What is genocide? According to what standards?
According to the resolution passed in the General Assembly, on December 1946, which declared genocide to be a crime under international law, a genocide consists of the "denial of the right of existence of entire human groups. As homicide it is the denial of the right to live of individual human being; such denial of the right of existence shocks the conscience of mankind, results in great losses to humaniry in the form of cultural and other contributions represented by these human groups, and is contrary to moral law and to the spirit and aims of the United Nations" (Resolution 96 I).
Then, on December 1948, the Convention on the Prevention and the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was adopted by the UN and it extended the above definition, defining, then, genocide as:
"(...) any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or relifious 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 condition of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;(d) Imposting measures intended to prevent births within the group;(e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
As seen, the term genocide is defined as any violent act with the intent of destroying a group, no matter for which purpose. Why then do nations and ethnic groups commit such actions? Do they believe they are superior to that race? Is it only for a nationalistic purpose? The sense that one's nationality is superior to another - hubris?
A genocide could occur any time, if you stop and think. The following is a picture of the known "Pyramid of Hate", which suggests that any "simple action and seemingly harmless statement can evolve into prejudice, discrimination and even systematic violence" (William, Tolley). This includes an industrial genocide (Holocaust) as well as one conducted by the usage of machetes (Cambodian Genocide).
Now the question that really matters... What will you do about this? Will you be a bystander or will you take action?
Before answering the question, a background knowledge would be appropriate. We, the 2015 Class, were discussing future genocides and some example of those. Some answers were among Iraq, the Korean Peninsula and mine: Palestine. I said Palestine, since this was a topic discussed in BRAMUN 2013 in the Security Council. Because Palestine is not today a formal state, if that takes place, I believe a genocide will occur, specially since the Palestinians would want their land back, including in the Gaza Strip. Settlers there, then woud eventually rebel and conduct a genocide, in my opinion; not trying to be pessimistic. However, not a single student viewed the world in an optimistic manner and said that there would no longer be any future genocides. Why is that? In my opinion, the world is in a period brought by technology and innovations, but these only spice the competition among nations and each sense of pride upon one's nationality. That is one of the biggest reasons, I believe, genocides will eventually occur; maybe not using machetes, but industrialy.
How will I prevent this? Is there a way of preventing it? Personally, not wanting to sound that pessimistic, the only way to stop a genocide involves the aid or help of P5 countries in the Security Council, since they are the countries that have the power and can "decide" if a resolution passes or not. With that in mind, nothing can be done, regarding a single individual, can it? A single individual will not drastically impact or help another nation or ethinic group, since we are talking about millions of citizens. I know this was not the answer you wanted, but I believe that that is the reality; theoretically I would love to help anyone and end with the world hunger, for instance; however is that viable? I do not think so.
Bystanding: "a person who is present at an event without participating in it" (dictionary.com)
Am I bystanding? I am bystanding, in a way; however there is not way to stop the genocide. I can raise awareness, but I will never end a genocide alone... What if I got on a plane now with other 25 people? Would I make a difference? Probably not, since the genocide will not be prevented. Maybe I will help creating a house, but not stop a genocide.
But I am supposed to just sit on my butt and not even help bring awareness... No!... People should bring awareness and try to incentivize their government to do something. Help will only be sent if someone takes the iniciative. Everything starts with one person and a first follower. Take a look at this inspirational video:
But I am supposed to just sit on my butt and not even help bring awareness... No!... People should bring awareness and try to incentivize their government to do something. Help will only be sent if someone takes the iniciative. Everything starts with one person and a first follower. Take a look at this inspirational video:
Here is an interesting site regarding the genocide's that are occuring around the world (many people are not aware of them, including me- I did not know of these occuring genocides):
Website link:
Youtube video:
Some final remarks. Is it that I cannot do anything to prevent the genocide simply due to the effect of globalization and a capitalist society? Why do some nations do not care at all if a million of Tutsi are killed? The United States and other European countries did not care at all, because it did not involve one's country and national identity. If the genocide involved the spreading of communist ideals, then the US would definetly try to prevent it, due to the Domino effect. Therefore, we can conclude that nations and societies are hubris and only care about the others it the issue involves them.
