Revision as of 10:39, 7 December 2021 editDavide King (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users105,217 edits Undid revision 1059086690 by Davide King (talk)Tag: Undo← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:33, 27 December 2021 edit undoDavide King (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users105,217 edits testTag: RevertedNext edit → | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{|class="wikitable" | |||
== MkUCR (AfD nomination) — c. 4,000 words (''full'') == | |||
|+ Sources | |||
{{main|Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mass killings under communist regimes (4th nomination)}} | |||
|- | |||
!Source !! Synopsis !! Topic | |||
|- | |||
|Courtois 1999 | |||
|"Already famous throughout Europe, this international bestseller plumbs recently opened archives in the former Soviet bloc to reveal the actual, practical accomplishments of Communism around the world: terror, torture, famine, mass deportations, and massacres. Astonishing in the sheer detail it amasses, the book is the first comprehensive attempt to catalogue and analyze the crimes of Communism over seventy years. | |||
'Revolutions, like trees, must be judged by their fruit,' Ignazio Silone wrote, and this is the standard the authors apply to the Communist experience—in the China of 'the Great Helmsman,' Kim Il Sung's Korea, Vietnam under 'Uncle Ho' and Cuba under Castro, Ethiopia under Mengistu, Angola under Neto, and Afghanistan under Najibullah. The authors, all distinguished scholars based in Europe, document Communist crimes against humanity, but also crimes against national and universal culture, from Stalin's destruction of hundreds of churches in Moscow to Ceausescu's leveling of the historic heart of Bucharest to the widescale devastation visited on Chinese culture by Mao's Red Guards. | |||
=== Must read (c. 1,000 words) === | |||
==== Comment (must read — short two paragraphs) ==== | |||
:''From . was the version'''1''' when the article was nominated for AfD. For a summary of both side's argument, is a good one.'' | |||
:''Included are many links to comments from the discussion, among others, which may be helpful for the closure when they are reviwing it.'' | |||
'''Delete''' per ] as ], as ],'''8''' , is possible to solve the ], ]/], ], and even ] issues (e.g. contradiction with and all individual events that are not described as ''mass killings'' by majority† sources, excess mortality and mass death events conflated as mass killings, etc.), since the 'Keep' side has refused attempts at rewrite, , and some even refusing to acknowledge any issue despite recognition from the moderator at ]. I have no prejudice in a full/future '''rewrite''' that is NPOV, in full respect of our policies and guidelines (NPOV is not negotiable), and a clearly agreed and defined topic, such as one. Merely stating "]" does not mean anything, especially if you do not address our legitimate concerns and disagree about the topic's scope and structure, as can be seen in my in-depth analysis of so far cited sources below. | |||
As the death toll mounts—as many as 25 million in the former Soviet Union, 65 million in China, 1.7 million in Cambodia, and on and on—the authors systematically show how and why, wherever the millenarian ideology of Communism was established, it quickly led to crime, terror, and repression. An extraordinary accounting, this book amply documents the unparalleled position and significance of Communism in the hierarchy of violence that is the history of the twentieth century."<ref>{{cite book|last=Courtois|first=Stéphane|author-link=Stéphane Courtois|year=1999|orig-year=1997|url=https://www.google.it/books/edition/The_Black_Book_of_Communism/H1jsgYCoRioC|title=The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression|publisher=Harvard University Press}}</ref> | |||
Just saying that there are no issues, or if they are, they can be easily fixed, without proposing any solution, ignoring that we have already discussed at length, and even had a DRN discussion about it — it does not help us. ] (]) 00:19, 23 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
|{{cite book|last=Courtois|first=Stéphane|author-link=Stéphane Courtois|year=1999|orig-year=1997|url=https://www.google.it/books/edition/The_Black_Book_of_Communism/H1jsgYCoRioC|title=The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression|publisher=Harvard University Press}} | |||
|- | |||
|Valentino 2004 | |||
|"Benjamin A. Valentino finds that ethnic hatreds or discrimination, undemocratic systems of government, and dysfunctions in society play a much smaller role in mass killing and genocide than is commonly assumed. He shows that the impetus for mass killing usually originates from a relatively small group of powerful leaders and is often carried out without the active support of broader society. Mass killing, in his view, is a brutal political or military strategy designed to accomplish leaders' most important objectives, counter threats to their power, and solve their most difficult problems. | |||
In order to capture the full scope of mass killing during the twentieth century, Valentino does not limit his analysis to violence directed against ethnic groups, or to the attempt to destroy victim groups as such, as do most previous studies of genocide. Rather, he defines mass killing broadly as the intentional killing of a massive number of noncombatants, using the criteria of 50,000 or more deaths within five years as a quantitative standard. | |||
; Examples of replicated content (deletion will not result in removal of any significant information from Misplaced Pages) | |||
* ], ], ], ], ], ], ], , . See . | |||
''Final Solutions'' focuses on three types of mass killing: communist mass killings like the ones carried out in the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia; ethnic genocides as in Armenia, Nazi Germany, and Rwanda; and 'counter-guerrilla' campaigns including the brutal civil war in Guatemala and the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Valentino closes the book by arguing that attempts to prevent mass killing should focus on disarming and removing from power the leaders and small groups responsible for instigating and organizing the killing."<ref>{{cite book|last=Valentino|first=Benjamin|author-link=Benjamin Valentino|year=2013|orig-year=2004|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Final_Solutions/qqedDgAAQBAJ|title=Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the 20th Century|publisher=Cornell University Press}}</ref> | |||
† ''Majority'' sources are country experts and specialists, ] (core source of MKuCR) are ''minority'' sources — is the ; see () how any ''academic'' criticism and mention of mainstream scholars who do not support a global Communist death toll. See also . | |||
|{{cite book|last=Valentino|first=Benjamin|author-link=Benjamin Valentino|year=2013|orig-year=2004|chapter-url=https://muse.jhu.edu/chapter/2239458|chapter=Communist Mass Killings: The Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia|title=Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the 20th Century|publisher=Cornell University Press|pages=91–151}} | |||
|- | |||
|Mann 2005 | |||
|"This comprehensive study of international ethnic cleansing provides in-depth coverage of its occurrences in Armenia, Nazi Germany, Cambodia, Yugoslavia, and Rwanda, as well as cases of lesser violence in early modern Europe and in contemporary India and Indonesia. After presenting a general theory of why serious conflict emerges and how it escalates into mass murder, Michael Mann offers suggestions on how to avoid such escalation in the future. Michael Mann is the author of ''Fascists'' (Cambridge, 2004) and ''The Sources of Social Power'' (Cambridge 1986)."<ref>{{cite book|last=Mann|first=Michael|authorlink=Michael Mann|year=2005|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Dark_Side_of_Democracy/cGHGPgj1_tIC|title=The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing|publisher=Cambridge University Press}}</ref> | |||
|{{cite book|last=Mann|first=Michael|authorlink=Michael Mann|year=2005|chapter-url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/dark-side-of-democracy/communist-cleansing-stalin-mao-pol-pot/5BC0D5F39EF9C5A1F6BA171572F419E9|chapter=Communist Cleansing: Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot|title=The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing|publisher=Cambridge University Press|pages=318–352}} | |||
|- | |||
|Chirot & McCauley 2006 | |||
|"Genocide, mass murder, massacres. The words themselves are chilling, evoking images of the slaughter of countless innocents. What dark impulses lurk in our minds that even today can justify the eradication of thousands and even millions of unarmed human beings caught in the crossfire of political, cultural, or ethnic hostilities? This question lies at the heart of ''Why Not Kill Them All''? Cowritten by historical sociologist Daniel Chirot and psychologist Clark McCauley, the book goes beyond exploring the motives that have provided the psychological underpinnings for genocidal killings. It offers a historical and comparative context that adds up to a causal taxonomy of genocidal events. | |||
Rather than suggesting that such horrors are the product of abnormal or criminal minds, the authors emphasize the normality of these horrors: killing by category has occurred on every continent and in every century. But genocide is much less common than the imbalance of power that makes it possible. Throughout history human societies have developed techniques aimed at limiting intergroup violence. Incorporating ethnographic, historical, and current political evidence, this book examines the mechanisms of constraint that human societies have employed to temper partisan passions and reduce carnage. | |||
==== Rationale (must read — short four paragraphs) ==== | |||
:''See also and , and Paul Siebert's comments in general (they are better than I could), as best rationale in favour of deletion and rebuttal of 'Keep' arguments.'' | |||
] ({{tq|If an article on a notable topic severely fails the verifiability or neutral point of view policies, it may be reduced to a stub, or completely deleted}}) and ] ({{tq|deliberately created to avoid a neutral point of view (including undue weight), often to avoid or highlight negative or positive viewpoints or facts}}). The article is a content POV fork and coat, as acknowledged and recognized by DRN moderator (though they did not weight in on whether to 'Keep' or 'Delete'), which fails NPOV/WEIGHT and VERIFY, and is OR/SYNTH per , including rebuttals , , and , and because: | |||
* "Generic Communist" grouping, as is applied in the article, is controversial (it was one of the much scholarly criticism of '']'', see , , and ).'''2''' | |||
* themselves do not find regime type to be significant in explaining mass killings, there are disagreement and a lack of consensus among genocide scholars, and all three approaches are flawed in terms of their predictive power and falsifiability (). See also concise summary. | |||
Might an understanding of these mechanisms lead the world of the twenty-first century away from mass murder? ''Why Not Kill Them All?'' makes clear that there are no simple solutions, but that progress is most likely to be made through a combination of international pressures, new institutions and laws, and education. If genocide is to become a grisly relic of the past, we must fully comprehend the complex history of violent conflict and the struggle between hatred and tolerance that is waged in the human heart."<ref>{{cite book|last1=Chirot|first1=Daniel|last2=McCauley|first2=Clark|author-link1=Daniel Chirot|author-link2=Clark McCauley|year=2006|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Why_Not_Kill_Them_All/sUgxEAAAQBAJ|title=Why Not Kill Them All? The Logic and Prevention of Mass Political Murder|publisher=Princeton University Press}}</ref> | |||
and , C.J. Griffin and Paul Siebert () gave an accurate and valid summary of issues. ] does not apply, since it has been over a decade that we have discussed this and tried to find a solution, or even a compromise, among us. Keeping it as it is, it is not only unhelpful but even actively harmful and a form of ] (); ], ], and ] are the only encyclopedias having such an article. 'Keep' voters have relied on ] {{tq|(Google search results alone are not grounds for protecting an article from deletion}}) rather than Google Scholar, the latter being a better way to look for scholarly literature or lack thereof. | |||
|{{cite book|last1=Chirot|first1=Daniel|last2=McCauley|first2=Clark|author-link1=Daniel Chirot|author-link2=Clark McCauley|year=2006|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Why_Not_Kill_Them_All/sUgxEAAAQBAJ|title=Why Not Kill Them All? The Logic and Prevention of Mass Political Murder|publisher=Princeton University Press}} | |||
|- | |||
|Jones 2006 | |||
|"An invaluable introduction to the subject of genocide, explaining its history from pre-modern times to the present day, with a wide variety of case studies. | |||
Recent events in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, East Timor and Iraq have demonstrated with appalling clarity that the threat of genocide is still a major issue within world politics. The book examines the differing interpretations of genocide from psychology, sociology, anthropology and political science and analyzes the influence of race, ethnicity, nationalism and gender on genocides. In the final section, the author examines how we punish those responsible for waging genocide and how the international community can prevent further bloodshed."<ref>{{cite book|last=Jones|first=Adam|author-link=Adam Jones (Canadian scholar)|year=2017|orig-year=2006|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/C_dhjwEACAAJ|title=Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction|publisher=Routledge}}</ref> | |||
The article takes a proposed Communist genocide/mass killing concept from — say — Mann, Straus (who is merely reviewing rather than proposing the concept), and Valentino, even though the first is about classicide, the second is about genocide in general, and the third is a chapter about genocides and mass killings in the 20th century, then listing all mass killings under Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pol, adding all excess deaths under all Communist regimes, even as only few scholars and from one side (Courtois, Rummel) list all non-combatant victims (famines, wars-related, etc.), to suggest all those are mass killings and/or victims of communism (the main culprit, which is contrary to Valentino's view of leaders, not regime type, being the main culprit), its more accurate title that, however, does not really solve all those issues I have highlighted. | |||
|{{cite book|last=Jones|first=Adam|author-link=Adam Jones (Canadian scholar)|year=2017|orig-year=2006|chapter-url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9781315725390-5/stalin-mao-adam-jones|chapter=Stalin and Mao|title=Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction|publisher=Routledge}} {{cite book|last=Jones|first=Adam|author-link=Adam Jones (Canadian scholar)|year=2017|orig-year=2006|chapter-url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9781315725390-7/cambodia-khmer-rouge-adam-jones?context=ubx&refId=81e1479f-0450-4588-8ca6-f4022396186e|chapter=Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge|title=Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction|publisher=Routledge}} | |||
|- | |||
|Sémelin 2007 | |||
|"How can we comprehend the sociopolitical processes that give rise to extreme violence, ethnic cleansing, or genocide? A major breakthrough in comparative analysis, ''Purify and Destroy'' demonstrates that it is indeed possible to compare the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia-Herzegovina while respecting the specificities of each appalling phenomenon. Jacques Semelin achieves this, in part, by leading his readers through the three examples simultaneously, the unraveling of which sometimes converges but most often diverges." | |||
Semelin's method is multidisciplinary, relying not only on contemporary history but also on social psychology and political science. Based on the seminal distinction between massacre and genocide, ''Purify and Destroy'' identifies the main steps of a general process of destruction, both rational and irrational, born of what Semelin terms 'delusional rationality.' He describes a dynamic structural model with, at its core, the matrix of a social imaginaire that, responding to fears, resentments, and utopias, carves and recarves the social body by eliminating 'the enemy.' Semelin identifies the main stages that can lead to a genocidal process and explains how ordinary people can become perpetrators. He develops an intellectual framework to analyze the entire spectrum of mass violence, including terrorism, in the twentieth century and before. Strongly critical of today's political instrumentalization of the 'genocide' notion, Semelin urges genocide research to stand back from legal and normative definitions and come of age as a discipline in its own right in the social sciences.<ref>{{cite book|last=Sémelin|first=Jacques|author-link=Jacques Sémelin|year=2007|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Purify_and_Destroy/HIS-AwAAQBAJ|title=Purify and Destroy: The Political Uses of Massacre and Genocide|publisher=Columbia University Press}}</ref> | |||
In academia and ''scholarly'' sources, mass killings are discussed as a general topic, hence this article acts as a coatrack content POV fork of that topic to push a Communist grouping, as if it was universally accepted and/or a special category that could explain the onset of mass killings — it does not and it is not a separate category and/or topic. As written , include a general article about mass killings, or during the 20th century, as a spin-off of ]. I also accept those three proposals as possible solutions other than deletion but only if the article is completely rewritten/restructured per ] (not a policy but an especially relevant essay for this article and its problems), e.g. if the closure give the green light to such rewrite, 'Keep' side must be collaborative and accept such possibility, as users showed , , and . | |||
|{{cite book|last=Sémelin|first=Jacques|author-link=Jacques Sémelin|year=2007|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Purify_and_Destroy/HIS-AwAAQBAJ|title=Purify and Destroy: The Political Uses of Massacre and Genocide|publisher=Columbia University Press}} | |||
|- | |||
|Rosefielde 2009 | |||
|"Twentieth and twenty-first century communism is a failed experiment in social engineering that needlessly killed approximately 60 million people and perhaps tens of millions more. These high crimes against humanity constitute a Red Holocaust that exceeds the combined carnage of the French Reign of Terror, Ha Shoah, Showa Japan's Asian holocaust, and all combat deaths in World War I and II. This fascinating book investigates high crimes against humanity in the Soviet Union, eastern and central Europe, North Korea, China, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia 1929–2009, and compares the results with Ha Shoah and the Japanese Asian Holocaust. | |||
As in other studies, blame is ascribed to political, ideological and personal causes, but special emphasis is given to internal contradictions in Marx's utopian model as well as Stalinist and post-Stalinist transition systems concocted to realize communist ends. This faulty economic engineering forms a bridge to the larger issue of communism's historical failure. | |||
==== For the closer (must read — three paragraphs) ==== | |||
:''See also for how we have been misread as though we are denying the events, which indeed happened — it is their grouping and connection that I and others dispute.'''10''''' | |||
Addendum — "per sources" arguments must not be taken at face value due to a sourcing problem as summarized by Siebert (see also and ) and the issue described in the lack of agreement about the main topic. is what they should answer and demonstrate to us and the closure, rather than {{tq|like the articles existence or think the subject "deserves" an article}} (as noted ). As was also noted , it must be kept in mind: | |||
* Many of 'Keep' voters did not participate at all in the extensive daily discussions about issues in the article, and as a result may be disingenuously dismissive of our arguments, issues, and rationale ( also noted). 'Keep' voters who have been canvassed, are ] (), or treat it as a ballot (as noted and and by admins clpo13 and Ymblanter). ], ], and ] must also be kept in mind. As for ], . | |||
* Possible geographical bias in light to the ] and ], ] (), and ] recognizing that the article is controversial and in dispute (]), which the 'Keep' side must be aware of but seems to have ignored. | |||
** and articles, and their politicization in Eastern Europe (, ). | |||
* Paul Siebert's research criteria and neutral search (e.g. Google Scholar) have been positively reviewed in in the academic peer-reviewed '']'', which is published by ]. | |||
* As noted , the article's problem are well hidden by the number of sources and citogensis but a deep analysis would clearly reveal; whether they are serious enough to warrant a deletion/rewrite is what I hope that it can be determined. If I and users are indeed correct , , the respect of our ] comes before of 's reaction — nothing is actually going to be censured and removed, everything already has their own articles, and any new content can be incorporated for a NPOV rewrite without OR/SYNTH issues. | |||
* ] and neither is ] ({{tq|Decisions on Misplaced Pages are primarily made by consensus, which is accepted as the best method to achieve Misplaced Pages's goals, i.e., the five pillars. Consensus on Misplaced Pages '''does not mean unanimity''' (which is ideal but not always achievable), '''nor is it the result of a vote'''. Decision making and reaching consensus involve '''an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns''', while '''respecting Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines'''}}). Respect for our ] is paramount. If policies and guidelines for this article are proved to have been indeed violated, and rewrite is agreed, there should be nothing the mob can do. | |||
* Insults, , against us. | |||
* Useful by DRN moderator, and the . | |||
The book includes: | |||
Thanks to Hemiauchenia for pointing out that ] is a good precedent in that the same, if not very similar, rationale for 'Delete' applies here, and I hope the closer here will also not take "'keep' opinions merely reply 'but it's notable' , ..." at face value. This is not a 'voting', as Misplaced Pages is not a democracy, so rational arguments and their strength, backed by sources (e.g. as I did to show Communist grouping is controversial) should be seen as the most valuable, irregardless if it is to 'Keep' and/or 'Delete', in weighting it. As noted there, "he 'keep' side would instead have needed to show that the alleged quality problems either don't exist or can be relatively easily fixed by editing; and most of them did not attempt to make this argument." Very few of 'Keep' votes have showed and answered this, and I not think they have rebuked it. | |||
* a comprehensive study of the transcommunist holocaust | |||
* a judicial assessment of holocaust culpability and special pleadings | |||
* an obituary for Stalinism everywhere except North Korea, and a death watch for contemporary communism in China, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, North Korea, Cuba and Nepal | |||
* a comparative assessment of totalitarian high crimes against humanity | |||
* a call for memory as a defense against recurrent economic, racial and ethnic holocausts | |||
The book will be useful to undergraduate and higher level students interested in Russian history, Stalism, communism, North and South Korean economic performance and international affairs. | |||
=== Analysis of sources (c. 3,500 words — can be skipped if above is deemed sufficient enough rationale) === | |||
==== Introduction (must read — three short paragraphs, plus proposed real notable topic as full rewrite) ==== | |||
:''Main article: . Paul Siebert's analysis.'' | |||
:''See also and for context and further information.'' | |||
In response to , see Paul Siebert's comment and for how an academic and Google Scholar research shows different results. | |||
Steven Rosefielde is a Professor of Economics at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and a member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences."<ref>{{cite book|last=Rosefielde|first=Steven|author-link=Steven Rosefielde|year=2009|url=https://www.google.it/books/edition/Red_Holocaust/7_eMAgAAQBAJ|title=Red Holocaust|publisher=Routledge}}</ref> | |||
Among others, the 'Keep' side has we understand the topic differently, as has been also noted by North8000 , so saying the topic is notable is not helpful if those on the 'Keep' side do not provide a clearly defined topic; e.g. I would vote 'Keep', provided the article is rewritten on this topic as summarized by Siebert : | |||
|{{cite book|last=Rosefielde|first=Steven|author-link=Steven Rosefielde|year=2009|url=https://www.google.it/books/edition/Red_Holocaust/7_eMAgAAQBAJ|title=Red Holocaust|publisher=Routledge}} | |||
<blockquote>"In my opinion, the really notable topic is '''the discussion of the view that Communism was the greatest mass murderer in XX century. Who said that? Why? What was the main purpose for putting forward this idea? How this idea was accepted? Who supports that? Who criticise it and what the criticism consists in? How this idea is linked to recent trends in Holocaust obfuscation?''' And so on, and so forth. This would be '''a really notable topic, and that can save the article from deletion'''. However, '''that will require almost complete rewrite of the article.'''"</blockquote> | |||
|- | |||
|Bellamy 2012 | |||
|"Most cultural and legal codes agree that the intentional killing of civilians, whether in peacetime or war, is prohibited. This is the norm of civilian immunity, widely considered to be a fundamental moral and legal principle. Yet despite this fact, the deliberate killing of large numbers of civilians remains a persistent feature of global political life. What is more, the perpetrators have often avoided criticism and punishment. Examining dozens of episodes of mass killing perpetrated by states since the French Revolution late eighteenth century, this book attempts to explain this paradox. It studies the role that civilian immunity has played in shaping the behaviour of perpetrators and how international society has responded to mass killing. The book argues that although the world has made impressive progress in legislating against the intentional killing of civilians and in constructing institutions to give meaning to that prohibition, the norm's history in practice suggests that the ascendancy of civilian immunity is both more recent and more fragile than might otherwise be thought. In practice, decisions to violate a norm are shaped by factors relating to the norm and the situation at hand, so too is the manner in which international society and individual states respond to norm violations. Responses to norm violations are not simply matters of normative obligation or calculations of self-interest but are instead guided by a combination of these logics as well as perceptions about the situation at hand, existing relations with the actors involved, and power relations between actors holding different accounts of the situation. Thus, whilst civilian immunity has for the time being prevailed over 'anti-civilian ideologies' which seek to justify mass killing, it remains challenged by these ideologies and its implementation shaped by individual circumstances. As a result, whilst it has become much more difficult for states to get away with mass murder, it is still not entirely impossible for them to do so."<ref>{{cite book|last=Bellamy|first=Alex J.|author-link=Alex J. Bellamy|year=2012|url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288427.001.0001/acprof-9780199288427|title=Massacres and Morality: Mass Atrocities in an Age of Civilian Immunity|publisher=Oxford University Press}}</ref> | |||
|{{cite book|last=Bellamy|first=Alex J.|author-link=Alex J. Bellamy|year=2012|chapter-url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288427.001.0001/acprof-9780199288427-chapter-7|chapter=The Cold War Struggle (2): Communist Atrocities|title=Massacres and Morality: Mass Atrocities in an Age of Civilian Immunity|publisher=Oxford University Press}} | |||
|- | |||
|Neumayer 2018 | |||
|"Memory has taken centre stage in European-level policies after the Cold War, as the Western historical narrative based on the uniqueness of the Holocaust was being challenged by calls for an equal condemnation of Communism and Nazism. | |||
This book retraces the anti-communist mobilisations carried out by Central European representatives in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and in the European Parliament since the early 1990s. Based on archive consultation, interviews and ethnographic observation, it analyses the memory entrepreneurs' requests for collective remembrance and legal accountability of Communist crimes in European institutions, Pan-European political parties and transnational advocacy networks. The book argues that these newcomers managed to strengthen their positions and impose a totalitarian interpretation of Communism in the European assemblies, which directly shaped the EU's remembrance policy. However, the rules of the European political game and recurring ideological conflicts with left-wing opponents reduced the legal and judicial implications of this anti-communist grammar at the European level. | |||
Since the 'Keep' side has refused any attempts at rewrite, identify a topic, and even acknowledge any issue, I see the only solution as 'Delete', with no prejudice in a future rewrite that is NPOV, in respect of our policies, and a clearly defined topic. Now let us move on to the issue of sourcing. | |||
This text will be of key interest to scholars and graduate students in memory studies, post-Communist politics and European studies, and more broadly in history, political science and sociology."<ref>{{cite book|last=Neumayer|first=Laure|author-link=Laure Neumayer|year=2018|url=https://www.google.it/books/edition/The_Criminalisation_of_Communism_in_the/4jhjDwAAQBAJ|title=The Criminalisation of Communism in the European Political Space After the Cold War|publisher=Routledge}}</ref> | |||
==== Helen Fein (short two paragraphs) ==== | |||
|{{cite book|last=Neumayer|first=Laure|author-link=Laure Neumayer|year=2018|url=https://www.google.it/books/edition/The_Criminalisation_of_Communism_in_the/4jhjDwAAQBAJ|title=The Criminalisation of Communism in the European Political Space After the Cold War|publisher=Routledge}} | |||
Nug cite ] but they fail to realize and do not point out something that is even in the article itself (as you can see ), e.g. {{tq|the xenophobic ideology of the Khmer Rouge regime bears a stronger resemblance to "an almost forgotten phenomenon of national socialism", or fascism, rather than communism}}, therefore the Khmer Rouge regime should not be discussed per Fein because she does not necessarily agree with categorizing as Communist; other scholars also categorize it as totalitarian (within the context of "xenophobic European nationalism", not Marxism) rather than Communist, e.g. ] and ] (see , sourced to , pp. 96–98) | |||
|} | |||
{{reflist talk}} | |||
We must not cherry pick authors and act as though they are proposing MKuCR when they are discussing genocide and/or mass killing in general; as noted by Nug themselves, that is chapter but the book is about genocide and/mass killings in general, so I do not see how that justifies MKuCR rather than a general article about mass killings during the 20th century, irrespective of regime type, which remains a possibility and alternative to both 'Keep' and 'Delete' options. | |||
==== Adam Jones (single sentence) ==== | |||
] also separates Stalin and Mao, who are discussed together, from Pol Pot, as you can see . | |||
==== Benjamin Valentino and other genocide scholars (four paragraphs, two of which are quotes from user Paul Siebert) ==== | |||
Valentino is the core source but his actually main idea is, to quote Siebert from ], that {{tq|the regime type is not a good predictor for mass killings onset. He came to that conclusion by having analyzed similar type regimes, and he found that one of them committed mass killings, whereas another one didn't. His main conclusion is that leader's personality is the main factor responsible for mass killing, and a practical conclusion is: if we remove some concrete group from power, we may eliminate a risk of mass killings even without making serious transformation of the state's political system. It is ironical that the work of the researcher who wanted to demonstrate that some limited number of persons are real culprits became a core of the article that puts responsibility for mass killings on Communist ideology as whole. ...<br><br>Valentino demonstrated that by the fact that many (majority) of Communist regimes had not been engaged in mass killings (his own words), and the core of his methodology was a comparison of similar regimes, one of which committed mass killings, whereas another didn't. That means the article twisted the idea of the main source it is based upon. A title that correctly transmits Valentino's views would be "Mass killings under some Communist regimes", but I am not proposing it, for that would be non-encyclopaedic, and because the views of genocide scholars are not fully in agreement with views of historians.}} | |||
While Misplaced Pages articles are not reliable in themselves, their sources there certainly are and all this can be verified at ], ], and ]. Nug have argued that all those articles have problems because they do not reflect what is said at MKuCR but these remain unproven allegations, as is showed by the fact that there has been no serious discussion in support of Nug's allegations and at ] they have been rejected by at least two other users, meaning that if Nug refuse to engage with us at Mass killing and do not gain consensus, they must concede that their allegations are wrong, and stop using this as an argument. | |||
Genocide scholars,'''3''' such as Valentino and many others, are a minority, lack consensus among themselves, and have not achieved mainstream status in political science ( and ), which is further proved by the fact they are not relied by ] and many events discussed at MKuCR are not described as mass killings ''et similia'' by historians and country experts/specialists. As has been noted by ], a disciple of ], genocide scholars are mainly concerned in establishing patterns and not data accuracy, for which they must rely on country experts and specialists (), who do not necessarily reach their same conclusion. | |||
==== Rudolph Rummel (single paragraph) ==== | |||
:''See also comment by Paul Siebert about how Rummel is not relied on by country experts and specialists.'' | |||
From , which is a tertiary source and a core source of both MKuCR and ] (CaHuCR),'''4''' Rummel is considered to be controversial ("they are hardly an example of a serious and empirically-based writing of history"), and is only mentioned "on the basis of the interest in him in the blogosphere." In addition, Rummel has been discussed at ] (, ). Harff herself, a disciple of Rummel, has acknowledged it (Harff 2017), there is no point in denying this any longer. Rummel's category is not Communism but "authoritarian and totalitarian", which discusses together Communism ''and'' fascist/far-right/other regimes (, , p. 5: "Disagreeing with Rummel's finding that '''authoritarian and totalitarian government''' explains mass murder, Valentino (2004) argues that regime type does not matter; ... .") | |||
==== Atsushi Tago and Frank Wayman (single paragraph) ==== | |||
, who do not discuss of MKuCR but of mass killings in general (even Rummel's categorization is described as "authoritarian and totalitarian government" at p. 5 vis-à-vis Valentino's disagreement, so that is an argument to rewrite MKuCR as mass killings under any regime type but why should we give so much WEIGHT to Rummel when, as I am going to show next, scholars disagree on regime type?), show that there is a disagreement among scholars, and the solution is certainly not to give too much weight to Rummel by following his categorization, which are criticized by other scholars by Valentino, who is not the only one. When scholars disagree, the solution is not following categorization by a relevant but undue (in light of disagreement and criticism) scholars like Rummel. That we must give WEIGHT and priority to Rummel by having a MKuCR (full Communist-devoted article despite scholars either disagreeing or rejecting ideology and regime type links) is absurd, false balance, does not follow, and is quite frankly beyond me. I cannot possibly be the only one to think this — I am well open to the idea of being proven wrong but I just do not see any sufficient rationale that would justify this. | |||
==== Stéphane Courtois (two very short sentences, plus one quote from Karlsson and two by users Fifelfoo and TFD) ==== | |||
] is as controversial as Rummel, again see Karlsson 2008, pp. 53–54. | |||
<blockquote>{{tq|Bearing in mind the charged nature of the subject, it is polemically effective to make such comparisons, but it does not seem particularly fruitful, neither morally nor scientifically, to judge the regimes on the basis of their 'dangerousness' or to assess the relationship between communism and Nazism on the basis of what the international academic community calls their 'atrocities toll' or 'body count'. In that case, should the crimes of all communist regimes, in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia and other countries where communism is or has been the dominant party, be compared to the Nazi regime's massacre of six million Jews? Should the Nazi death toll also include the tens of millions of people who the German Nazi armies and their supporting troops killed during the Second World War? Not even Courtois' analytical qualification, that ranking the two regimes the same is based on the idea that the 'weapon of hunger' was used systematically by both the Nazi regime and a number of communist regimes, makes this more reasonable, since this 'weapon' on the whole played a very limited role in the Nazi genocide in relation to other types of methods of mass destruction, and in relation to how it was used by communist regimes.}}</blockquote> | |||
Keep in mind this is one of MKuCR's core sources and has dismissed, or otherwise criticized, two claimed sources in support of MKuCR as either controversal or not mainstream. Courtois' participation to was also revisionist and similarly controversial (). | |||
<blockquote>{{tq|''The Black Book on Communism'' only conducts a multi-societal analysis of genocide in its deeply flawed foreword and introduction, where it claims Communism is Criminal and Not Christian (hard to believe, but true). This does not meet the academic standards of comparative sociology. ... While the ''Black Book'' presents a number of chapters on single country studies, it presents no cross-cultural comparison, there is no discussion of "Mass killing in Communism."}} —User Fifelfoo</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote>{{tq| Conquest did not write about mass killings under Communist regimes, he wrote about the Red terror, the Holodomor and the Great purge in the Soviet Union. He treated these as separate subjects and did not develop a theory of mass killings under Communist regimes. We should not put together a group of events and create an article when no one else has.}} —User The Four Deuces</blockquote> | |||
==== Steven Rosefielde (one sentence, plus one helpful quote by Siebert) ==== | |||
What is ignored is that ] says Communism is less genocidal than Nazism, and he is specifically about excess deaths and mass mortality rather than mass killings, which contrary to the 'Keep' side is not the same thing. To quote Siebert from ]: | |||
<blockquote>{{tq|As I already explained, the question is not only the figures themselves, but in their interpretation. As Rosefielde pointed out (Premature Deaths: Russia's Radical Economic Transition in Soviet Perspective Author(s): Steven Rosefielde Source: Europe-Asia Studies , Dec., 2001, Vol. 53, No. 8 (Dec., 2001), pp. 1159-1176) 3.4 million of Russians died prematurely in 1990s, after fall of Communism. If we consider all "premature deaths" as mass killings, should we speak about "democratic mass killings" in that case? It seems Rosefielde does not consider premature deaths in neither post-Communist Russia not in Communist USSR as "mass killings". The problem is not only in Rummel's figures, but in his interpretation of those figures.}}</blockquote> | |||
==== Klas-Göran Karlsson and Michael Schoenhals (three paragraphs, one which is quote from source itself) ==== | |||
This is not the best source because, as noted by The Four Deuces, because it was written at the request of Sweden's conservative government with the objective of "elucidating and informing on communism's crimes against humanity", which ironically proves the lack of scholarly research of a generalized grouping as is done in the article. Yet, it describes 'Keep' side's core MKuCR's sources (Courtois and Rummel) as either controversial or not mainstream, and acknowledges as follows: | |||
<blockquote>{{tq|This research review does not claim to list all research on the communist regimes' crimes against humanity. Bearing in mind the large number of books written on Soviet communism in particular, and on the terror of the last decade in the West and in post-Soviet Eastern Europe, '''this would be an impossible task.''' ... There is, therefore, a great need for Swedish research on communist regimes' crimes against humanity, and a great need to create the right conditions for this research. This research would benefit from taking a comparative approach, either focusing on comparing these criminal histories with each other, or with crimes against humanity perpetrated by other regimes in modern history. ... Despite commendable research initiatives in recent years, '''this area of research is still in its infancy'''.}}</blockquote> | |||
The bolded part is one more reason why the currently structured article should be deleted — it simply is an impossible task. MKuCR article does not reflect this source because it says (1) , and even if it does, it would be limited to three Communist ''leaders'' (Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot),'''6''' not even Communist regimes, as the review is limited to three very specific periods of three different Communist regimes (Fein and Jones separate Pol Pot from Stalin and Mao) out of dozens and dozens of other Communist regimes, which did not engage in mass killings;'''7''' (2) the article must be restructured to limit the scope to them, e.g. removing discussion about causes, since the killings were the result not of communism ''per se'', as Karlsson 2008 says they were carried out as part of a policy of an unbalanced modernization process of rapid industrialization (Karlsson 2008, p. 8); and (3) it is not discussed in a vacuum but is compared with non-Communist regimes, which MKuCR fails to address. | |||
==== University syllabus (example of citogensis) ==== | |||
single university syllabus does not debunk SYNTH claims and is also just further proof of citogenesis in actions, as shown by and citogenesis/republishing itself on . In addition, as noted by Siebert, the author is an expert in Putin's Russia, and she has authored no publications on Communism. | |||
=== Main topic (can be skipped but is useful for context) === | |||
I think that if we truly want to move forward, we need to identify the ''main'' topic of this article. If we cannot agree on what the main topic is, and is to be structured, it should be ''both'' AfD and RfC — because it is not sufficient that AfD results in ''Keep'' or ''No consensus'', if we, in fact, do not agree on what the main topic is, hence RfC will be necessary. | |||
; Main topics | |||
# Mass killings under Communist states'''1''' () — it essentially discusses ''and'' merge all the topics below,'''2''' treats any death as a mass killing, and treats it as scholarly discourse (as if they are all discussed together) ''and'' consensus; it is both theory-based and events-focused | |||
# Mass killings under Communist states () — it has the same problems as the previous version but at least it aknowledges the controversy and the lack of consensus, and recognizes that while there were many killings under Communist states, only Stalin's, Mao's, and Pol Pot's regimes can be categorized as having engaged in mass killing as proposed by ], the core sources | |||
# Excess mortality under Communist states, Mass deaths under Communist states – one of Siebert's proposal for rewrite; it would be the neutral version of topic No. 1, and my understanding is that it would remain both theory-based and events-focused, which may fix NPOV and be a compromise between the two sides but not fix OR/SYNTH because country experts and specialists, which this article would rely much more, do not make such Communist grouping, hence we may mislead users in acting as though those scholars are part of the scholarly discourse of topic No. 1 | |||
# Communist state(s) and mass killing(s),'''3''' Victims of communism – Siebert's and TFD's, plus me, proposed topic and really the only notable one, see summary '''4''' identifies the topic for us — discussion of the number of '''victims of communist''' regimes has been "extremely extensive and '''ideologically biased'''." | |||
; Alternatives (disambiguations) — it does not preclude having No. 3 or 4, and one of those | |||
# Communist mass killing – the name given by core source Valentino and applied only to Stalin's, Mao's, and Pol Pot's regimes | |||
# List of ''article'' – it would only include events which are ''universally'' described as mass killings in ''scholarly'' sources (again, mostly Stalin's, Mao's, and Pol Pot's regimes) | |||
{{collapsetop|Collapsed notes}} | |||
'''1.''' I never understood why this article uses ''communist regimes'', as if Communist states were small-c ]; our main article is ], not ] (redirect), and scholars ''do'' make a distinction between small-c communism and capital-c Communism, the latter being a state led by a nominal Communist party. | |||
'''2.''' "The article takes the Communist genocide/mass killing concept from Mann, Straus (who is merely reviewing rather than proposing the concept) and Valentino, even though the first is about Classicide, the second is about genocide, and the third is a chapter about general genocides and mass killings in the 20th century (with Communism simply being one type), then listing all mass killings under Stalin, Mao and Pol Pol, and adding all excess deaths under all Communist regimes, even as only few scholars and from one side list all non-combatant victims (famines, wars, etc.), to suggest all those are victims of Communism, its more accurate title that, however, does not really solve all those issues (undue weight, original research, synthesis, more than one topic, NPOV, etc.)" — ] | |||
'''3.''' I use ''Communist state'' rather than ''Communism'' because the article, like all other topics, will be focused on Communist states, it will be a subarticle of ] (e.g. a summary of the article should not go at ], where we may have a short sentence about some scholars saying Communist states faithfully put in practice communism, and many other scholars disagreeing, but at ]), and nothing would preclude a subsection about communism in general and the discussion of links with it, e.g. Siebert's and TFD's, plus me, proposed topic would fit well with North8000's suggestion that such an article would be about links between the two, rather than categorize the article by political system, which we do only for Communism — any attempts at creation of other article were dismissed as OR/SYNTH, which is a clear double standard, since it would applies to topic No. 1, 2, and likely 3 as well. | |||
'''4.''' Such article may also substitute ] and have other articles, e.g. Communist states and human rights, which would discuss not the events, which can simply be linked rather than coatracked as we do here, but a link between the two. Problem is that while I am sure sources could be found for such an article, I am not sure there is, in fact, a scholarly literature that supports it as a separate article. The link is also much less stronger'''5''' than one may think because it would be about communism in general (e.g. it would make no sense to have one limited to Communist states and/or Marxism–Leninism, since that is the example or link that is attempted to prove) but unlike, say, fascism — and despite what ] may lead some to believe — communism is much more broad and divided (e.g. many communists condemned and criticized Communist states, indeed some of them were the first to criticize the October Revolution as a betrayal, dictatorship of the party, state capitalism, etc. already in late 1917, not in the 1920s and 1930s, or when they saw things going bad), and there are, in fact, democratic and libertarian communists. It is tragic but ironic that both anti-communists and ''tankies'' ignore how many victims were themselves communists. | |||
'''5.''' While atrocities and killings indeed continued after Stalin and Mao (e.g. 1989 in China), they did not fit the mass killing category, and Communist leaders have criticized or rejected, both in practice and theoretically — some of them in full, and many others at least in part in regards to their excesses, Stalin and Mao (as was noted by Valentino himself, most Communist regimes, and Communist leaders I may had, did not engage in mass killings), and Cambodian genocide was stopped by Communist Vietnam. The Soviet Union also helped stop the Holocaust and defeat fascism. In short, while one can much more clearly see that fascism results in genocide and politicide, it is not clear for communism, and communists themselves have been victims of genocide and politicide — by both far-right and military regimes, and nominally Communist regimes themselves. | |||
{{collapsebottom}} | |||
] (]) 12:21, 20 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
=== Conclusion (in 457 words, excluding links and wikitext) === | |||
The article is a POV content fork and coatrack, which fails NPOV and VERIFY, and is OR/SYNTH per , and because (1) Communist grouping is controversial (it was one scholarly criticism of '']'', see , , and ), and (2) genocide scholars themselves do not find regime type to be significant in explaining mass killings (). | |||
=== Notes (short enough and useful) === | |||
'''1.''' Is not only editing — but making (see ) — while the AfD is ongoing not only to be avoided but disrupting? Additionally, the article itself was created by a banned user to troll () and there were two further consecutive ''No consensus'' results ( and ) — it should have been deleted back then, with a RfC about its future recreation; after all, if it the topic is so notable and clear-cut as the 'Keep' side maintains, it should have been easy and perhaps the article would be in much better state by now. Instead, the included editorializing ({{tq|This is a well sourced article, not OR, worthy of the encyclopedia}}) and the acknowledged we needed to fix such issues. They have not been resolved, as showed by the many discussion at ], and deletion with eventual rewrite seems to be the only solution'''8''' to fix it once and for all. | |||
'''2.''' is a relevant quote provided by Siebert from David-Fox 2004. Dallin 2000 says: {{tq|"Whether all these cases, from Hungary to Afghanistan, have a single essence and thus deserve to be lumped together—just because they are labeled Marxist or communist—is a question the authors scarcely discuss."}} | |||
'''3.''' All those authors cited are genocide scholars, while Rummel is best known for his ], a different topic, in which he is mainstream. See also . | |||
'''4.''' Karlsson 2008 is completely misunderstood at CaHuCR because Karlsson says to prefer ''crimes against humanity'' over ''mass killings'' and discusses MKuCR but limits himself only to Stalin's, Mao's, and Pol Pot's regimes, not to any Communist regime'''5''' — in those cases, killings were carried out as part of a policy of an unbalanced modernization process of rapid industrialization (Karlsson 2008, p. 8). | |||
'''5.''' Such an article would not be encyclopedic, as we already have articles for each event, and the review discuss them individually. | |||
'''6.''' {{tq|"Communism has a bloody record, but '''most regimes that have described themselves as communist or have been described as such by others have not engaged in mass killing'''. In addition to shedding light on why some communist states have been among the most violent regimes in history, therefore, I also seek to explain '''why other communist countries have avoided this level of violence'''."}} (Valentino 2013, p. 91.) The bolded parts are obviously missing and not reflected in MKuCR. | |||
'''7.''' The most accepted definition of mass killing is 50,000 killed within five years, and that applies to Stalin's, Mao's, and Pol Pot's regimes, and the ], which must be seen within the context of the ] and the ], not as it is described at MKuCR. | |||
'''8.''' </nowiki>."] —Paul Siebert | |||
'''9''' —Paul Siebert | |||
'''10.''' —AndyTheGrump | |||
] (]) 22:00, 22 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 19:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:33, 27 December 2021
Source | Synopsis | Topic |
---|---|---|
Courtois 1999 | "Already famous throughout Europe, this international bestseller plumbs recently opened archives in the former Soviet bloc to reveal the actual, practical accomplishments of Communism around the world: terror, torture, famine, mass deportations, and massacres. Astonishing in the sheer detail it amasses, the book is the first comprehensive attempt to catalogue and analyze the crimes of Communism over seventy years.
'Revolutions, like trees, must be judged by their fruit,' Ignazio Silone wrote, and this is the standard the authors apply to the Communist experience—in the China of 'the Great Helmsman,' Kim Il Sung's Korea, Vietnam under 'Uncle Ho' and Cuba under Castro, Ethiopia under Mengistu, Angola under Neto, and Afghanistan under Najibullah. The authors, all distinguished scholars based in Europe, document Communist crimes against humanity, but also crimes against national and universal culture, from Stalin's destruction of hundreds of churches in Moscow to Ceausescu's leveling of the historic heart of Bucharest to the widescale devastation visited on Chinese culture by Mao's Red Guards. As the death toll mounts—as many as 25 million in the former Soviet Union, 65 million in China, 1.7 million in Cambodia, and on and on—the authors systematically show how and why, wherever the millenarian ideology of Communism was established, it quickly led to crime, terror, and repression. An extraordinary accounting, this book amply documents the unparalleled position and significance of Communism in the hierarchy of violence that is the history of the twentieth century." |
Courtois, Stéphane (1999) . The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression. Harvard University Press. |
Valentino 2004 | "Benjamin A. Valentino finds that ethnic hatreds or discrimination, undemocratic systems of government, and dysfunctions in society play a much smaller role in mass killing and genocide than is commonly assumed. He shows that the impetus for mass killing usually originates from a relatively small group of powerful leaders and is often carried out without the active support of broader society. Mass killing, in his view, is a brutal political or military strategy designed to accomplish leaders' most important objectives, counter threats to their power, and solve their most difficult problems.
In order to capture the full scope of mass killing during the twentieth century, Valentino does not limit his analysis to violence directed against ethnic groups, or to the attempt to destroy victim groups as such, as do most previous studies of genocide. Rather, he defines mass killing broadly as the intentional killing of a massive number of noncombatants, using the criteria of 50,000 or more deaths within five years as a quantitative standard. Final Solutions focuses on three types of mass killing: communist mass killings like the ones carried out in the Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia; ethnic genocides as in Armenia, Nazi Germany, and Rwanda; and 'counter-guerrilla' campaigns including the brutal civil war in Guatemala and the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Valentino closes the book by arguing that attempts to prevent mass killing should focus on disarming and removing from power the leaders and small groups responsible for instigating and organizing the killing." |
Valentino, Benjamin (2013) . "Communist Mass Killings: The Soviet Union, China, and Cambodia". Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the 20th Century. Cornell University Press. pp. 91–151. |
Mann 2005 | "This comprehensive study of international ethnic cleansing provides in-depth coverage of its occurrences in Armenia, Nazi Germany, Cambodia, Yugoslavia, and Rwanda, as well as cases of lesser violence in early modern Europe and in contemporary India and Indonesia. After presenting a general theory of why serious conflict emerges and how it escalates into mass murder, Michael Mann offers suggestions on how to avoid such escalation in the future. Michael Mann is the author of Fascists (Cambridge, 2004) and The Sources of Social Power (Cambridge 1986)." | Mann, Michael (2005). "Communist Cleansing: Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot". The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing. Cambridge University Press. pp. 318–352. |
Chirot & McCauley 2006 | "Genocide, mass murder, massacres. The words themselves are chilling, evoking images of the slaughter of countless innocents. What dark impulses lurk in our minds that even today can justify the eradication of thousands and even millions of unarmed human beings caught in the crossfire of political, cultural, or ethnic hostilities? This question lies at the heart of Why Not Kill Them All? Cowritten by historical sociologist Daniel Chirot and psychologist Clark McCauley, the book goes beyond exploring the motives that have provided the psychological underpinnings for genocidal killings. It offers a historical and comparative context that adds up to a causal taxonomy of genocidal events.
Rather than suggesting that such horrors are the product of abnormal or criminal minds, the authors emphasize the normality of these horrors: killing by category has occurred on every continent and in every century. But genocide is much less common than the imbalance of power that makes it possible. Throughout history human societies have developed techniques aimed at limiting intergroup violence. Incorporating ethnographic, historical, and current political evidence, this book examines the mechanisms of constraint that human societies have employed to temper partisan passions and reduce carnage. Might an understanding of these mechanisms lead the world of the twenty-first century away from mass murder? Why Not Kill Them All? makes clear that there are no simple solutions, but that progress is most likely to be made through a combination of international pressures, new institutions and laws, and education. If genocide is to become a grisly relic of the past, we must fully comprehend the complex history of violent conflict and the struggle between hatred and tolerance that is waged in the human heart." |
Chirot, Daniel; McCauley, Clark (2006). Why Not Kill Them All? The Logic and Prevention of Mass Political Murder. Princeton University Press. |
Jones 2006 | "An invaluable introduction to the subject of genocide, explaining its history from pre-modern times to the present day, with a wide variety of case studies.
Recent events in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, East Timor and Iraq have demonstrated with appalling clarity that the threat of genocide is still a major issue within world politics. The book examines the differing interpretations of genocide from psychology, sociology, anthropology and political science and analyzes the influence of race, ethnicity, nationalism and gender on genocides. In the final section, the author examines how we punish those responsible for waging genocide and how the international community can prevent further bloodshed." |
Jones, Adam (2017) . "Stalin and Mao". Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction. Routledge. Jones, Adam (2017) . "Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge". Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction. Routledge. |
Sémelin 2007 | "How can we comprehend the sociopolitical processes that give rise to extreme violence, ethnic cleansing, or genocide? A major breakthrough in comparative analysis, Purify and Destroy demonstrates that it is indeed possible to compare the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia-Herzegovina while respecting the specificities of each appalling phenomenon. Jacques Semelin achieves this, in part, by leading his readers through the three examples simultaneously, the unraveling of which sometimes converges but most often diverges."
Semelin's method is multidisciplinary, relying not only on contemporary history but also on social psychology and political science. Based on the seminal distinction between massacre and genocide, Purify and Destroy identifies the main steps of a general process of destruction, both rational and irrational, born of what Semelin terms 'delusional rationality.' He describes a dynamic structural model with, at its core, the matrix of a social imaginaire that, responding to fears, resentments, and utopias, carves and recarves the social body by eliminating 'the enemy.' Semelin identifies the main stages that can lead to a genocidal process and explains how ordinary people can become perpetrators. He develops an intellectual framework to analyze the entire spectrum of mass violence, including terrorism, in the twentieth century and before. Strongly critical of today's political instrumentalization of the 'genocide' notion, Semelin urges genocide research to stand back from legal and normative definitions and come of age as a discipline in its own right in the social sciences. |
Sémelin, Jacques (2007). Purify and Destroy: The Political Uses of Massacre and Genocide. Columbia University Press. |
Rosefielde 2009 | "Twentieth and twenty-first century communism is a failed experiment in social engineering that needlessly killed approximately 60 million people and perhaps tens of millions more. These high crimes against humanity constitute a Red Holocaust that exceeds the combined carnage of the French Reign of Terror, Ha Shoah, Showa Japan's Asian holocaust, and all combat deaths in World War I and II. This fascinating book investigates high crimes against humanity in the Soviet Union, eastern and central Europe, North Korea, China, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia 1929–2009, and compares the results with Ha Shoah and the Japanese Asian Holocaust.
As in other studies, blame is ascribed to political, ideological and personal causes, but special emphasis is given to internal contradictions in Marx's utopian model as well as Stalinist and post-Stalinist transition systems concocted to realize communist ends. This faulty economic engineering forms a bridge to the larger issue of communism's historical failure. The book includes:
The book will be useful to undergraduate and higher level students interested in Russian history, Stalism, communism, North and South Korean economic performance and international affairs. Steven Rosefielde is a Professor of Economics at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and a member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences." |
Rosefielde, Steven (2009). Red Holocaust. Routledge. |
Bellamy 2012 | "Most cultural and legal codes agree that the intentional killing of civilians, whether in peacetime or war, is prohibited. This is the norm of civilian immunity, widely considered to be a fundamental moral and legal principle. Yet despite this fact, the deliberate killing of large numbers of civilians remains a persistent feature of global political life. What is more, the perpetrators have often avoided criticism and punishment. Examining dozens of episodes of mass killing perpetrated by states since the French Revolution late eighteenth century, this book attempts to explain this paradox. It studies the role that civilian immunity has played in shaping the behaviour of perpetrators and how international society has responded to mass killing. The book argues that although the world has made impressive progress in legislating against the intentional killing of civilians and in constructing institutions to give meaning to that prohibition, the norm's history in practice suggests that the ascendancy of civilian immunity is both more recent and more fragile than might otherwise be thought. In practice, decisions to violate a norm are shaped by factors relating to the norm and the situation at hand, so too is the manner in which international society and individual states respond to norm violations. Responses to norm violations are not simply matters of normative obligation or calculations of self-interest but are instead guided by a combination of these logics as well as perceptions about the situation at hand, existing relations with the actors involved, and power relations between actors holding different accounts of the situation. Thus, whilst civilian immunity has for the time being prevailed over 'anti-civilian ideologies' which seek to justify mass killing, it remains challenged by these ideologies and its implementation shaped by individual circumstances. As a result, whilst it has become much more difficult for states to get away with mass murder, it is still not entirely impossible for them to do so." | Bellamy, Alex J. (2012). "The Cold War Struggle (2): Communist Atrocities". Massacres and Morality: Mass Atrocities in an Age of Civilian Immunity. Oxford University Press. |
Neumayer 2018 | "Memory has taken centre stage in European-level policies after the Cold War, as the Western historical narrative based on the uniqueness of the Holocaust was being challenged by calls for an equal condemnation of Communism and Nazism.
This book retraces the anti-communist mobilisations carried out by Central European representatives in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and in the European Parliament since the early 1990s. Based on archive consultation, interviews and ethnographic observation, it analyses the memory entrepreneurs' requests for collective remembrance and legal accountability of Communist crimes in European institutions, Pan-European political parties and transnational advocacy networks. The book argues that these newcomers managed to strengthen their positions and impose a totalitarian interpretation of Communism in the European assemblies, which directly shaped the EU's remembrance policy. However, the rules of the European political game and recurring ideological conflicts with left-wing opponents reduced the legal and judicial implications of this anti-communist grammar at the European level. This text will be of key interest to scholars and graduate students in memory studies, post-Communist politics and European studies, and more broadly in history, political science and sociology." |
Neumayer, Laure (2018). The Criminalisation of Communism in the European Political Space After the Cold War. Routledge. |
References
- Courtois, Stéphane (1999) . The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression. Harvard University Press.
- Valentino, Benjamin (2013) . Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the 20th Century. Cornell University Press.
- Mann, Michael (2005). The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing. Cambridge University Press.
- Chirot, Daniel; McCauley, Clark (2006). Why Not Kill Them All? The Logic and Prevention of Mass Political Murder. Princeton University Press.
- Jones, Adam (2017) . Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction. Routledge.
- Sémelin, Jacques (2007). Purify and Destroy: The Political Uses of Massacre and Genocide. Columbia University Press.
- Rosefielde, Steven (2009). Red Holocaust. Routledge.
- Bellamy, Alex J. (2012). Massacres and Morality: Mass Atrocities in an Age of Civilian Immunity. Oxford University Press.
- Neumayer, Laure (2018). The Criminalisation of Communism in the European Political Space After the Cold War. Routledge.