) have written extensively about the underlying root conditions and causes of genocide and mass violence. These theoretical models and the research related to genocide and mass violence can be integrated and augmented to create a risk analysis model aimed at the prevention of genocide. The spiraling risk for fomentation of enmity within a group and directed against those defined as "other" can be assessed by examining a myriad of factors underlying mass violence and genocide. Factors including group cultural history, situational factors, social psychological factors and context, and interpersonal factors, can be examined to provide an assessment of risk for movement along a path of mass violence with hallmarks including stigmatization, dehumanization, moral disengagement, moral exclusion, impunity, and bystander interactions. Risk assessment can then be applied to an analysis aimed at the selection of effective prevention strategies.It is important to note that variations of this risk analysis model can be applied to mass violence in many forms and contexts. However, the dynamics shift depending on whether one is discussing forms of terrorism, democide, genocide, etc. Nonetheless, the fundamental features of the model, such as risk factors associated with group cultural history, the role of authoritarian leaders, and the manipulation of social psychological factors to propel a group down the path of mass violence remain the same. Additionally, steps aimed at the prevention of genocide are also applicable to other forms of mass violence.It should be acknowledged that there is no general agreement as to a non-legal definition of genocide. For the purpose of this article, the definition outlined by Fein (1994a) will be used. Additionally, this essay will focus specifically on genocide, in particular on genocide as it occurs within nation-states against an identifiable target group. Although this model can be used to discuss other instances of genocide, such as the threat of genocide committed by a nation-state outside of its initial boundaries (e.g. the Ukrainian famine orchestrated by the Soviets), the dynamics shift. For example, self-interest comes to play a much larger role and need for manipulation of social psychological factors may be highly diminished if intrastate media is controlled.
Both of us have been involved for many years in teaching and research concerning topics ranging from propaganda and prejudice to the psychosocial roots of mass violence and genocide. Clearly the analysis of the functioning and structure of hate based organizations falls within the domain of our interests. It is our perspective that only through an understanding of the psychological mechanisms that play a role in enmity ranging from the individual to the national level can we work to combat hate as a destructive force within our society. WHAT IS A HATE GROUP?Both the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League track and maintain records concerning hate groups and hate group activities in the United States. Using their definitions as a foundation, we define hate groups as any organized group whose beliefs and actions are rooted in enmity towards an entire class of people based on ethnicity, perceived race, sexual orientation, religion, or other inherent characteristic. Note that there are two major components to this definition. First, a hate group must be organized. The level of visibility within the community, organizational structure (e.g. chapters), and degree of activity related to the promotion of beliefs (e.g. publications) all have and impact on whether an organization is classified as a hate group. Smaller groups that have not come to the attention of the community, do not engage in organized activities (e.g., publishing, rallies, or meetings), and efforts organized by one or two individuals are not considered to be hate groups. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center ( 2003), there were 751 active hate groups within the United States in 2003. Organization is such an important component in the identification of a hate group that some researchers use the term "organized racism" to define groups with an openly racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, or other bias (Blee, 2002).The second major component of the above definition is the clear use of enmity towards a specific group as a primary organizational focus. Consequently, the fundamental belief system of the group and the majority of organized group activity are focused on the promotion of hate. Informal activity however may meet a broader range of psychological needs. The Anti-Defamation League (2004) identifies the most common hate group targets within the United States to be African-Americans, Jews, Hispanics, and gays/lesbians. Recent immigrants and Catholics are also mentioned as targets of hate groups but to a lesser extent. The Southern Poverty Law Center breaks down hate groups in the United States into six categories: Neo-Confederacy, Neo-Nazi, Racist Skinheads, Black Separatists, Klan, and Other. The category "other" includes a range of organizations ranging from white supremacist groups such as those identified with the Christian Patriot and Identity movements to anti-gay organizations such as the Westboro Baptist Church.Hate of course is not limited to the United States. Rather, hate extends to all of the major regions of the pop...
Man is the religious animal. He is the only religious animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion-several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat, if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven.-Mark Twain Hatred, discrimination, and violence in the name of religion are certainly not new phenomena, but rather date back through the historical record. The persecution of early Christians by the Romans and of Jews/Muslims during the Crusades are but two examples from history. Today, terrorist attacks in Israel, violence in Northern Ireland, ethnic conflict and genocide in the former Yugoslavia, and a host of other headlines remind us regularly that hatred and violence under the flag of religion still exist. However, for most individuals in the United States prior to September 11th, 2001, such violence was thought to occur primarily elsewhere on the distant horizon of international affairs. Freedom of religion and religious tolerance are viewed by most in the U.S. as fundamental tenets of our society. Furthermore, any religious hatred and intolerance that exist in the U.S. are thought to occur only on the domestic fringe and are thus not major threats to the vast majority of Americans. Consequently, the attacks of September 11, given the belief that the attacks were grounded in Islamic fundamentalism as part of a Holy War, have raised questions for many about the foundation of religious hatred and violence. Unfortunately, most of the discussion of religious hatred in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks has focused on the specifics of Islam. Religious responses from various theological perspectives have occurred along a continuum of dialogue. At one end of the spectrum, many theologians have stressed the beauty and peace-abiding nature of the Islamic faith. At the other end, wellknown Christian evangelists have offered harsher opinions. For example, Franklin Graham, son of the Reverend Billy Graham, stated that he believed Islam to be a "very evil and wicked religion," 1 and Jerry Falwell called Mohammed a "terrorist." 2 While both have subsequently qualified their remarks, such comments exemplify a reciprocal foundation of religious intolerance that argues against a purely theological root for religious hatred, terrorism, and violence. While theological rationales for the fomentation of intra-religious hatred 5 \\server05\productn\G\GHS\2-1\GHS106.txt unknown Seq: 2 8-AUG-03 12:24
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.