Related Links:

Modern Genocide Is Different than Ancient Mass Murder

International Action May Limit Genocide but Is Unlikely to Bring Lasting Peace

Overview: Approaches to Studying Genocide

Why Rape Was a Key Part of Genocide in Rwanda

Voices from Rwanda: Rape by Militia

Genocide doesn't just happen. It occurs only under certain conditions and even then, not always.

Historian Mark Levene argues that what we currently think of as genocide has its foundations in the very processes that have created our entire, global, political-economic system. That is, the processes that created the modern world also provided the soil out of which genocides can spring.

These processes and conditions are not, in an of themselves, inherently evil. The rise of the West, modernity and the nation state are the key fundamentals upon which our world's peace, security and well-being rest. However, these processes that largely define for us “how the world works” have a dark side.

The Rise of the West

There is no part of the world that has not been touched by the rise of the West. The colonial era saw the beginning of this in the massive expansion of European countries around the globe through colonization, settlement and trade. And this was only the beginning. The globalization of trade and finance (and all the technological and political developments which make this globalization possible) have only kicked this expansion into hyperdrive.

But what has this to do with genocide?

In some cases, the relationship between the rise of the West and genocide is direct and obvious—as with the destruction or supplanting of indigenous peoples. In other cases, the relationship is not quite so direct. In cases where Western countries did not disrupt or destroy indigenous societies through direct violence, the imposition of Western economic, political and social relationships in far-flung places caused serious social and economic disruptions. Old, traditional ways of doing things were challenged, upset and obstructed.

With the rise of the West, the world became more connected. This simple connectedness brought with it processes, relationships and ideas that ruptured (directly or indirectly) the traditional fabric of non-Western societies.

From Difference to Obsolescence

This world-wide expansion of Western social, economic and political relations carried with it deeper assumptions and ways of seeing the world. From the perspective of the European centers, the changes spreading across the globe looked, for all the world, like progress. Changes were not just changes. They were changes in a linear progression toward a better, more secure, more civilized world—at least according to those in power in the centers of Western civilization.

Looked at from a perspective of linear progress, peoples or societies that resisted Western institutions, relations and ideas were not merely resisting, they were standing in the way of history and civilization. They were backward, primitive or “savage.” The rise of the West gave a new spin to difference. Non-western societies and peoples were not merely different, nor were they merely worse, they were obsolete in the larger scheme of history.

The rise of the West was not accompanied by an over-arching scheme to annihilate foreign peoples, but it was accompanied by a mind set that allowed this annihilation to be perfectly conceivable.

Modernity

Modernity is a mindset, a way of understanding the world. This peculiar mindset is behind what we know as modernization—the processes and outcomes of state efforts to engineer economic, social and political change.

What are the characteristics of modernity and what do these have to do with genocide?

Classification and Control

Modernity is obsessed with classification. Think of the Linnaean taxonomy of life into Kingdom, Phylum, Class etc. The idea is that organizing and controlling the world depends on understanding the world. Understanding the world depends on classifying elements in the world (whether animals, chemicals, types of societies or humans).

And this is the key. The push to categorize, classify and systematize grows out of a desire for control. The modern mindset understands that history and society need human direction if it is to improve.

But, how are humans, who have multiple and complex layers of identities and loyalties, to be classified? In the nineteenth century, “race” became the master concept by which to categorize, measure and ultimately manage humans. The distinct aspects of non-European societies—to say nothing of personal idiosyncrasies—were papered over under the larger heading of the supposedly primordial and scientifically relevant category of race.

This mindset radically depersonalized history. A particular interaction between people (usually men) from a European country and the people of an African village was now contact (conflict) between civilization and primitive societies. Entire populations were now thinkable in terms of grand categories—supposedly biologically identifiable categories. History was the process of the triumph of civilized races over backward races.

Instead of individuals resisting European encroachment, resistance was recast in terms of backward races that impeded social progress and civilization. Here the notion of genocide came into its own. Social progress might require more than simply removing this or that individual. It may require that entire races be changed or even annihilated.

The Nation-State

We normally think about the political organization of the world in terms of the relations between nation-states. The nation-state tells us who we are and provides us with a promise that our daily lives can be lived without serious threat to our persons. Because the state holds a monopoly on the legitimate use of violent force, it provides the benefit of reigning in human propensities for aggression. Most people can now can expect to get through a normal day without a violent confrontation with another person, family, clan or tribe. Justice comes from universally recognized authorities and not from revenge and vigilante action.

The idea of the "nation" becomes the individual's primary identity point of reference.

Subordinate All Other Groups

In order for the nation-state to exercise it's legitimate monopoly over violent force, it must subject all other groups within the state to itself. Whatever other identity a person might have, whatever other religious or ethnic group he or she belongs to, the person is first and foremost a citizen of the state.

Time was when a religious community could claim that a political leader had no jurisdiction over certain persons or crimes. Individuals would relate to states through the mediation of a religious organization. But no more. In the modern nation-state, each individual is a subject of the state and the state is under no obligation to recognize an individual's membership in any other group when it comes to that individual's rights and obligations to the state.

States can, of course, enter into explicit compacts to allow specific bodies “group rights.” But this departs from the standard way that states relate to individuals living within their geographical boundaries. In the political realm, the state's primacy is absolute. Any individual or group that would challenge this absolute authority exposes itself to the state's monopoly of violent force.

Drive for Development and Totalizing

The modern state is based on the assumption of an ever upward trajectory. The state will not merely provide a secure basis for living, it will constantly seek to improve health and productivity of society.

In order to accomplish this, the modern state organizes its fiscal, human, technological and extractive resources toward it's mandate to improve society. Because of the state's absolute authority, it can seek to mobilize all aspects of life toward these ends. The state's push toward progress can become totalizing in the sense that all aspects of life can be organized and directed toward this goal.

Groups or individuals that dissent or resist the state's goals and efforts must reckon with the state's monopoly of violent force.

Premium on Social Coherence

In their upward trajectory, states are in competition—economically and politically—with other states. This puts a premium on social coherence within the state. Just as assembly lines work better when parts are standardized, managing social engineering projects is easier when citizens and subjects share social, economic, cultural and linguistic norms. So states push subjects to assimilate to ideals of a nation—the notion of a collective and unified community. The idea of the nation "standardizes" individuals.

Individuals and groups that do not voluntarily assimilate may be branded “outsiders,” “trouble makers,” or, if they are individuals, declared insane. Groups that refuse to assimilate to national values may be encapsulated or, if this is not possible, they may be targeted for persecution. Again, the specter that looms over any effort to resist nationalizing efforts is the state's monopoly of force.

Genocide and the Modern Age

The modern era has witnessed the expansion of Western power into all corners of the globe. This has not only connected the globe in a way that was not possible before, but disrupted (sometimes violently) ways of life alien to European social, cultural, political and economic factors.

But it isn't the mere contact with different modes of life that sets the stage for genocide. The heart of modernity itself sets the stage for mass exterminations. Because modernity combines an assumption of progress with a fetish for categorizing the world as a way of controlling the world, peoples, societies and races that are different from the modern “civilized” ideal can be classified as barriers to progress.

Add to this the third major feature of the modern age: the nation-state. The nation-state is the political and organizational unit responsible for pushing for progress. Because states are in competition with each other, they seeks to mobilize their entire populace toward progress. This is most easily done when subjects and citizens conform to relatively narrow social and cultural ideals. So, there is a press for subjects to identify with a homogeneous national identity rather than distinct and idiosyncratic group identities. Groups that will not assimilate hamper the efficiency of the state. Because the hallmark of the nation-state is its legitimate monopoly over violent force, groups that threaten progress expose themselves to the full force of the state's power.

Bottom Line

Genocide is not some aberration external to the modern age of nation-states. Quite the contrary, the very processes that have created the conditions for the modern nation-state also created the conditions of genocide.

Full Text Availability:

Full text available for purchase at