Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Genocide literature review
Consequences of genocide
Consequences of genocide
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Genocide literature review
I suppose that the field of criminology has neglected the study of genocide because, genocide is a political act reflecting the will of sovereignty (Adler, Mueller, Laufer, 2018). On another note genocide has been found to be political rather than criminally act; " Employed to enhance a country's solidarity and unification (Adler, Mueller, Laufer, 2018." Genocide is also a breach of international norms, is committed by the state, vastness of deception defies belief, and the problems of genocide admits to atrocity. Also it is important for the field to never come off to show are to come off that they are in any way studying anything to put their communities in any harms way. Genocide is not an exact study that the field of criminology need
Can genocide ever be stopped? For decades the UN (United Nations) has tried to abolish all kinds of genocide; unfortunately, we do not believe in equality as a species, and this perfect utopia seems impossible in our day and age. In 1994, during the genocide in Rwanda (one of the bloodiest genocides of all time) the United Nations tried to make a stand and stop this massacre once and for all. Grievously, the UN’s mission terminated due to the lack of resources; the UN military was forced to watch while the genocide continued(Document A). Genocide has been occurring for decades, anything from clans like the KKK to the extermination of Jews during WW2. Genocides happened to a multitude of minorities, ironically, no one has made a considerable stand to stop them. Generally speaking, the abolishing of genocide seems unattainable in our modern day due to 3 reasons: Lack of media attention, Human innate stubbornness, and abominable people.
While it is relatively easy to confuse the ideas of Aristotle, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and René Descartes, ancient philosophy, eighteenth century politics, and mathematics all appear to be considerably disconnected subjects. Associated with these divisions are three different opinions on a common subject matter: technology. It appears that Rousseau directly opposes technology, Aristotle’s opinion rests in the middle but also shares similarities with Rousseau, and Descartes favors technology. After reading Rousseau’s Discourse On the Origin of Inequality, Aristotle’s The Nicomachean Ethics and Descartes’s The Discourse on Method, one can draw these conclusions. When looking at Rousseau’s opinion on the natural man, it is clear he believes that all things manmade are disadvantageous; Aristotle’s view on friendship can be both supportive and antagonistic, while Descartes’s method for pursuing the truth points solely to a pro-technology point-of-view.
“The sweetly sickening odor of decomposing bodies hung over many parts of Rwanda in July 1994: . . . at Nyarubuye in eastern Rwanda, where the cadaver of a little girl, otherwise intact, had been flattened by passing vehicles to the thinness of cardboard in front of the church steps,” (Deforges 6). The normalcy of horrible images like this one had cast a depressing gloom over Rwanda during the genocide, a time when an extreme divide caused mass killings of Tutsi by the Hutu. Many tactics such as physical assault or hate propaganda are well known and often used during times of war. Sexual assault and rape, however, during times of war is an unspoken secret – it is well known that rape occurs within combat zones and occupied territories, but people tend to ignore, or even worse, not speak of the act. There have been recorded cases of rape and sexual assault in almost every war in human history. Genocidal rape was used as a gendered war tactic in the Rwandan genocide in order to accomplish the Hutu goal of elimination of the Tutsi people in whole, or part.
Former UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali once said, "We were not realizing that with just a machete, you can do a genocide." To be candid, nobody anticipated the Rwandan Genocide that occurred in 1994. The genocide in Rwanda was an infamous blood-red blur in modern history where almost a million innocent people were murdered in cold blood. Members of the Tutsi tribe were systematically hacked or beaten to death by members of the Interahamwe, a militia made up of Hutu tribe members. In just 100 days, from April 6, 1994 to mid-July, 20% of Rwanda's population was killed; about 10,000 people a day. Bodies literally were strewn over city streets. Genocide obviously violates almost all articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; however, the article I find most important is Article 3 - the right to life, liberty, and personal security. In just 100 days, one million people were denied the most basic privilege granted to every human – the right to live, simply because they were born to the wrong tribe.
Greenfield, Daniel M. "Crime of Complicity in Genocide: How the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and Yugoslavia Got It Wrong, and Why It Matters." The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 98.3 (2008): 921-24. HeinOnline. Web. 18 Apr. 2011.
The genocides of the 20th century which occurred in Rwanda and Germany had striking similarities, something that should have alerted the world to stop them. At the core of these two massacres, patterns existed that outlined how similar thinking and reasoning could lead to something as horrible as these two events. One can see how both groups used their command of knowledge as a way to control the people, how the rest of the world refused to step up to stop the killings, and how the people were thought of as less than humans to provide a just cause for such terrible acts.
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
After Elie Wiesel was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986, he gave an acceptance speech reflecting upon the true meaning of his novel and reflecting upon the crimes in our history. He revealed how “silence encourages the tormentor” while “indifference [is] the most insidious danger of all.” I find a lot of truth in these words and I agree with his assertion. Individuals tend to get overwhelmed by desperation, a sense of helplessness and fear in the face of acts, such as oppression and genocide. During these times, it is the responsibility of the world community to step in. This is proved to be true by the novel Night, the movie The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, and by the article called “A Secret Life.”
When the Belgian colonizers entered Rwanda in 1924, they created an ethnic classification between the Hutu and the Tutsi, two tribes who used to live together as one. After independence in 1962, there was a constant power struggle between the two tribes. Former Canadian Prime Minister, Jean-Pierre Chrétien described the situation as “tribalism without tribes.” (Destexhe, 1995) There were many signs leading towards genocide, yet the nations in power chose to ignore them. From April 6, 1994 until mid-July, a time spanning approximately of 100 days, 800,000 people were murdered when the Hutu attacked the Tutsi. No foreign aid came to the rescue until it was too late. Ten years after the genocide the United Nations was still involved in Rwanda, cleaning up the mess that was left behind because of man’s sinful nature. Could the Rwandan Genocide have been prevented, or is it simply a fact of life? Even though the international community is monitoring every country and race, such an event as the Rwandan Genocide could occur again because the European colonizers introduced ethnic classification where it did not exist and the nations in power chose to ignore the blatant signs of genocide.
Critical criminology, also known as radical criminology dates back to the concepts of Marxism. Despite the fact that Fredric Engels and Karl Marx were the founders of contemporary radical criminology, none of them gave explicit focus to crime. William Bonger (1876-1940), a Dutch criminologist was a more direct founder of this concept. It gained popularity during the early 1970s when it tried to explain the causes of contemporary social mayhem. He used economic explanations were used by critical criminology to analyze social behavior by arguing that social and economic inequalities were the main reason behind criminal behavior (Henry & Lainer, 1998). This view reduces the focus on individual criminals and elaborates that the existing crime is as a result of the capitalist system. Just like the conflict school of thought, it asserts that law is biased since it favors the ruling or the upper class and that the legal system that governs the state is meant to maintain the status quo of the ruling class. Critical criminologist are of the view that political, corporate and environmental crime are not only underreported but also inadequately punished by the existing criminal legal system.
When 1937 arrived, Japanese soldiers raided China’s capital of Nanking and began to mass murder citizens. A sole leader of the Japanese Imperial Army was non-existent. There were many of people in power such as generals who allowed these behaviors to occur. Baron Koki Hirota, Foreign minister at the time, proceeded to do nothing while being well aware of the Japanese’s persecution of the Chinese. These unsympathetic murders of those who were thought to be Chinese soldiers as well as woman, children and elderly. This massacre lasted between the 1937 and 1938. Within this time 300,000 Chinese citizens were viciously killed. This genocide is called Rape of Nanking because of raping the woman before killing them. Most likely this group was selected because the second world war happened in Asia. This was significant because a country was able to kill half the population of another. I believe the reason of this Genocide was for Japan to take advantage of China while expand Japan. Most likely the Japanese wished to exterminate China’s entire population.
The Law today is a summary of various principles from around the world from the past and the present. Early practises of law were the foundation of the law that we know and abide by today. These practises were referred to as the Classical school. Over time however, different criminologist have altered and greatly improved the early, incomplete ideas and made them more complete and practical to more modern times. This newer version is referred to as the Positivist school. This rapid change from the classical to the positivist perspective was due to the change and growth of civilization. Even though one perspective came from another, they are still different in many ways and it is evident when relating them to section 462.37, Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime, and section 810, Sureties to keep the Peace. The Classical School of criminology’s time of dominance was between 1700 and 1800. Its conception of deviance was that deviance was a violation of the social contract. Classical theorists believed that all individuals were rational actors and they were able to act upon their own free will. A person chose to commit crimes because of greed and because they were evil. The primary instrument that could be used in regards to the classical school to control crime was to create “criminal sanctions that instil fear of punishment in those contemplating criminal acts” (Gabor 154). Classical school theorists believed the best defence was a good offence and therefore they wanted to instil so much fear into people about what would happen to them if they were to commit a crime that even those who were only thinking of committing a crime were impacted greatly. The classical school individuals operated entirely on free will and it was their ...
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.
Criminology is a social science rather than a branch of law. Although there are several different theories surrounding criminology, they all share a common goal: the search for the causes of criminal behavior in the hopes that this information can be transformed into policies that will be effective in handling or even eliminating crime.
In contrast to crime science’s concentration on finding the right answers to cease crimes against humanity, criminology emphasizes on the significance of investigating both crimes and criminals independently. If criminology is perceived to interpret crimes, then, criminal science is designated to fix