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