Editing Harff Gurr 1988

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 2: Line 2:


'''Main argument:''' Comparative research on geno- and politicides is needed despite critics who see comparative research on genocides as a universalization of the Holocaust. Harff & Gurr (1988) argue that this kind of research can be beneficial in assessing the risk of future episodes of genocide and politicide, and a distinction between genocides and politicides is beneficial in this regard. By developing a typology that distinguishes between two types of genocide and four types of politicide, the authors identify forty-four episodes of geno- or politicides since World War II.   
'''Main argument:''' Comparative research on geno- and politicides is needed despite critics who see comparative research on genocides as a universalization of the Holocaust. Harff & Gurr (1988) argue that this kind of research can be beneficial in assessing the risk of future episodes of genocide and politicide, and a distinction between genocides and politicides is beneficial in this regard. By developing a typology that distinguishes between two types of genocide and four types of politicide, the authors identify forty-four episodes of geno- or politicides since World War II.   
'''Different Forms of Genocide and Politicide'''
*Comparative research is flawed because not all forms of systematized violence are comparable to the Holocaust
*The Holocaust does not exist as a monolith for other cases of mass violence, and attempting to create a 1 to 1 ratio in this way obscures the nuances of other instances of mass violence
“The totality of the nazi effort to destroy Jews probably has no direct analogy in modern times. But if the ‘uniqueness' argument is accepted, one is led to the dangerous conclusion that only a Western civilization armed with a Nazi-type ideology is capable of technically perfected forms of mass destruction.” (p.361)
*This ostracizes and further mystifies other countries from Western nations, and makes it harder to look for accountability
*Western countries also should not be a metric that is applicable for the rest of the world, this ignores cultural nuances that would provide context to instances of mass violence




Please note that all contributions to Projecting Power may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Projecting Power:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)