 1951.[39] Signatories are also required to prevent genocide and prosecute its perpetrators.[40] Many countries have incorporated genocide into their municipal law, varying to a lesser or greater extent from the convention.[41] The convention's definition of genocide was adopted verbatim by the ad hoc international criminal tribunals and by the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court (ICC).[42] The crime of genocide also exists in customary international law and is therefore prohibited for non-signatories.[43]

Prosecutions

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in session

During the Cold War, genocide remained at the level of rhetoric because both superpowers (the United States and the Soviet Union) felt vulnerable to accusations of genocide and were therefore unwilling to press charges against the other party.[44] Despite political pressure to charge "Soviet genocide", the United States government refused to ratify the convention, fearing countercharges.[45] Authorities have been reluctant to prosecute the perpetrators of many genocides, although non-judicial commissions of inquiry have also been created by some states.[46]

International courts have found a small number of events as constituting genocide, such as the Rwandan genocide and the Srebrenica genocide.[47]

On 25 January 2010, Iraqi official Ali Hassan al-Majid (1st cousin of Saddam Hussein) was executed by hanging after being convicted of committing genocide by using chemical weapons against Iraq's Kurdish population during the 1997–1998 Al-Anfal campaign.[48][49][50] The first head of state to be convicted of genocide was Khieu Samphan in 2018 for the Cambodian genocide.[11]

Although it is widely recognized that punishment of the perpetrators cannot be of an order with their crimes, the trials often serve other purposes such as attempting to shape public perception of the past.[46]

Genocide studies

The field of genocide studies emerged in the 1970s and 1980s, as social science began to consider the phenomenon of genocide.[51][52] Due to the occurrence of the Bosnian genocide, Rwandan genocide, and the Kosovo crisis, genocide studies exploded in the 1990s.[53] In contrast to earlier researchers who took for granted the idea that liberal and democratic societies were less likely to commit genocide, revisionists associated with the International Network of Genocide Scholars emphasized how Western ideas led to genocide.[54] The genocides of indigenous peoples as part of European colonialism were initially not recognized as a form of genocide.[55] Pioneers of research into settler colonialism such as Patrick Wolfe spelled out the genocidal logic of settler projects, prompting a rethinking of colonialism.[56] Many genocide scholars are concerned both with objective study of the topic, and obtaining insights that will help prevent future genocides.[57]

Definitions

The blockade of Biafra, which resulted in the death of at least 1 million people, was argued not to be genocide because it was the Nigerian government's aim to suppress rebellion.[58]

The definition of genocide generates controversy whenever a new case arises and debate erupts as to whether or not it qualifies as a genocide. Sociologist Martin Shaw writes, "Few ideas are as important in public debate, but in few cases are the meaning and scope of a key idea less clearly agreed."[59][60] Some scholars and activists use the Genocide Convention definition.[21] Others prefer narrower definitions that indicate genocide is rare in human history, reducing genocide to mass killing[61] or distinguishing it from other types of violence by the innocence,[8] helplessness, or defencelessness of its victims.[62] Most genocides occur during wartime,[63][64] and distinguishing genocide or genocidal war from non-genocidal warfare can be difficult.[64] Likewise, genocide is distinguished from violent and coercive forms of rule that aim to change behavior rather than destroy groups.[65][66] Some definitions include political or social groups as potential victims of genocide.[67] Many of the more sociologically oriented definitions of genocide overlap that of the crime against humanity of extermination, which refers to large-scale killing or induced death as part of a systematic attack on a civilian population.[68] Isolated or short-lived phenomena that resemble genocide can be termed genocidal violence.[69]

Cultural genocide or ethnocide—actions targeted at the reproduction of a group's language, culture, or way of life[70]—was part of Raphael Lemkin's original concept, and its proponents in the 1940s argued that it, along with physical genocide, were two mechanisms aiming at the same goal: destruction of the targeted group. Because cultural genocide clearly applied to some colonial and assimilationist policies, several states with overseas colonies threatened to refuse to ratify the convention unless it was excluded.[71][20] Most genocide scholars believe that both cultural genocide and structural violence should be included in the definition of genocide, if committed with intent to destroy the targeted group.[72] Although included in Lemkin's original concept and by some scholars, political groups were also excluded from the Genocide Convention. The result of this exclusion was that perpetrators of genocide could redefine their targets as being a political or military enemy, thus excluding them from consideration.[73]

The overlap of law and history leads to contrasting perspectives on genocide.[74] The law focuses on serious acts, limiting genocide to physical and biological aspects, necessitating intent to destroy a group, and protecting only defined classes of groups. Historians, however, explore the broader complexities of genocides, including long-term processes and various motives, without strict legal definitions. Some historians also recognize cultural adaptability after genocidal events.[75]

Criticism of the concept of genocide and alternatives

The death of large numbers of civilians as collateral damage of military activity such as aerial bombings is excluded from the definition of genocide, even when they make up a significant portion of a nation's population.[76]

Most civilian killings in the twentieth century were not from genocide, which only applies to select cases.[77][78] Alternative terms have been coined to describe processes left outside narrower definitions of genocide. Ethnic cleansing—the forced expulsion of a population from a given territory—has achieved widespread currency, although many scholars recognize that it frequently overlaps with genocide, even where Lemkin's definition is not used.[79] Other terms ending in -cide have proliferated for the destruction of particular types of groupings: democide (people by a government), eliticide (the elite of a targeted group), ethnocide (ethnic groups), gendercide (gendered groupings), politicide (political groups), classicide (social classes), and urbicide (the destruction of a particular locality).[80][81][82]

The word genocide inherently carries a value judgement[83] as it is widely considered to be the epitome of human evil.[84] In the past, violence that could be labeled genocide was sometimes celebrated[85]—although it always had its critics.[86] The idea that genocide sits on top of a hierarchy of atrocity crimes—that it is worse than crimes against humanity or war crimes—is controversial among scholars[87] and it suggests that the protection of groups is more important than of individuals.[88] Historian A. Dirk Moses argues that the prioritization of genocide causes other atrocities to not be considered in study and response.[89][90]

Causes

We have been reproached for making no distinction between the innocent Armenians and the guilty: but that was utterly impossible in view of the fact that those who are innocent today might be guilty tomorrow. The concern for the safety of Turkey simply had to silence all other concerns.

Estancieros and gold prospectors launched a campaign of extermination against the Native Selknam peoples, Argentina, in the 19th century; in the image Julius Popper targeting Indigenous peoples, 1886

The colloquial understanding of genocide is heavily influenced by the Holocaust as its archetype and is conceived as innocent victims targeted because of racism rather than for any political reason.[8] Genocide is not an end of itself, but a means to another end—often chosen by perpetrators after other options failed.[93] Most are ultimately caused by its perpetrators perceiving an existential threat to their own existence, although this belief is usually exaggerated and can be entirely imagined.[94][95][96] Particular threats to existing elites that have been correlated to genocide include both successful and attempted regime change via assassination, coups, revolutions, and civil wars.[97]

Most genocides were not planned long in advance, but emerged through a process of gradual radicalization, often escalating to genocide following resistance by those targeted.[98] Genocide perpetrators often fear—usually irrationally—that if they do not commit atrocities, they will suffer a similar fate as they inflict on their victims.[99][100] Despite perpetrators' utilitarian goals,[101] ideological factors are necessary to explain why genocide seems to be a desirable solution to the identified security problem.[101][99] Noncombatants are harmed because of the collective guilt ascribed to an entire people—defined according to race but targeted because of its supposed security threat.[102] Other motives for genocide have included theft, land grabbing, and revenge.[5]

War is often described as the single most important enabler of genocide[103] providing the weaponry, ideological justification, polarization between allies and enemies, and cover for carrying out extreme violence.[104] A large proportion of genocides occurred under the course of imperial expansion and power consolidation.[105] Although genocide is typically organized around pre-existing identity boundaries, it has the outcome of strengthening them.[106] Although many scholars have emphasized the role of ideology in genocide, there is little agreement in how ideology contributes to violent outcomes;[107] others have cited rational explanations for atrocities.[101]

Perpetrators

Group of auxiliary guards at Sobibor extermination camp in 1943

Genocides are usually driven by states[108][109] and their agents, such as elites, political parties, bureaucracies, armed forces, and paramilitaries.[109] Civilians are often the leading agents when the genocide takes places in remote frontier areas.[110] A common strategy is for state-sponsored atrocities to be carried out in secrecy by paramilitary groups, offering the benefit of plausible deniability while widening complicity in the atrocities.[111][112][113] The leaders who organize genocide usually believe that their actions were justified and regret nothing.[114]

How ordinary people can become involved in extraordinary violence under circumstances of acute conflict is poorly understood.[115][116] The foot soldiers of genocide (as opposed to its organizers) are not demographically or psychologically aberrant.[117] People who commit crimes during genocide are rarely true believers in the ideology behind genocide, although they are affected by it to some extent[118] alongside other factors such as obedience, diffusion of responsibility, and conformity.[119] Other evidence suggests that ideological propaganda is not effective in inducing people to commit genocide[120] and that for some perpetrators, the dehumanization of victims, and adoption of nationalist or other ideologies that justify the violence occurs after they begin to perpetrate atrocities[121] often coinciding with escalation.[122] Although genocide perpetrators have often been assumed to be male, the role of women in perpetrating genocide—although they were historically excluded from leadership—has also been explored.[123] People's behavior changes under the course of events, and someone might choose to kill one genocide victim while saving another.[124][125][126] Anthropologist Richard Rechtman writes that in circumstances where atrocities such as genocides are perpetrated, many people refuse to become perpetrators.[127]

Methods

Remains of victims of the Armenian genocide in the former Armenian village of Sheykhalan near Mush, 1915
Photograph of the bodies of dozens of Armenians in a field
Armenian genocide victims. The corpses of Armenians beside a road, a common sight along deportation routes.

It is a common misconception that genocide necessarily involves mass killing; indeed, it may occur without a single person being killed.[128][page needed][clarification needed] In Axis Rule (1944) Raphael Lemkin outlined eight types of techniques used by the Nazis to commit group destruction: political, social, cultural, economic, biological, physical, religious, and moral.[129]

Forced displacement is a common feature of many genocides, with the victims often transported to another location where their destruction is easier for the perpetrators. In some cases, victims are transported to sites where they are killed or deprived of the necessities of life.[130] People are often killed by the displacement itself, as was the case for many Armenian genocide victims.[131] Cultural destruction, such as that practised at Canadian boarding schools for indigenous children, is often dependent on controlling the victims at a specific location.[131] Destruction of cultural objects, such as religious buildings, is common even when the primary method of genocide is not cultural.[82] Cultural genocide, such as residential schools, is particularly common during settler-colonial consolidation.[132][133]

Men, particularly young adults, are disproportionately targeted for killing before other victims in order to stem resistance.[134][135] Although diverse forms of sexual violence—ranging from rape, forced pregnancy, forced marriage, sexual slavery, mutilation, forced sterilization—can affect either males or females, women are more likely to face it.[136] The combination of killing of men and sexual violence against women is often intended to disrupt reproduction of the targeted group.[134]

Almost all genocides are brought to an end either by the military defeat of the perpetrators or the accomplishment of their aims.[137]

Reactions

Protestors holding a "Stop genocide, free Palestine" banner during a march against Israeli actions during the Gaza war in Helsinki, Finland, 21 October 2023

According to rational choice theory, it should be possible to intervene to prevent genocide by raising the costs of engaging in such violence relative to alternatives.[138] Although there are a number of organizations that compile lists of states where genocide is considered likely to occur,[139] the accuracy of these predictions are not known and there is no scholarly consensus over evidence-based genocide prevention strategies.[140] Intervention to prevent genocide has often been considered a failure[141][142] because most countries prioritize business, trade, and diplomatic relationships:[143][140] as a consequence, "the usual powerful actors continue to use violence against vulnerable populations with impunity".[142]

Responsibility to protect is a doctrine that emerged around 2000, in the aftermath of several genocides around the world, that seeks to balance state sovereignty with the need for international intervention to prevent genocide.[144] However, disagreements in the United Nations Security Council and lack of political will have hampered the implementation of this doctrine.[141] Although military intervention to halt genocide has been credited with reducing violence in some cases, it remains deeply controversial[145] and is usually illegal.[146] Researcher Gregory H. Stanton found that calling crimes genocide rather than something else, such as ethnic cleansing, increased the chance of effective intervention.[147] Perhaps for this reason, states are often reluctant to recognize crimes as genocide while they are taking place.

History

Statues at the Chickasaw Cultural Center during the 2012 Trail of Tears Conference. Many historians have labelled the forced displacement of Native Americans from their homelands in the United States as a genocide.[148][149]
Naked Soviet POWs held by the Nazis in Mauthausen concentration camp. Political scientist Adam Jones wrote that "the murder of at least 3.3 million Soviet POWs is one of the least-known of modern genocides".[150]

Lemkin applied the concept of genocide to a wide variety of events throughout human history. He and other scholars date the first genocides to prehistoric times.[151][152][16] Prior to the advent of civilizations consisting of sedentary farmers, humans lived in tribal societies, with intertribal warfare often ending with the obliteration of the defeated tribe, killing of adult males and integration of women and children into the victorious tribe.[153] Ancient sources like the Hebrew Bible contain events that have been cited as potentially describing genocide,[154][155] although some biblical scholars disagree.[156] The massacre of men and the enslavement or forced assimilation of women and children—often limited to a particular town or city rather than applied to a larger group—is a common feature of ancient warfare as described in written sources.[157][128] The events that some scholars consider genocide in ancient and medieval times had more pragmatic than ideological motivations.[158] As a result, some scholars such as Mark Levene argue that genocide is inherently connected to the modern state—thus to the rise of the West in the early modern era and its expansion outside Europe—and earlier conflicts cannot be described as genocide.[159][160]

Although all empires rely on violence, often extreme violence, to establish their own existence,[161] they may also seek to preserve and rule the conquered rather than eradicate them.[162] Such "non-genocides"[163] might include policies of integration (via enslavement or otherwise), or of exile. Although the desire to exploit populations could disincentivise extermination,[164][need quotation to verify] imperial rule could lead to genocide if resistance emerged.[165] Ancient and medieval genocides were often committed by empires.[158] Unlike traditional empires, settler colonialism—particularly the settlement of Europeans outside of Europe—is characterized by militarized populations of settlers in remote areas beyond effective state control. Rather than labor or economic surplus, settlers want to acquire land from indigenous people[166] making genocide more likely than with classical colonialism.[167] While the lack of law enforcement on the frontier ensured impunity for settler violence, the advance of state authority enabled settlers to consolidate their gains using the legal system.[168]

Genocide was committed on a large scale during both world wars. The prototypical genocide, the Holocaust, involved such large-scale logistics that it reinforced the impression that genocide was the result of civilization drifting off course and required both the "weapons and infrastructure of the modern state and the radical ambitions of the modern man".[169] Scientific racism and nationalism were common ideological drivers of many twentieth century genocides.[170] After the horrors of World War II, the United Nations attempted to proscribe genocide via the Genocide Convention. Despite the promise of "never again" and the international effort to outlaw genocide, the practice has continued to occur repeatedly into the twenty-first century.[171]

Effects and aftermath

Mourners at a 2007 funeral for victims of the Srebrenica massacre

In the aftermath of genocide, common occurrences are the attempt to prosecute perpetrators through the legal system and obtain recognition and reparations for survivors, as well as reflection of the events in scholarship and culture, such as genocide museums.[172] Except in the case of the Holocaust, few genocide victims receive any reparations despite the trend of requiring such reparations in international and municipal law.[173] The perpetrators and their supporters often deny the genocide and reject responsibility for the harms suffered by victims.[174] Efforts to achieve justice and reconciliation are common in postgenocide situations, but are necessarily incomplete and inadequate.[87] The effects of genocide on societies are under-researched.[172]

Much of the qualitative research on genocide has focused on the testimonies of victims, survivors, and other eyewitnesses.[175] Studies of genocide survivors have examined rates of depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, suicide, post-traumatic stress disorder, and post-traumatic growth. While some have found negative results, others find no association with genocide survival.[176] There are no consistent findings that children of genocide survivors have worse health than comparable individuals.[177] Most societies are able to recover demographically from genocide, but this is dependent on their position early in the demographic transition.[178]

Because genocide is often perceived as the "crime of crimes", it grabs attention more effectively than other violations of international law.[179] Consequently, victims of atrocities often label their suffering genocide as an attempt to gain attention to their plight and attract foreign intervention.[180] Although remembering genocide is often perceived as a way to develop tolerance and respect for human rights,[181] the charge of genocide often leads to increased cohesion among the targeted people—in some cases, it has been incorporated into national identity—and stokes enmity towards the group blamed for the crime, reducing the chance of reconciliation and increasing the risk of future occurrence of genocide.[88][94] Some genocides are commemorated in memorials or museums.[182]

Notes

  1. ^ Usually defined as a "national, ethnic, racial, or religious group"

References

  1. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, p. 11.
  2. ^ a b Bachman 2022, p. 48.
  3. ^ a b c Irvin-Erickson 2023, pp. 20–21.
  4. ^ a b Bachman 2021b, p. 1021.
  5. ^ a b c Kiernan 2023, p. 6.
  6. ^ Jones 2023, pp. 24–29.
  7. ^ Dunoff, Ratner & Wippman 2006, pp. 615–621.
  8. ^ a b c Moses 2023, p. 19.
  9. ^ Shaw 2015, Conclusion of Chapter 4.
  10. ^ a b Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 7.
  11. ^ a b Kiernan 2023, p. 2.
  12. ^ a b c d Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 14.
  13. ^ Ochab & Alton 2022, pp. 19–20.
  14. ^ Shaw 2015, p. 39.
  15. ^ Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 15.
  16. ^ a b Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 11.
  17. ^ Irvin-Erickson 2023, pp. 7–8.
  18. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2017, pp. 267–268.
  19. ^ a b Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 20.
  20. ^ a b c Curthoys & Docker 2008, pp. 13–14.
  21. ^ a b Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 22.
  22. ^ Bachman 2021b, p. 1020.
  23. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2017, p. 4.
  24. ^ Bachman 2022, p. 53.
  25. ^ Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 8.
  26. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2017, pp. 267–268, 283.
  27. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2017, p. 3.
  28. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2017, p. 158.
  29. ^ Schabas 2010, pp. 136, 138.
  30. ^ Ozoráková 2022, pp. 292–295.
  31. ^ Irvin-Erickson 2023, p. 13.
  32. ^ Schabas 2010, p. 136.
  33. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 35.
  34. ^ Jones 2023, pp. 49–50.
  35. ^ Kiernan, Madley & Taylor 2023, pp. 4, 9.
  36. ^ Ochab & Alton 2022, pp. 28, 30.
  37. ^ Bachman 2022, p. 57.
  38. ^ Bachman 2022, p. 47.
  39. ^ a b Kiernan, Madley & Taylor 2023, p. 2.
  40. ^ Ochab & Alton 2022, p. 32.
  41. ^ Schabas 2010, p. 123.
  42. ^ Ozoráková 2022, p. 281.
  43. ^ "Genocide: The legal basis for universal jurisdiction" (PDF). Amnesty International. September 2021. Archived from the original (PDF) on 31 December 2024.
  44. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2017, p. 9.
  45. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2017, p. 266.
  46. ^ a b Stone 2013, p. 150.
  47. ^ UN Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect n.d., p. 2.
  48. ^ "The Anfal Campaign Against the Kurds". A Middle East Watch Report: Human Rights Watch 1993.
  49. ^ "Saddam Hussein's henchman 'Chemical Ali' executed". The Daily Telegraph. 25 January 2010. Archived from the original on 8 January 2025. Retrieved 2 September 2021.
  50. ^ "Chemical Ali in his own words", Human Rights Watch. Retrieved 24 June 2007
  51. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, pp. 13, 17.
  52. ^ Jones 2023, p. 23.
  53. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, pp. 17–18.
  54. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, pp. 23–24.
  55. ^ Kiernan, Madley & Taylor 2023, p. 6–10.
  56. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, p. 9.
  57. ^ Jones 2023, p. 24.
  58. ^ Moses 2021, pp. 443–444.
  59. ^ Shaw 2015, p. 38.
  60. ^ Williams 2020, p. 8.
  61. ^ Shaw 2014, p. 4.
  62. ^ Shaw 2015, Sociologists redefine genocide.
  63. ^ Mulaj 2021, p. 15.
  64. ^ a b Shaw 2014, pp. 6–7.
  65. ^ Shaw 2014, p. 7.
  66. ^ Kiernan, Madley & Taylor 2023, pp. 11–12.
  67. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, p. 3.
  68. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, pp. 3–4.
  69. ^ Shaw 2014, p. 5.
  70. ^ Bachman 2022, pp. 56–57.
  71. ^ Bachman 2022, p. 62.
  72. ^ Bachman 2021a, p. 375.
  73. ^ Bachman 2022, pp. 45–46, 48–49, 53.
  74. ^ Curthoys & Docker 2008, p. 9.
  75. ^ Bilsky & Klagsbrun 2018, pp. 373–396.
  76. ^ Moses 2023, pp. 22–23.
  77. ^ Moses 2023, p. 25.
  78. ^ Graziosi & Sysyn 2022, p. 15.
  79. ^ Shaw 2015, Chapter 5.
  80. ^ Shaw 2015, Chapter 6.
  81. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 33.
  82. ^ a b Jones 2023, pp. 42–43.
  83. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, pp. 31–32.
  84. ^ Lang 2005, pp. 5–17.
  85. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 32.
  86. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, pp. 45–46.
  87. ^ a b Mulaj 2021, p. 11.
  88. ^ a b Sands 2017, p. 364.
  89. ^ Moses 2021, p. 1.
  90. ^ Bachman 2022, p. 118.
  91. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 162–163.
  92. ^ Moses 2023, p. 32.
  93. ^ Kathman & Wood 2011, pp. 737–738.
  94. ^ a b Stone & Jinks 2022, p. 258.
  95. ^ Moses 2023, pp. 16–17, 27.
  96. ^ Nyseth Nzitatira 2022, p. 52.
  97. ^ Nyseth Nzitatira 2022, pp. 52–53.
  98. ^ Jones 2023, pp. 48–49.
  99. ^ a b Stone 2013, p. 146.
  100. ^ Moyd 2022, p. 245.
  101. ^ a b c Maynard 2022, p. 308.
  102. ^ Moses 2021, p. 329.
  103. ^ Moyd 2022, p. 233.
  104. ^ Moyd 2022, pp. 236–239.
  105. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 49.
  106. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 50.
  107. ^ Maynard 2022, p. 307.
  108. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, pp. 36–37.
  109. ^ a b Weiss-Wendt 2022, p. 189.
  110. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, pp. 215–216.
  111. ^ Anderson & Jessee 2020, p. 12.
  112. ^ Anderton 2023, p. 146.
  113. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2022, pp. 179–180, 189.
  114. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2022, p. 186.
  115. ^ Anderson & Jessee 2020, p. 3.
  116. ^ Rechtman 2021, p. 174.
  117. ^ Williams 2020, pp. 1–2, 211; Anderson & Jessee 2020, pp. 8–9; Rechtman 2021, p. 190; Maynard 2022, p. 319
  118. ^ Maynard 2022, p. 152.
  119. ^ McDoom 2020, p. 124.
  120. ^ Luft 2020, p. 4.
  121. ^ McDoom 2020, pp. 124–125.
  122. ^ Luft 2020, p. 5.
  123. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, p. 10.
  124. ^ Anderton 2023, p. 143.
  125. ^ Rechtman 2021, p. 177.
  126. ^ Luft 2020, p. 2.
  127. ^ Rechtman 2021, pp. 181–182, 187, 191.
  128. ^ a b Jones 2023, The Origins of Genocide.
  129. ^ Moses, A. Dirk (15 April 2010), Bloxham, Donald; Moses, A. Dirk (eds.), "Raphael Lemkin, Culture, and the Concept of Genocide", The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies, Oxford University Press, pp. 34–35, ISBN 978-0-19-923211-6, retrieved 4 August 2025
  130. ^ Basso 2024, p. 20.
  131. ^ a b Basso 2024, p. 21.
  132. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, pp. 213–214.
  133. ^ Adhikari 2023, p. 43.
  134. ^ a b Basso 2024, p. 33.
  135. ^ von Joeden-Forgey 2022, p. 118.
  136. ^ von Joeden-Forgey 2022, pp. 116–119.
  137. ^ Bellamy & McLoughlin 2022, p. 303.
  138. ^ Kathman & Wood 2011, p. 738.
  139. ^ Nyseth Nzitatira 2022, pp. 67–68.
  140. ^ a b Nyseth Nzitatira 2022, p. 68.
  141. ^ a b Mulaj 2021, p. 16.
  142. ^ a b Moyd 2022, p. 250.
  143. ^ Ochab & Alton 2022, pp. 3, 41.
  144. ^ Bachman 2022, p. 119.
  145. ^ Mulaj 2021, p. 17.
  146. ^ Moses 2023, p. 21.
  147. ^ Ochab & Alton 2022, p. 43.
  148. ^ "Indian Removal Act: The Genocide of Native Americans – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog". University of Alabama at Birmingham. Archived from the original on 16 October 2021. Retrieved 16 October 2021.
  149. ^ Stannard, David (1992). American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World. Oxford University Press. p. 256. ISBN 978-0195085570.
  150. ^ Jones 2017, p. 377: "'Next to the Jews in Europe,' wrote Alexander Werth', 'the biggest single German crime was undoubtedly the extermination by hunger, exposure and in other ways of ... Russian war prisoners.' Yet the murder of at least 3.3 million Soviet POWs is one of the least-known of modern genocides; there is still no full-length book on the subject in English. It also stands as one of the most intensive genocides of all time: 'a holocaust that devoured millions,' as Catherine Merridale acknowledges. The large majority of POWs, some 2.8 million, were killed in just eight months of 1941–42, a rate of slaughter matched (to my knowledge) only by the 1994 Rwanda genocide."
  151. ^ Naimark 2017, p. vii.
  152. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 31.
  153. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, pp. 203–204.
  154. ^ Naimark 2017, pp. 7–9.
  155. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, pp. 50–51.
  156. ^ Hinlicky, Paul R.; Reno, R.; Jenson, Robert; Wilken, Robert; Radner, Ephraim; Root, Michael; Sumner, George (2021). "Rahab, confessing YHWH, tricks her king, saving Joshua's spies and her own family 2:1–24". Joshua (Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible). Baker Publishing Group. p. unpaginated. ISBN 978-1-4934-3113-7. Retrieved 28 December 2024. anachronistic imposition of the contemporary notion of genocide on Joshua by pointing to the cultural-religious matrix of herem rather than to the modern racial-biological-genetic matrix of genocide
  157. ^ Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, pp. 39, 50.
  158. ^ a b Lemos, Taylor & Kiernan 2023, p. 43.
  159. ^ Weiss-Wendt 2022, p. 170.
  160. ^ Jones 2023, p. 84.
  161. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, p. 219: "Violence was inherent to imperial formation; at times it could be unleashed as extreme and genocidal violence."
  162. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, p. 219: "Imperial rule could display its potential to limit violence."
  163. ^ Straus, Scott (20 September 2016). "Ideology and Restraint: Genocide and Non-Genocide Cases in Comparative Perspective". In Hof, Tobias (ed.). Empire, Ideology, Mass Violence: The Long 20th Century in Comparative Perspective. Geschichtswissenschaften. Vol. 38. Munich: Herbert Utz Verlag. pp. 203ff. ISBN 9783831643318. Retrieved 19 May 2025.
  164. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, p. 211.
  165. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, p. 220: "As the imperial powers aimed to avoid any appearance of weakness and to ensure that rebellion did not set a precedent that could shake the empire to its foundations, responses to resistance were often extreme. Once challenged, the empire and the settlers on the ground tended to respond with extreme cruelty, resorting repeatedly to exemplary, excessive, and corrupting wrathful violence."
  166. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, pp. 212–213.
  167. ^ H?ussler, Stucki & Veracini 2022, pp. 218–219.
  168. ^ Adhikari 2023, pp. 45–46.
  169. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, p. 7.
  170. ^ Kiernan et al. 2023, p. 8.
  171. ^ Ochab & Alton 2022, pp. 1–2.
  172. ^ a b Mulaj 2021, p. 2.
  173. ^ Mulaj 2021, p. 24.
  174. ^ Mulaj 2021, pp. 2, 16.
  175. ^ Anderson & Jessee 2020, p. 7.
  176. ^ Lindert et al. 2019, p. 2.
  177. ^ Lindert et al. 2017, p. 246.
  178. ^ Kugler 2016, pp. 119–120.
  179. ^ Moses 2023, p. 22.
  180. ^ Moses 2023, p. 23.
  181. ^ Barsalou & Baxter 2007.
  182. ^ Stone 2013, p. 151.

Bibliography

Books

Collections

Journals

Other sources

tvb什么意思 什么金属最硬 出尔反尔是什么意思 空调出风小没劲什么原因 为什么肚子会隐隐作痛
珊瑚色是什么颜色 胸椎退变是什么意思 拯救银河系什么意思 脚崴了吃什么药 618是什么节日
最近有什么新闻 牙酸是什么原因 火车票无座是什么意思 黑白相间的蛇是什么蛇 6月13是什么星座
甘油三酯查什么项目 补铁有什么作用和功效 莲子和什么搭配最好 无以回报是什么意思 月经不能吃什么东西
锦衣卫是干什么的gangsutong.com 验孕棒两条杠什么意思hcv9jop5ns1r.cn taco什么意思hcv8jop0ns3r.cn 阳性体征是什么意思hcv8jop0ns3r.cn 考上公务员意味着什么xinjiangjialails.com
什么是造影检查hcv8jop8ns0r.cn 迪奥是什么意思hcv8jop0ns3r.cn 老年人吃什么水果对身体好hcv8jop0ns7r.cn 膝盖里面痛什么原因引起的hcv9jop1ns6r.cn 大料是什么调料hcv8jop6ns7r.cn
低筋面粉是什么hcv8jop3ns7r.cn 非萎缩性胃窦炎是什么意思hcv8jop0ns7r.cn 小孩子眼睛眨得很频繁是什么原因fenrenren.com 尿道口为什么叫马眼hcv7jop9ns9r.cn 2月3号是什么星座hcv8jop6ns9r.cn
养尊处优什么意思hcv8jop4ns1r.cn 深井冰什么意思hcv9jop8ns1r.cn 心绞痛吃什么药hcv7jop6ns7r.cn 半什么半什么的成语hcv8jop2ns0r.cn bic是什么意思hcv9jop7ns2r.cn
百度