As promised, here goes with a blog
about why people participate in genocide. To begin with it is worth mentioning
that I am not coming here with a blank slate – I am coming here having
developed a theoretical model of why people participate which I want to test
and see if it holds true in Cambodia. Almost all research so far on the
participation in genocide has concentrated on the Holocaust and the Rwandan
genocide, so it is quite exciting to see whether it applies also to another, very different genocide.
Hopefully, my model will be
published at some point (at the latest as part of my thesis), but if you are
interested, there is a slightly earlier version already out there in the academia-sphere. Basically what I try to show is
that there is no one reason why people participate but many different pathways –
in all I identify eleven such pathways, each with different variations and
manifestations and also a whole host of, what I call, facilitative factors,
that is factors which don’t actually motivate people to participate, but do
make it a whole lot easier. But here is the bigger picture: there are really
only three broad types of motivations for people to participate in genocide.
First, it is because of their social
group, what social psychologists call their ‘ingroup’. In the case of genocide
that is the group of perpetrators. For instance, people may want to be obedient
to an authority who they think is legitimate in giving them orders. Or they may
not want to fall out of line in a group of friends and try to act in conformity
to what they think is expected of them. Alternatively, the group can actually exert
pressure on an individual to participate or even issue outright threats. In the
most extreme version, this can result in the group threatening to kill someone
if they don’t participate, or even actually doing it.
The second batch of motivations
revolve around the so-called ‘outgroup’, here these are the victims, the people
to be killed. For example, participants in the genocide can actually genuinely
believe that it is the right thing to do, that the victim group must be
annihilated and that they should be lauded for their actions. These ideological
killers are pretty much what a lot of films or books paint perpetrators to be,
but they really are only one of several types. Another motivation can stem from
emotions which the perpetrator experiences towards the victims, notably anger,
fear, resentment, and several more.
The last types of perpetrator
motivations are an eclectic mix of ‘intrinsic’ motivations. These motivations have
nothing to do with the victims or the other perpetrators but are really
focussed pretty much on the perpetrator him or herself. Being a sadist, seizing
a grotesque opportunity to profit economically or in their career, taking on a role
and acting it out to its fullest, enjoying the thrill and excitement of doing
something wrong or wanting to attain additional status or an ego-boost.
Of course, each of these merit a lot
more differentiation and I could elaborate on each a lot more, but I think you
get the gist – the current chapter version is 81 pages, but I’ll spare you
that! All of these have been well-documented for the Holocaust and Rwanda,
although obviously not all equally frequent, and it is my mission here in
Cambodia to try and find out whether it is the same motivations underlying the
violent dynamics of the 1970s here, too, or if there are different reasons.
Next blog, I’ll let you in on a couple of first insights.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen