The development of cultural genocide, and its definition, within international law can be seen from its origin, Raphael Lemkin, to the subsequent debate by the United Nations’ Ad Hoc Committee on Genocide, to its omission from the Genocide Convention, and now to its reintroduction in the international arena by Indigenous peoples’ mobilization. Furthermore, the various components in the United Nations’s Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (UNGC), specifically article 2, have many particulars that work against addressing ‘cultural’ genocide, which results in the inability to appropriately and legally acknowledge the brutalities inflicted upon groups, which do not fit in the restrictive category of ‘physical' genocide …show more content…
Although, one can argue that article 7 of the UNGC is somewhat enough, it still does not adequately delve into the nuances of genocide as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples does. Therein lies the downfall of the UNGC. The articles, allowing for freedom from cultural genocide, were eliminated from the UNGC due to the vested interests of the colonial powers who built their wealth upon the the exploitation of Indigenous people, through imposed cultural genocide. Indeed, claims of cultural genocide are often derided, and their indicators dismissed as benign effects of modernity and indigenous cultural diffusion. Therefore, in order to rectify the institutionalized euro-centric dispositions, there is a need to expand the meaning and connotations of genocide so as to include the aspect of ‘cultural’ genocide, which is arguably a good first step in addressing the atrocities committed against many groups, but particularly the Indigenous …show more content…
Moreover, he discussed not only “mass killing and the physical elimination of such groups but also what is often referred to as ‘cultural genocide’ or ‘ethnocide.’” So it is important to note that Lemkin did give priority to the protection of cultural or ‘national” groups. Thus, “‘physical’ genocide was not, for him, simply a matter of individual killings in the aggregate; rather, it referred to the manner in which the mass loss of life debilitates the continuation of a ‘group.’” However, the continued ambiguity of cultural genocide still does not address the past plight of many groups, namely the Indigenous people. Rather, it categorizes and draws “boundaries around these peoples in a manner that imposes Western understandings of group identity and group spaces” which again points to the fact that the UNCG has unwittingly become yet another eurocentric tool for reframing Indigenous lifeworlds, rather than a resource for Indigenous justice. But it is precisely on this basis of demarcating ‘groups’ that one can argue for the inclusion of cultural genocide. Cultural genocide is more accurate than ‘forcible assimilation’ when it comes to the experiences of Indigenous people, because “groups with clearly defined identities were targeted as groups, rather than
The physical and mental intent to destroy another being often unveils the darkest side of human nature. In the memoir, “An Ordinary Man: An Autobiography” dedicated to the Rwandan genocide, war hero Paul Rusesabagina states: “A sad truth of human nature is that it is hard to care for people when they are abstractions, hard to care when it is not you or somebody close to you. Unless the world community can stop finding ways to dither in the face of this monstrous threat to humanity those words never again will persist in being one of the most abused phrases in the English language and one of the greatest lies of our time.” The United Nations promised never again would they allow genocide to occur after the Second World War. Unfortunately, less
Genocide is a pressing issue with a multitude of questions and debates surrounding it. It is the opinion of many people that the United Nations should not get involved with or try to stop ongoing genocide because of costs or impositions on the rights of a country, but what about the rights of an individual? The UN should get involved in human rights crimes that may lead to genocide to prevent millions of deaths, save money on humanitarian aid and clean up, and fulfill their responsibilities to stop such crimes. It is preferable to stop genocide before it occurs through diplomacy, but if necessary, military force may be used as a last resort. Navi Pillay, Human Rights High Commissioner, stated, “Concerted efforts by the international community at critical moments in time could prevent the escalation of violence into genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or ethnic cleansing.”
The second pillar Genocide/Colonialism suggests indigenous peoples must always be disappearing to allow non-indigenous peoples rightful c...
First I will define the definition of terms used in this paper. When I use the word Aboriginal, I understand this as a label given from the colonizers/ Europeans to identify Indigenous peoples. Canadian legislation defines Indigenous peoples as Aboriginal, I understand this as indifferent from the dominant ideology, therefore, the colonizers named Indigenous peoples as Aboriginal. According to teachings I have been exposed to it’s a legal term and it’s associated with discrimination and oppression. However, audiences I have written for prefer the use of Aboriginal. More premise to this reference is Aboriginal, Indigenous, First Nations, Indian and Native are used interchangeable, but it should be noted these names do represent distinct differences. Furthermore, I will use Indigenous to represent an empowering way to reference a unique general culture in Canada. Under the title of Indigenous peoples in Canada, for me represents: First Nations people, Metis people and Inuit peoples. These are the two titles I will use when I reference Indigenous people from an empowering perspective and Aboriginal from a colonizer perspective.
Downey, Michael. “Canada’s ‘Genocide’: Thousands Taken from Their Homes Need Help.” Acting on Words: An Integrated Rhetoric, Research Guide, Reader, and Handbook. Ed. David Brundage, Michael Lahey. Toronto: Pearson Canada Inc., 2012. 445-448. Print.
As European domination began, the way in which the European’s chose to deal with the Aborigines was through the policy of segregation. This policy included the establishment of a reserve system. The government reserves were set up to take aboriginals out of their known habitat and culture, while in turn, encouraging them to adapt the European way of life. The Aboriginal Protection Act of 1909 established strict controls for aborigines living on the reserves . In exchange for food, shelter and a little education, aborigines were subjected to the discipline of police and reserve managers. They had to follow the rules of the reserve and tolerate searchers of their homes and themselves. Their children could be taken away at any time and ‘apprenticed” out as cheap labour for Europeans. “The old ways of the Aborigines were attacked by regimented efforts to make them European” . Their identities were threatened by giving them European names and clothes, and by removing them from their tra...
Both of these cases share similar characteristics, but because the genocides differed in motivations and certain key mechanisms, it can be concluded that each case holds its own uniqueness, therefore the differences outweigh the
Her book focuses on the myriads of issues and struggles that Indigenous men and women have faced and will continue to face because of colonialism. During her speech, Palmater addressed the grave effects of the cultural assimilation that permeated in Indigenous communities, particularly the Indian Residential School System and the Indian Act, which has been extensively discussed in both lectures and readings. Such policies were created by European settlers to institutionalize colonialism and maintain the social and cultural hierarchy that established Aboriginals as the inferior group. Palmater also discussed that according to news reports, an Aboriginal baby from Manitoba is taken away every single day by the government and is put in social care (CTVNews.ca Staff, 2015). This echoes Andrea Smith’s argument in “Heteropatriarchy and the Three Pillars of White Supremacy: Rethinking Women of Color Organizing” that colonialism continues to affect Aboriginals through genocide (2006, p. 68). Although such actions by the government are not physical acts of genocide, where 90% of Aboriginal population was annihilated, it is this modern day cultural assimilation that succeeded the Indigenous Residential School System and the Indian Act embodies colonialism and genocide (Larkin, November 4,
To start off with, what is genocide? Genocide is the killing of a massive number of people of in a group. Genocide has not only been practices in the present day, but it has been practiced for m...
"Eight Stages of Genocides." Genocides and Conflicts. William Mitchell College of Law, 2012. Web. 15 Apr. 2014. .
Paradigms of Genocide: The Holocaust, The Armenian genocide, and Contemporary Mass Destructions, 156-168. Sage Publications Inc., 1996. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1048550
SAINATI, TATIANA E. "Toward A Comparative Approach To The Crime Of Genocide." Duke Law Journal 62.1 (2012): 161-202. Academic Search Premier. Web. 25 Nov. 2013
Russel-Brown, Sherrie. “Rape as an Act of Genocide.” Berkeley Journal of International Law. 21:2 (2003): 350-374. Google Scholar. Web. 28 April 2014.
Scheffer, David J. "Responding To Genocide And Crimes Against Humanity." U.S. Department Of State Dispatch 9.4 (1998): 20. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 19 Dec. 2011. .
Print. The. Hymowitz, Sarah, and Amelia Parker. " Lessons - The Genocide Teaching Project - Center for Human Rights & Humanitarian Law." American University, Washington College of Law. American UniversityWashington College of Law Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, 2011.