Genocide: Demons from the Past
As the world saw Hitler’s escapades revealed, it was vowed that such atrocities would never take place again. Following Raphael Lemkin’s coining of the term “genocide,” the United Nations formed a preventive genocide convention in 1948 and swore to keep the world free from genocide’s evil grasp.
The reality is that the Holocaust is still alive. Genocide is still happening.
And now the people of the world are asking, “Why?”
To begin to understand why, it is important to understand who is responsible. But is blaming someone for the world’s genocide as easy as pointing a single finger?
“It’s all fine and good to say that Nazi Germany started all of that — it makes it so easy,” said Irene Guenther, published author and professor in the history department. “We figure, ‘Oh Nazis, they’re like green people with horns on their heads.’ But in fact, that whole notion of making a better, fitter race — that’s a pretty old one.”
History of Eugenics
So old and familiar in fact, that most people would be surprised to learn it has roots in the United States during the Eugenics movement. These roots, however, are hardly touched on in history classes. “I have never had a history course, nor have I ever used a textbook in all the years that I’ve taught, where eugenics is included,” Guenther said.
So what is eugenics?
According to a compiled document Guenther provided which cited Edwin Black’s, “War Against the Weak,” and Phyliss Goldstein and Alan Stoskopf’s, “Race and Membership in American History,” eugenics has a lengthy past. The term itself is Greek for “good in birth,” and was coined by English mathematician Francis Galton in 1883. Galton’s ideas preached the possibility of obtaining a perfect and “fitter” race. In a sense, eugenics was a human breeding program, aiming to breed the best with the best in order to create the most advanced form of human possible. Surprisingly, most of the world went along with it, particularly in the United States, Europe and parts of Asia.
The reason for this acceptance was partially because of authors like David Jordan. In his book, “Blood of a Nation,” Jordan spouted his beliefs that characteristics such as poverty, prostitution or criminal behavior could be passed down through the blood.
The Carnegie Institute started funding scientific expeditions for more research. By 1911, scientists proposed a solution which listed the “best practical means” for ridding the human population of defective traits. Among the top ideas suggested was the use of euthanasia.
What did this mean for society? Essentially, those who were deemed unfit — prostitutes, the mentally ill and the disabled — were either thrown into institutions or were sterilized to prohibit them from reproducing. Some institutions fed their mentally ill patients milk from diseased cows, believing that if they were worthy additions to the human race, they would survive.
What is perhaps most shocking about this era is that the Eugenics movement gained governmental support with the case Buck v. Bell. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes summed up the court’s majority opinion stating, “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.”
Equally shocking is the Court did not reverse its decision until 1972 after approximately 100,000 people had been sterilized. As Guenther puts it, “Eugenics became this wide category that you could throw into anything you didn’t like or that scared you.”
Genocide Prevention
While it is safe to suggest that the practices during the Eugenics movement were frightening, Guenther notes that it shouldn’t be marked as the beginning of genocide. “I think there’s been slaughtering going on since human beings have been around.”
For instance, even before the principle of eugenics, one doesn’t need to look far in American history before finding questionable acts. Take, for example, Christopher Columbus.
“Not that many people know that Columbus was a genocidal murderer,” said Austin Reece, a philosophy professor at Bryant & Stratton College in Milwaukee, referring to Columbus’ treatment of the Native Americans upon his voyages to the New World.
Historical scholar, Howard Zinn, author of “A People’s History of the United States” says that most, if not all, American history text books attempt to paint Columbus in a flattering light rather than exposing the darker elements of his character.
Is it really easier to reconstruct history rather than face it?
While scholars debate about Columbus and his portrayal, Reece notes that it does bring up important questions: “What does that mean that we celebrate Columbus Day? What does that mean about us as a country?”
It is difficult to say, but it makes one wonder, How does America really view genocide and does it try to prevent it?
The start of genocide prevention, as Guenther explained, began after the formation of the Genocide Convention in 1948.
Although the United States eventually ratified the convention in the late 1980s, some believe that the country has done little in actively preventing genocide since the ratification.
Guenther is inclined to think that the U.S. could be doing more. “We have made ourselves into this role as a moral conscience or yardstick. … It is important to follow through.” She said that what the United States often does is either ignore witness accounts of genocide or “dance around the word ‘genocide’ ” because the use of that word implies action, which can be politically risky.
Samantha Power, author of “A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide,” takes a similar stance. In her book, she challenges the United States in particular to be more proactive, using 20th century genocide episodes—such as Rwanda and Cambodia—and outlines how the United States reacted to each. Power argues that politicians only become involved in matters of genocide after the public demands action.
Reece agrees with Power, but admits that he finds optimism within the American government. “I’m hopeful … some individual politicians take a stand and act diligently and compassionately,” he said. “Great policy change comes only after a few things have happened: moral outrage, a collective consciousness and collective effort.”
In order to reach this collective effort, Guenther said that we must overcome stereotypes within America’s culture. “Let me tell you a story about being in a doctor’s office,” she said, while leaning forward in her chair. “They had the radio going, and they’re reporting on the Sudan, and the nurse says to me, ‘Oh, those Africans, they just always kill themselves.’ ”
It is stereotypes like this, Guenther explained, that prevent people from taking action, since it causes them to feel disconnected from those who are suffering.
Taking action
Emily Lonergan, a former student of Guenther’s, said she feels that part of overcoming stereotypes begins with education as well as self-reflection. “Maybe that’s where it starts, with our involvement and taking a hard look at ourselves and saying, ‘What have we done? What haven’t we done? And how do we change that for the future?’ ”
Marquette seems to take this notion to heart, evidenced by its passionate students and their dedication to genocide prevention.
Kerstin Klein, a senior in the College of Communication, started the Marquette chapter of Invisible Children in 2007 and currently serves as its president. Invisible Children is a global organization that fights the use of children solidiers in the African country of Uganda. Thanks to the organization, Marquette students can get involved and raise money and awareness in a variety of ways. At the end of the year, all proceeds help to restore a country where citizen abductions and civil war are the norm.
Klein said that because of the intensity of the cause, people can be scared away, but she is determined to bring awareness to Uganda’s children soldiers. “We’re trying to bring excitement to the cause and get people to do something about it,” she said.
However, the issue of disconnect proves to be a problem. There are people who still don’t know what a child soldier is. What is it like to be one? What does it mean?
Matthias Seisay, a counselor/recruiter with the Educational Opportunity Program and a refugee from Sierra Leone, has seen children soldiers and dealt with the aftermath, firsthand. He admits that while some people are remarkably informed on specific issues in Africa, there are many who believe Africans “live in trees.”
In regards to describing what effects war has on children soldiers, Seisay had a difficult time putting it into words.
“It is not a Hollywood movie,” he said. “These are people who are paying for a war that is designed and implemented by adults … and kids are paying the price with their blood, sweat and tears.”
He remembers seeing children with weapons so large, they could barely hold them.
According to Seisay, they had to lay down or kneel before they could actually operate those guns. It was a really sad situation, he said, and most of these children were as young as 5 years old. They were stolen from their homes and beaten and brainwashed into submission, forced to fight in a war that lasted over 11 years in Sierra Leone.
To make the situation resonate more with students, Klein tells them to “imagine someone kidnapping your 4-year-old brother, giving him an AK-47 and commanding him to kill.”
Klein explained that a similar war situation is happening in Uganda.
“For the past 23 years, a rebel army led by Joseph Kony has been trying to overthrow the Ugandan government, and they have resorted to abducting children (to build an army),” Klein said.
Currently, the war is filtering into other parts of Africa, including the Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
How can we help?
While it seems like a tall order, Seisay said that every little bit of giving helps.
“It can be anything. It can range from book drives at the end of semesters to school supplies of any nature,” Seisay said.
There are also larger ways to get involved, including Lobby Days, which takes passionate students all the way to Washington, D.C. The recent agenda, Klein said, is to get the LRA Disbarment and Ugandan Recovery Act to move forward in the Senate. This bill would require the United States to provide further assistance to the Ugandan government, which has explicitly requested U.S. support.
Elizabeth Lajeunesse, a sophomore in the College of Education and president of Marquette’s Darfur Action Coalition, said the expelled Sudanese refugees in the Congo also need attention, and she hopes to use DAC’s efforts to send some relief. While planning is still in progress, she said the group has great things in store for this year, but it wasn’t always easy.
Alexandrea Newell, a junior in the College of Arts & Sciences and vice president of DAC, said that initially, she felt intimidated trying to take on genocide. “We’re all just college students stepping into these huge calls,” she said.
But she still recognized the power of an individual. “This is our world, and we can really move the world. It’s a ripple effect,” she said.
This ripple effect is why it’s important to be conscious of our actions, Reece said. “I think that’s at the heart of ethics, taking the time to understand all the consequences that flow from our actions. Did it harm? Did it help?”
Or as Abraham Lincoln put it just before signing the Emancipation Proclamation, “We cannot escape history. We (…) will be remembered in spite of ourselves. The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation.”
Although it’s been 147 years since Lincoln spoke those words to Congress, they still hold significance today, especially when applied to the topic of genocide.
As history repeats itself and blood is continually spilled, the question remains: “What will you do?” The choice is yours.
Loading ...