Genocide is
as much a product of culture as it is responsible for cultural change and development. Such
violence may be "supported" by ideology but based in other cultural conflicts, like
resource competition. Genocide may also be associated with forms of violence which serve to not
only eradicate an extant group of people but also their history. For example, the Islamic
extremist group ISIS (also called "ISIL" or "Daesh") has been responsible
for the killing and displacement of millions of Syrian people since 2011. The systematic
violence ISIS employs is not limited to taking lives-- they have destroyed many historical sites
in order to erase the cultural heritage of the nation of Syria. The destruction of sites like
Palmyra disrupts historical and cultural continuity between the people and the land, making it
that much more difficult for them to retain or re-establish Syrian identity.
Throughout history as well as today, genocide has the goal of eradicating a particular
group of people. One of the unintended consequences of this conflict-- which in no way excuses
it-- is cultural change and development resulting from displacement. Consider the long-term
effects of the Jewish diaspora in response to European Antisemitism in the early 20th century.
Many Jewish people fled from the violence of the Holocaust and established new communities with
new, blended identities around the world. More than anything, cultural change in response to
genocide proves that identity is both persistent and adaptable. Cultural or national identity
may be based on the survival of that which a group in power sought to kill.
When we talk about genocide, it is important not to fool ourselves into thinking that
the systematic killing of a people is something that has only occurred in the past. We may study
past examples of conflict to identify patterns of violence, but it is important to bear in mind
that culture is ever-changing, and so are the causes and effects of
genocide.
No comments:
Post a Comment