Genocide: Raphael Lemkin

761 Words2 Pages

What conflicts count as genocide and which ones do not? Why? Genocide has been a long debated issue, with many people trying to come up with new ways of defining it, mainly to help them understand the sheer nature of horror behind these terrible crimes. The negative connotation associated this term has been notorious for its vast manipulation of people especially when trying to magnify a situation and therefore giving it the necessary amount of attention. This term has been in the forefront of many national and international stories, for many years. However, some genocides have been inclined to more publicity than others. Hence, this essay will be exploring the reasons behind this phenomenon, mainly the reasons behind the vast amounts of …show more content…

He was single handedly able to redefine the way we look at genocide. His definition would ultimately be used in many “famous” court cases namely NUERBURG, as well as being referenced in many books…etc. but to understand the usefulness of such word, we need to look back at Raphael Lemkins origins for this word. Lemkins definition steams from his initial ideas of criminalizing barbarity and Vandalism, which he established in 1933 during the Madrid conference. Lemkin strongly believed that ‘barbarity ’ which is the “acts of extermination directed against ethnic, religious and social collectives whatever the motive (political, religious, etc.” as well as ‘vandalism’ which is the “ Destruction of works of art and culture, being the expression of the particular genius of these collectives” served as the initial signs of genocide and thereby criminalizing them might eliminate/prevent it in the future. However, his proposal was rejected. In 1944 in Lemkins wildly referenced book he defined genocide as:
”Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition in turn may be made upon the oppressed population, which is allowed to remain or upon the territory alone, after removal of the population and the colonization of the area by the oppressor’s own

Open Document