We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2014
I begin this study with the political, cultural and legal contexts of genocide research, rather than directly with issues arising from the understanding of genocide. This might seem a surprising choice, but it reflects my belief that the academic field has been imbued with similar assumptions to those which have shaped popular consciousness of genocide. Scholars in this field have strong moral and political commitments, and these inevitably affect their research activities. Since genocide is always a matter of great political, cultural and legal import, dialogue between academic research and wider debates is necessary and often fruitful. However we need to be critically aware of these contexts and how they affect scholarship. The argument of this chapter is that genocide research has been heavily skewed, and even distorted, by issues arising from its origins in mid-twentieth-century Europe and how these continue to ramify in twenty-first-century world politics. This skewing is a matter not just of scholars' personal outlooks but of how powerful political, cultural and legal paradigms have affected the conceptual, methodological and theoretical frameworks within which academic research has developed.
Political and legal origins of ‘genocide’
The idea of ‘genocide’, first proposed in Lemkin's (1944) study of Nazi rule, was from the start both a sociological concept, used for analysing historical developments, and a political-legal one, designed to show how genocide might be outlawed and its perpetrators punished. It came to prominence at the end of the Second World War as the victor states and their new United Nations Organization sought ways of, on the one hand, stigmatizing Nazism's policies towards civilians, and, on the other, criminalizing similar policies by others in the future. The UN adopted, in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), a relatively broad definition of genocide – not limited to mass killing like some later definitions – influenced by the approach of Lemkin who lobbied for it.
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.
