Discussion on e2-half-done-draft-post-here-by-4-2
Ryota F
English 101
Professor Ed O’Connell
4/2/2010
Explaining Eliminationist Assaults
In his book Worse than war Daniel Goldhagen (2009) deals with the
issue of eliminationism. He explains why eliminationist assaults begin
and suggests what we can do to stop eliminationist assaults. He argues
that, although eliminationist beliefs have been universally held by
people throughout history, eliminationist assaults are not inevitable
unless political leaders decide to act on such beliefs. Goldhagen
denies popular explanations that focus on globalization, social
structures, ethnic conflict or human nature. Among numerous conflicts
and eliminationist assaults Goldhagen discusses in his book, the
Holocaust is probably the most well known eliminationist assault in
history. He argues that eliminationist anti-Semitism among Germans was
very strong “but lay dormant until Hitler and the state he led
initiated, organized, and oversaw the Jews’ mass murder” (p. 21).
Accordingly, he proposes that in order to stop eliminationist
assaults, an elimination prevention program that allows targeted
killings be implemented. His views are controversial and many disagree
with his views. The Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights
Studies (2009), for example, offers structural explanations for
eliminationist assaults. However, a review of various information and
opinion suggests that there is enough support for Goldhagen’s views
also. For instance, Fowler (2004), when addressing to Annual
Conference of the Association of Holocaust Organizations, indicated
that eliminationist assaults are not inevitable. A Congressional bill,
S. 1704 World War II War Crimes Accountability Act of 2009 proposed by
Sen. Nelson is also consistent with Goldhagen’s view that individuals
choose to commit eliminationist assaults and thus should be held
accountable for their actions. Finally, Michael Walzer, author of Just
and unjust wars also supports Goldhagen’s view that targeted killings
can be justified (Miller, 2010).
First, in explaining eliminationism, Goldhagen argues that popular
explanations that focus on structural or historical factors such as
globalization, social structures, ethnic conflict or human nature do
not adequately explain why eliminationist assaults begin. One such
explanation is presented by the Montreal Institute for Genocide and
Human Rights Studies (2009). Its report entitled Mobilizing the will
to intervene: Leadership & action to prevent mass atrocities states
that “[t]he combined impact of poverty and inequality, rapid
demographic growth, nationalism, and climate change drives deadly
violence and threatens international peace and security” (viii).
Goldhagen acknowledges that these underlying structural factors such
as nationalism and ethnic conflict “can motivate people to annihilate
others” (p. 67). However, he correctly asserts that they cannot
explain why some ethnic conflicts lead to eliminationist assaults
while others do not. Also, he argues that the structural explanations
cannot explain the timing of “the various phases of the German’s
eliminationist program against the Jews” (p. 67). As Goldhagen argues,
therefore, the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights
Studies must recognize that structural factors do not inevitably lead
to eliminationist assaults.
In contrast to the Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights
Studies, Fowler (2004), in his address to Annual Conference of the
Association of Holocaust Organizations, indicates that eliminationist
assaults are not inevitable, supporting Goldhagen’s view. In his
speech, Fowler disagrees with Cynthia Ozick, a writer who warns what
has happened once will happen again. Fowler states that the writer
“goes too far, giving to the darkness an inevitability that renders us
powerless, stripping from us for all time any choice.” Goldhagen also
emphasizes individual choices in his book and states that in the case
of the Holocaust, Hitler and the state he led decided to mobilize and
organize those who held anti-Semitic sentiments into a program of
killing.
A Congressional bill, S. 1704 World War II War Crimes Accountability
Act of 2009 proposed by Sen. Nelson is also consistent with
Goldhagen’s view that individuals choose to commit eliminationist
assaults and thus should be held accountable for their actions. This
bill holds “the surviving Nazi war criminals accountable for the war
crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity they committed during
World War II, by encouraging foreign governments to more efficiently
prosecute and extradite wanted criminals.” The idea behind this bill
is that eliminationist assaults such as the Holocaust do not happen
without certain individuals who have “full capacity to do otherwise”
deciding “to slaughter other human beings by the thousands, hundreds
or thousands, or millions” (Goldhagen, p. 69). This bill, therefore,
supports Goldhagen’s argument.
Finally, Michael Walzer, author of Just and unjust wars also supports
Goldhagen’s view that targeted killings can be justified (Miller,
2010). Goldhagen argues that “[t]here is no mass murder or elimination
I know that could not have been avoided had one person or a few people
decided to do otherwise, which they easily could have done” (p. 73).
Based on this view, one of his solution to this problem is to
implement a program that would allow targeted killings and “pay the
substantial rewards…for killing” perpetrators (p. 578). This idea is
controversial, but Walzer (2010) agrees with Goldhagen and states that
these killings “can be justified when the target is a legitimate enemy
who is actively engaged in planning or organizing or carrying out
criminal or terrorist activities” (Miller, 2010).
In conclusion, Goldhagen’s views on why eliminationist assaults begin
and what we can do to stop eliminationist assaults are controversial.
However, a review of various information and opinion suggests that
there is enough support for Goldhagen’s views. The case of the
Holocaust illustrates that eliminationist assaults cannot be solely
explained by structural or historical factors, and since political
leaders and the states they lead are responsible for mass murders, we
need laws and programs that hold these individuals accountable and
allow targeted killings of those perpetrators.
References
Fowler, J. (2004). Education about the Holocaust: How does it help
build a better world? Annual
Conference of the Association of Holocaust Organizations. Retrieved
March 31, 2010,
from http://www.holocaust-trc.org/edu_holocaust.htm
Goldhagen, D. J. (2009). Worse than war: Genocide, eliminationism, and
the ongoing assault on
humanity. New York: Public Affairs.
Miller, M. (2010, February 21). Targeted for death. Los Angles Times.
Retrieved March 31, 2010,
from http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/21/opinion/la-oe-miller-web21-2010feb21
Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (2009).
Mobilizing the will to
Intervene: Leadership & action to prevent mass atrocities. Retrieved
March 31, 2010, from http://migs.concordia.ca/W2I/documents/ENG_MIGS_finalW2IAugust09.pdf
Nelson, Sen. B. (2009). S. 1704 World War II War Crimes Accountability
Act of 2009.
Meagan Judkins
notes, i will use them to finish this project.
Meagan Judkins
#3226 English 101
April 1, 2010
Essay 2 UNFINISHED 1st DRAFT
Native Americans & Genocide
I have chosen the ever sensitive topic on the Native American genocide
brought up in chp. 3 of Goldhagen’s “Worse Than War”. I decided upon
this topic for a variety of reasons, one being that throughout this
course Goldhagen has listed off various instances of genocide, none of
which were questionable to me, they were genocide. Even Goldhagen’s
claim that Truman should be labeled a mass murderer rang, in some way,
rang true to me. When in chp. 3 Goldhagen brings up the United
State’s own shady past, it occurred to me, for reason of society or
otherwise, I assumed genocide to be a thing of other nations, not my
“just” America. It did not occur to me just how much one can be
blinded by their own society. My realization helped to better
understand Goldhagen’s purpose. We as societies and human beings can
be trained to overlook certain truths, become de-sensitized or to
forget certain events completely. As I researched I found that the
view on the treatment of the Native Americans by my European ancestors
isn’t quite as black and white when compared to the Holocaust for
example. There are many factors that were involved in the expulsion
and deaths of the Native Americans by the hand of the settlers. I
intend to delve into these arguments to help better prove Goldhagen’s
point; the mass killing of one society by another is horrific, in most
cases avoidable and more importantly should not be justified. If we
as a species can not properly identify genocide and its dark
associates then we will continue to suffer its consequences. Not only
the poor and weak, but all of us are at risk of genocide. To quote
Elie Wiesel 'The danger lies in forgetting. Forgetting, however,
will not effect only the dead. Should it triumph, the ashes of
yesterday will cover our hopes for tomorrow.'
In Goldhagen’s attempt to explain “why they (genocides) begin” he
suggests that one of the reasons is “nation building”. He uses this
to explain what happened with the Native Americans. Although in “Were
American Indians the Victims of Genocide?” Guenter Lewy feels that it
is not fair to deem the history of the United States in regard to the
treatment of the Native Americans as genocide. Guenter argues that
“In the end, the sad fate of America's Indians represents not a crime
but a tragedy, involving an irreconcilable collision of cultures and
values. Despite the efforts of well-meaning people in both camps,
there existed no good solution to this clash.” After reading
Guenter’s article I do understand his point however, even if most of
the death and suffering came unintentionally from the Europeans, be it
disease or the Franciscan missions in California (acting in what is
thought to be good faith), there was a portion of that death that was
induced by hate, greed and revenge.
Another thing to note is Goldhagen’s view on the many types of
genocide, or eliminationism. It is not just the mass murder of a
people. Going back to chp.1 and 2 in “Worse Than War” we revisit
Goldhagen’s explanation of expulsion. This is when a group is forcibly
moved from their homes or land. We then remember The Indian Removal
Act of 1830 which eventually led to the Trail of Tears. The Trail of
Tears was the relocation of 17,000 Cherokee Indians to reservations in
Oklahoma. Many Native Americans suffered from exposure, disease, and
starvation while en route to their destinations, and many died,
including 4,000 of the 15,000 relocated. It can be argued that the
most significant part of the cruelty was moving the Indians from their
land which Goldhagen constitutes as genocide.
Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_Tears
In God, Greed, and Genocide: The Holocaust Through the Centuries,
Grenke quotes Chalk and Jonassohn with regards to the Cherokee Trail
of Tears that "an act like the Cherokee deportation would almost
certainly be considered an act of genocide today
-Relate to Goldhagens point about Truman.
http://hnn.us/articles/7302.html
BACK TO ARTICLE- To some, however, this is enough in itself to warrant
the term genocide. David Stannard, for instance, states that just as
Jews who died of disease and starvation in the ghettos are counted
among the victims of the Holocaust, Indians who died of introduced
diseases "were as much the victims of the Euro-American genocidal war
as were those burned or stabbed or hacked or shot to death, or
devoured by hungry dogs." As an example of actual genocidal
conditions, Stannard points to Franciscan missions in California as
"furnaces of death."
Disagree?
But then:
Each of these small sections is occupied by an entire family;
cleanliness and tidiness are out of the question: a thrifty peasant
usually has a better--kept cattle--pen.'' Under such conditions
Spanish--introduced diseases ran wild: measles, smallpox, typhoid, and
influenza epidemics occurred and re--occurred, while syphilis and
tuberculosis became, as Sherburne F. Cook once said, 'totalitarian'
diseases: virtually all the Indians were afflicted by them.
http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/AmericanHolocaust/amholocaust-6.html
-pose the question in regard to the Pequot tribe, wouldn’t the
Europeans have defended their ground to the death too?
-delve deeper into “Nation Building”
H.J.RES.46
Title: To acknowledge a long history of official depredations and ill-
conceived policies by the United States Government regarding Indian
tribes and offer an apology to all Native Peoples on behalf of the
United States.
Sponsor: Rep Boren, Dan [OK-2] (introduced 4/30/2009)
MG
Professor O'Connell
English 101
3 March 2010
At the time of President Truman people were very racist. Was dropping
two atomic bombs on Japan an act of racism or was it the truly the
only way to stop the war faster? It was said that dropping two atomic
bombs into Japan during the war was the right decision President Harry
S. Truman did (reviewjournal.com). In the book Worse than war by
Goldhagen, the author claims that "the Japanese were already defeated
and ready to surrender (201)." Is mass slaughtering in any condition
a right solution to take just to stop war faster? Mass slaughter
should never and can never be excused because it goes against humanity
and the rights of innocent lives to life.
In the year 1945 on August 6th President Harry Truman decided to
drop two atomic bombs on the city of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He
dropped one bomb called the "Little Boy" on Hiroshima and after a few
days President Truman decided to drop another atomic bomb called "Fat
Man" on the city of Nagasaki (worldwar2database.com). According to
Goldhagen,eighty-five percent Americans were for the bombing of
innocents because the people being bombed were simply Japanese (201).
In both cities, thousands of innocent people died because of the
decision President Truman did. About seventy five-thousand people died
in Hiroshima and seventy-thousand people in Nagaski. Mass slaughter
can never be excused under the label of "combating" an enemy. If there
is even one single innocent life (and let alone not thousands) it is
not but combat but murder plain and simple. The times of Truman were
clearly racist times. It was a time of when blacks and whites were
segregated because of race.
Genocide, elimination, dictators have surrounded us all over
the world throughout history, even going back to when the Egyptians
enslaved the Hebrews in ancient civilization. In today’s world with
mass weaponry and where conflicts are on a worldwide scale, is it safe
for us and our children to live and be raised in a world where a
person can not live in freedom and personal responsibility. No, we are
in a world where ethnic cleansers and dictators rise, where humans are
being killed or slaughtered just for the way they look, where they
come from, what their religion is?, Is it a world full of war? Is it
humane for a person to kill an innocent child just because their
family is from a different race? Is the only way to keep our
children safe and this world safe from violence, genocide,
elimination, and dictators is to get back at our enemy and kill/
slaughter them? Is murder the solution?
In an interview with Worse than war book writer Daniel J.
Goldhagen, the author claims that in his point of view killing the
perpetrators is the only solution to keep this world safe from
violence and genocide. Some people might think or will think that this
humane and that it is murder. But come to think of it, that seems to
be the only solution to stop genocide. These murderers kill large
amount of innocent people without any conscience. Why? Just because
they dislike the way they look, where they come from, what their
religion is? So, is it fair for people like that to live in the world
while the innocent people get killed and people who are still alive
live in fear that they could be next victims? Should our children be
raised in a world where look matters and there is no freedom. Should
they live in a world where genocide rises and haunt them forever. No,
they should not! Then if the only way to keep this world safe from
these horrific elimationist is to kill them, so let it be. It's better
to kill a person like Osama Bin Laden for example, then for some one
like Osama Bin Laden kill a huge amount of innocent people.
Eliminating one person like that from the world is not killing, but
saving.
The Congressional bill H.CON.RES.7 backs up what has been said in the
previous paragraphs on top. One Agrees one-hundred percent with the
Congressional bill H.CON.RES.7 because it fights for universal freedom
and human rights. It fights for the respect of other races, creeds,
and colors (thomas.loc.gov). It fights against intolerance and
prejudice (thomas.loc.gov). All in all, slaughtering a large amount of
innocent lives no matter what the cause; is extremely inhumane.
References
Worldwar2database.com. Worldwar2database.com, 2007. Web. 3 Apr. 2010.
<http://www.worldwar2database.com/html/atombomb.htm>.
Reviewjournal.com. Las Vegas Review-Journal, 6 Aug. 2005. Web. 3 Apr.
2010. <http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Aug-06-Sat-2005/
opinion/2794069.html>.
Nytimes.com. New York Times, 6 Aug. 1995. Web. 3 Apr. 2010. <http://
www.nytimes.com/1995/08/06/opinion/hiroshima-50-years-later.html?pagewanted=1>.
Thomas.loc.gov. The Library of Congress, 2009. Web. 3 Apr. 2010.
<http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:1:./temp/
~bdVts9:@@@L&summ2=m&|/bss/111search.html|>.
Spiegel.de. Spiegel, 10 Aug. 2009. Web. 3 Apr. 2010. <http://
www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,653938,00.html>.
Rosemarie J.
E2
Rosemarie Johnson
Professor E. O’Connell / English 101, Class 3226
April 2, 2010
To Armenians, war has always been a determinant. When Turkey was
both an empire in decline and an emergent nation, the Armenians, a
small but significant minority in Anatolia, were subjected to two
massacres under the Sultan, who feared the secessionist Armenians
would hasten the demise of his empire. When the Sultan was deposed by
a nationalist, reformist group known as the Young Turks, the political
leaders, Talat and Enver conceived a transformation ideology that
Goldhagen describes as Imperialism at Home (Goldhagen, 2009, p 290).
Talat and Enver planned a “Turkey for the Turks,” an Islamic Nation
that would rid Turkey of its Armenian population, and restore Turkey
once again, to a position of importance. To achieve their
elimionatist aims, Talat and Enver indoctrinated the Turkish people by
“suitable and special” means against the hated Christian infidels.
The military, who were already predisposed to kill civilian women and
children, fell into line with the party position. It only required an
opportune moment for Talat and Enver to put their plans into effect.
The outbreak of World War I provided what Goldhagen claims
is the “best context for undertaking pre-existing eliminationist
desires” (Goldhagen, 2009, p 270). War provided a cover of secrecy
with little threat of intervention. As Talat and Enver explained in a
memorandum to German officials, “The work that is to be done must be
done now; after war it will be too late” (Goldhagen, 2009, p 284).
The Turkish leaders having calculated the right opportunity, and
assessed their chances of implementing their plans with no threat of
intervention from the Allies, passed an emergency legislation to
enforce the roundup of Armenians simultaneously throughout Turkey to
prevent any retaliatory measures. When Henry Morgenthau, US
Ambassador to Constantinople tried to intervene, Talat explained
matter-of-factly that in order to politically restructure Turkey, the
Armenian question had to be settled.
In a prelude to the Nazi Holocaust, for the first time is the history
of modern genocide, technological inventions were adapted into killing
units run by a doctor, concentration camps were built and transport by
box cars utilized. Women and children who were segregated from the
men, were forced to march without food or water to Zeir Yar in the
Syrian Desert. As Goldhagen (2009, p 99) correctly observes,
“volunteers are a characteristic of our age.” Kurds and local
peasants attacked the victims, raping the women and girls, and robbing
the Armenians of their few remaining
possessions. Not content with the depopulation of Anatolia, the cadre
of Turkish loyalists, who were exempt from prosecution at the trial
that convicted Talat and Enver in abstentia, violated the sovereignty
of Russia after the assassination of the Czar, and slaughtered
Armenian refugees once again with impunity. Russia, which was in the
throes of a Bolshevik revolution, and had its own internal problems,
was in no position to retaliate.
In the intervening decades, Armenians sought commemorative
resolutions in Congress with varying degrees of success but
reparations proved elusive. It was never a good time to address the
question of Armenian Genocide. World War II, which might have taken a
very different course if the Allies had seen Hitler as a later-day
Talat or Enver, came and went, and the Cold War took top priority.
The Armenians persisted through US entanglements abroad until the war
on terrorism destroyed Armenian-American’s hopes for reparations or US
recognition of the Armenian Genocide. When Hitler addressed his
generals in 1939, he proved as much a prophet as a politician when he
asked, “Who still talks about the Armenian Genocide?” (Goldhagen, p
34). When
H Res 252, Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian
Genocide Resolution was cleared by the House Committee on Foreign
Affairs for consideration by the full House, Secretary of State,
Hilary Clinton, speaking on behalf of the Obama Administration, urged
that the matter be dropped. Turkey is now a NATO partner, an ally
against terrorism, and most importantly, a significant market for US
munitions and armaments. Expediency may trump justice but the
Armenian lobby promises to make its presence felt in the mid-term
elections, and to hold both President Obama and Secretary of State,
Hilary Clinton to their campaign promises.
References
Watson, I., Labott. E. & Silverleib. A. (2010, March 6). Cable News
Network
Official: Armenian genocide resolution unlikely to get full House
vote
Retrieved March 28, 2010 from http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/06/us.turkey.genocide.debate/index.html
Schiff, Rep. A.B. (2010, March 6) House Resolution 252, (Thomas)
Library of Congress
Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide
Retrieved March 28, 2010 from
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:2:./temp/~bd2XG8::
Gennet. R. (2010, March 12). Huffington Post
Why the Armenian Genocide Matters
Retrieved March 28, 2010 from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robbie-gennet/why-the-armenian-genocide_b_496995.html
Goldhagen, D.J. (2009). Worse Than War
United States: Public Affairs, a member of the Perseus Books Group
SOPHIA
A Short Story
By
Rosemarie Johnson
(E2)
Professor E. O’Connell / English 101, Class 3226
April 2, 2010
It was quiet again today: A pall of silence hung over Haggia Sofia
as if all the bells had been muffled for the funeral of an important
dignitary. If the muzzeins in the minarets hadn’t begun the morning
call to prayer, I would have thought the city of Constantinople
abandoned.
Yesterday my brother was sent home from the army as if he were as
unfit to serve as one of the old Armenian men, who sit all day in the
shade, mumbling into their Turkish coffee about taxes, the good old
days, and the new Turkish leader, Talat. There are times when my
mother puts down her sewing and watches my brother pace up and down on
the terrace with sadness in her eyes that I’ve never seen before, but
my father fills his pipe and jokes about us all having to eat more
couscous and olives. I hate olives! I would much rather have figs or
sweet melons.
This morning my father has sent me on an errand to Gunduz, the olive
merchant. I would have rather wandered through the souks instead,
because I love the smell of sandalwood and rosewater candies. Some
day when I’m grown up, I will buy myself a turquoise necklace and a
tortoiseshell comb to put in my hair, that is if the souks are still
here. As I read the chalked signs on the Armenian bazaars, “Turkey
for the Turks,” I see soldiers helping themselves to the fruit and
sweet cakes as the shopkeepers remain silent.
As I walked slowly down the winding street to Gunduz’ store, I slowed
down not wanting to enter while he was talking to a Turkish customer,
but he must have seen me coming because the old olive merchant excused
himself and snatched my order, muttering under his breath as he
shuffled in old felt slippers to read it in the light. “Three barrels
of olive,” he growled showing his tobacco stained teeth. “Your father
isn’t going into the olive business by any chance?” I didn’t reply
for in truth I was dreading weeks and weeks of eating olives.
In the early evening as I helped my mother sort skeins of silk for
her embroidery, I heard my father and my brother unloading the barrels
of olives. The day seemed like it would never end. No traffic could
be heard in the street, and a strange wind, unusual for April, rattled
the shutters and dimmed the oil lamps, so that dinner was unusually
late.
Mother and I had barely cleared away the meal when a knock came to
the back door. My father jumped up and said “I’ll get it, I’m
expecting someone.” In came my father with a man that I had never
seen before. He was about my father’s age and dressed like a sailor
I had seen in pictures. My father introduced him as Petros, a Greek
fisherman and offered him a drink of wine, which he laughingly
refused. I heard, him say, “there is no time to be lost, my ship
sails with the next tide.” As I peeped around the corner to see what
they were doing, the man asked me “how much do you weight girl?” I
didn’t know, but my mother answered for me as she led me to another
room.
“You must dress warmly my dear, do what your father tells you and no
matter what happens be quiet!” “Petros is here to help us; we must
leave Turkey as it is not safe for us to remain here any longer. We
are going to hide in the empty barrels until we are out to sea. Do
not be afraid, your father has taken care of all the arrangements for
our safe passage. But I need you to be strong and do as you are
told. Do you understand, Sophia?” “Yes, mother, I understand, but
I’m scared.” “I know dear, but trust that God will watch over us in
our journey. Hurry, it’s time to go.”
My father explained to us that we would be hidden in the olive
barrels that I had ordered earlier in the day and that he would go
onboard the ship as a sailor. As we entered the barrels I tried not
to think about the olives and leaving the only home I’ve ever known.
After what seemed like the longest night of my life I heard the
crashing of water in the distance as the lid of my barrel was lifted
off, I saw my father looking down at me with relief. “We are in the
straits of Marmora,” he said as my family crowded to the rails to see
a last glimpse of our beloved Turkey. The Golden Horn of Turkey
seemed to be on fire. Petros said, “we were just in time.” I still
do not understand what the meaning of those signs, “Turks for Turkey”,
as we were Turks too.
Jayne R
English 101
Professor O’Connell
Half of Essay # 2 (Rough Draft Only)
Genocide, according to dictionary.com, is defined as the deliberate
and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or
cultural group. According to Daniel Goldhagen, the author of Worse
than War, genocide is worse than war. Goldhagen states that mass
murders have killed more, perhaps many more, than 100 million people,
a much greater number than have died as a consequence of conventional
military operations. He also believes that genocide however it is
defined, is but one expression of a broader and more fundamental
phenomenon called eliminationism. Eliminationism consists of five
principal forms transformation, repression, expulsion, prevention of
reproduction, or extermination. In the book Worse than War, Goldhagen
goes is depth about genocide which is the last principal form of
eliminationism. Ironically, the last principal form extermination is
also known as the “final solution.”
The prevention of reproduction is a fourth eliminationist act that
according to Goldhagen is the least frequently used. The Nazis
forcibly sterilized many Germans suffering from genuine or imagined
congenital problems. This is due to the German and American beliefs in
eugenics. Eugenics is the practice and study of selective breeding
with the goal of improving the human species. Nazis in Germany were
not the only ones to implement sterilization on people. Goldhagen
states other countries issues, but failed to mention sterilization
that has happened here in the United States. Americans started to
sterilize people in the early 1920’s in Lynchburg, Virginia. It was
decided that people who were “social inadequate or feebleminded”
should be sterilized. This was a way to keep the American race pure of
good genetic traits. In the court case Buck vs. Bell, Bucks attorneys
pleaded to ban sterilization in the United States, but it was not
overturned. Sterilization to this day is not illegal in the United
States.
In 1948, the United Nations General Assembly passed its Convention on
the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, consisting of
nineteen articles. (236) According to Goldhagen genocide is not
properly defined in the convention. This allows the countries to
pretend that genocide is not being committed. He states that the
United States did this with Rwanda, in refusing to call Hutu’s all-out
slaughter Genocide. This is true, it seemed like it was the United
States policy at the time not to intervene in other countries domestic
affairs. The United States did apologize to the people of Rwanda for
not doing enough to stop the slaughter, though an apology is not
enough. The U.S sent a bill to the House of Foreign affairs in regards
to observing the 15th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide in 2009. On
April 6, 1994 an airplane carrying Rwanda’s president was shot down.
The Hutu’s blamed the Tutsi’s and their plan to eliminate the Tutsi’s
came into play. This genocide in Rwanda claimed the lives of over
800,000 people. Bill H. Con. Res. 87 urges all responsible nations to
uphold the principles of the Conventions on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and seek to halt genocide wherever
it may occur. Goldhagen believes that this Convention needs to
redefine genocide such as stating a threshold number of people killed
for it to be considered genocide. This way, nations cannot ignore it
and state there is no “intent” because there is a body count. Also so
genocide can be properly labeled and nations will feel they have the
right to intervene.
References:
Goldhagen, Daniel. Worse Than War. New York, NY 2009. Print.
“Eugenics: Carrie Buck, Virginia’s Test Case”
http://www.hsl.virginia.edu/historical/eugenics/3-buckvbell.cfm
Peace Pledge Union Information: Rwanda 1994
http://www.ppu.org.uk/genocide/g_rwanda.html
Thomas (Library of Congress) H. CON. RES. 87
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:2:./temp/~bdfSDS::|/bss/111search.html|
Sandy B
Professor Ed O’Connell
English 101 # 3226
Essay e2 Draft 1
Friday, April 2, 2010
Inner Violence
“Do you believe that street gangs isn’t a serious issue to put
interest as Nazi?”
A street gang cannot be distinguishing from a group of Nazi.
Daniel Goldhagen discuss in his book Worse Than War many conflicts
that have “lead mass slaughter” (Goldhagen 59) in the last decades of
wars. In chapter 3, he introduced three different conflicts from the
American past history that have lead USA to be influenced in the “mass
slaughter.” In the US history, “American Revolution” and the “National
Building” (59-61) have been for the Americans the best glorious
history events because it’s part of their American patriotism. Until
Goldhagen point out the other part of these history events that these
events have been involve with “mass slaughter” by eliminating the
“Tories, Southerners, and the Native Americans” (62). After US gained
his independency, they expelled away the “Tories” from the America
land or they had to become “Loyal Americans.” The south slavery lead
the American Revolution war between the Northerners vs. the
Southerners that killed many African-Americans and American soldiers.
Then the “Tories” and the “Loyal American” eliminated most of the
Native Americans population in order to get land and gold which they
didn’t care about Native Americans life. These US history events
managed to eliminate sort of group of people by their differences in
race, in culture, and in religion. The same thought happen with “The
Germans” formed the “Holocaust” to eliminated the Jewish. Now the
American society it’s facing with criminal organizations known as
“Street Gangs” that related to homicides, drug trades, and recruitment
of persons. “Street Gangs” are groups of people that attack any other
different groups by their neighborhood, race, culture, and other
stereotype which lead to “Mass slaughter.” People don’t think it isn’t
a big deal, but the numbers of “Street Gangs” are increasing rapidly
because in America the human population and diversities are increasing
rapidly too. The Nazi or Neo-Nazi was formed first with a minor group
of anger Germans that grew quickly the group to almost control the
whole universe, well, “Street Gangs” are minor groups of anger
teenagers that are increasingly by controlling their own
neighborhood. The “Anti-Gang Enforcement Act of 2009” have been
introduced since June 10, 2009 to amends this bill to “predicate gang
crime” and “Project Safe Neighborhoods programs” (Thomas Library).
The Nazi was only one large group that almost dominated the entire
world then they got stop, but street gangs there are numbers of them
around the world it’s impossible to stop. In 2006, the United State
Department of Justice “estimates 30,000 gangs, with 800,00 members,
impacting 2,500 communities across the United
States” (dosomething.org). The number of gangs continues to rise
rapidly especially in school areas. As Goldhagen says, “individual–
centered...located mass murder in the psychological mechanism of the
individual that impel people to slaughter others” (Goldhagen 65) like
many street gangs started because of their personal anger issues and
wanted to get power by mass slaughtering other members from different
street gang and reserving neighborhoods as their territory.
Reference:
Betty M. Chemers is Director of OJJDP’s Research and Program
Development Division. James H. Burch is Program Manager in the
Special Emphasis Division. http://www.dosomething.org/tipsandtools/11-facts-about-gangs.
Goldhagen, D.J. Worse Than War. 2009. (59-65).
H.R.2815. “Anti-Gang Enforcement Act of 2009.” Rep Rooney, Thomas J.
[FL-16] (introduced 6/10/2009).
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:9:./temp/~bdKThK:@@@L&summ2=m&|/bss/d111query.html|.
Scott Zimmer
Scott Zimmer
Mr. O Connell
English 101 - 3226
Apr 2, 2010
Essay e2 1/2
The question of what qualifies as eliminationism and - by extension – genocide, has been redefined by Daniel Goldhagen. In his book “Worse than War” (2009) he seeks to expand it beyond the obvious examples and into the areas of our history and present that we have overlooked. The practice of eliminationism is explained by Goldhagen “When unwilling to come to some modus vivendi, groups, people, and polities deal with populations they have conflict with or see as a danger that must be neutralized by seeking to eliminate them or to destroy their capacity to inflict putative harm.“ Before this concept was only applied to the obvious atrocities of Hitler, Stalin, etc. Goldhagen says that eliminationism as it is does not depend on the amount of deaths, nor which side the offending party is on. The deaths do not have to be in the millions for it to then be considered “bad enough” and genocide. That President Truman ordered atomic bombs dropped on two Japanese cities full of civilians during World War 2 has not been labeled genocide before. Historians have defended President Truman’s action as necessary, that it was a military action that if not done would have resulted in many more deaths. Goldhagen labels it as what it is, eliminationsim. That hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians were killed that posed no militaristic threat to the U.S. can’t be labeled otherwise. And with this label he extends it up to modern times to include the activities of dictators and political parties that would have escaped such classification before.
The war that has been fought in Iraq and Afghanistan has been fought for various reasons, some which have been accomplished. In this war there has been many instances of eliminationist tactics by the parties involved on either side, these tactics are covered over by the stated intentions of the political parties involved.
Scott Zimmer
Scott Zimmer
Mr. O Connell
English 101 - 3226
Apr 2, 2010
E2 Short Story 1/2
Isiah walked to the creek. It was low, but it still flowed.
It was a habit. A bad habit, but one he didn’t mind. The creek still had water. The water still looked good and it reminded him of when he was too young to piece together much. The water tasted good. He wasn’t supposed to drink it, but would he start now with that? How far would that line of thought take him?
He wasn’t bothered by the time it would take him to get back to the shop. He was too necessary to be disposed of. He could sit here, and he didn’t mind if they sat there, waiting. He took another gulp, it went down, and something like satisfaction came up. And the boots plodding in came in late enough to let him squeeze all the pleasure out of it.
“Isiah.” asks the man from behind.
“Private Brown.”
“You know my name. Use it.”
“Mike.” A simple name, boring, typically American. Why not just be John? Or maybe just Mike - Mike Wayne. Brown was better.
“You piss me off. You know that? I think you do and I think you don’t mind liking it.”
Isiah could hear the strap of the rifle as it rubbed against rough denim. He turned away from the creek, the empty valley, and the sun that was in his eye. The rifle was on Private Browns’ shoulder.
Private Brown looked healthy, he didn’t even look mad. In fact if Isiah liked speaking English he might have started up a conversation with him about now. But he chose to stand there instead.
“You know you can’t come down here anymore. It’s not safe. And that water isn’t safe either. Why am I telling you this again? “
“The water is safe, there is nothing wrong with the valley, that wasn’t hear before that is. But I understand.”
Meagan Judkins
my peers, i didnt see anyone else post their story until the gentleman
prior to this.
Meagan Judkins
English 101 #3226
April 2, 2010
Short Story 1/2 done
I remember being confused most of the time. I remember feeling out
of place. But mostly I remember feelings of nervousness. My mother
always seemed to be shouting at my father. Her claims rang true to
me. Why had we come here? I knew that things were bad in back in
England, but bad enough for us to flee? To leave grandma and
grandpa? “This land will bring us freedom! This land represents a
new life! How can you not see that?” my father shouted. He seemed
increasingly tense with every passing day. This made me nervous.
There was so much I didn’t understand.
I remember the savages were often ill. I asked my father once, “why
do we recover yet they perish?” my father, in his stoic way, replied
“it is divine intervention.” It did not occur to me in my tender age
just how frightening this statement was. I remember there was a time
when I was allowed to play with the other savage children my own age.
Although we weren’t able to speak much to each other, I quickly
learned that words were unnecessary when exploring my new lush
surroundings. I liked the way of the Indians. They seemed wise, even
the children. Sometimes the men would intimidate me. They had hard
faces and although they seemed to interact positively with men like my
father, they also seemed ready to pounce at the slightest misstep.
It was 1830 when I heard that the Indians would be moved west to a
place called Oklahoma.
Laura C.
Laura Cortes
English 101 Section 3226
Professor O’Connell
Genocide has been a problem the world has faced many times over during
the existence of mankind. Throughout history, leaders have planned,
organized, and executed mass murders based on a deep belief that they
are doing it for the betterment of their community or out of thirst
for power and control. Many groups of people have been exterminated
for various reasons; most examples that are commonly seen are those
being murdered because of the religious beliefs they have or for being
considered an unwanted and impure minority in the community.
Eliminationism as Goldhagen calls it, has had such an impact in the
history of humanity we can even see multiple examples of it in the old
and new testaments of the bible. One group that has suffered through
every possible example that Goldhagen presents in his novel “Worse
Than War” about what eliminationism is, has to be the Jewish people.
From having their children murdered to reduce the size of their
population, being forced into slavery, being obligated to adapt to a
new belief system or dying for the old one and even being completely
annihilated, there is no doubt that Jewish people have not usually
been welcomed in most places with open arms. Although biblically
considered the “chosen people” of God, they have been treated as
anything but such. In “Worse Than War” Daniel Goldhagen frequently
uses the example of Hitler and the Holocaust as a prime example of how
detrimental and catastrophic genocide is.
When the Jews were invited to come live in the prosperous land of
Egypt it definitely seemed like a huge blessing at the time and for a
very long time it was. Unfortunately when the ruler who had accepted
them with open arms died and a new one took his place, he didn’t
particularly find this ever growing group of people very beneficial
for his land or people. It is in a situation like this where we can
observe a mass murderer being born. For pharaoh enslaving the Jews
wasn’t enough to feel as though he was controlling them he went as far
as murdering all children to stop the growth of the population. The
Spanish Inquisition once again brought upon the Jewish people a time
of immense suffering. Not only did they have to suffer the humiliation
of having to give up their cherished beliefs in order not to be
killed, regardless of all that they were still expulsed and even
murdered. It was the ignorant belief at the time that somehow Jews
would corrupt newly converted Christians or even existing Christians
into betraying what they were taught.
It is evident that as Goldhagen describes in chapter 3, the Jewish
community has been the victim of what he calls “nation-building.” It
has been the misfortune of most Jews over the centuries to live under
many leaders that for one reason or another begin to see them as a
huge threat. This of course naturally turns into a desire to expulse
or exterminate them in order for the nation to properly “progress” as
the leader thinks will occur if he gets rid of the threat.
Notes: This rough draft is pretty rough as you guys can see. All my
ideas are pretty much here but just expressed in a rather vague way. I
do have referrences that I plan on using but I haven't just yet and
that's why I did not include them. I apologize for posting so late,
but I was out of town and didn't realize this was due last Friday.
Laura C.
English 101 Section 3226
Professor O’Connell
E2 Short Story 1/2
How could I not feel bitter? I sit alone in this dimly lit room and
wonder if God hears our cries at all or if He even cares anymore. My
mother sees the anger in my eyes grow with each passing day, she tries
to comfort me by always reminding me that everything happens for a
reason and that God never abandons us when we need Him most. What a
joke… Where has he been this whole time? I can say I’m fortunate
because my family and I escaped before the worse could happen but I
have no idea what has become of everyone else.
“David” I whisper in my loneliness. Time has almost ceased to exist
since we went into hiding like frightened little mice. “Be grateful!”
I tell myself in a louder forceful voice. But I’m not, why should I
live while all the others die. And David… What has become of my
beloved David? So many thoughts flooding my mind. Can insanity be
worse than death?
“Rebecca!” My mother yells in a whisper. I stare at her as though I
can see beyond her entire bean. “You are doing it again! Are you
trying to get us killed?!” She angrily asks pressing her hand against
her forehead as she so often does when frustrated.
“What am I doing?” I reply as though I really don’t know. “What do you
mean…” She pauses to take a deep breath. “You are “thinking” too loud
again.” Her tone sounds like defeat. The moment of silence between us
seems like forever. “I’m sorry.” Then I turn away. I hear her walk
back up the stairs. The thoughts return. Hours pass, I’m not sure how
many but I’ve been down in this filthy basement alone the entire time.
The family that took us in is kind enough to let us live upstairs most
of the time, but for their safety and our own some nights we are
obligated to sleep on the cold floor of this damp room.
The door at the top of the door slams open and I am startled awake. My
father, mother and brother are running as though they have seen a
ghost. But I know it isn’t a ghost. It is a very real monster coming
to get us.
Laura C.
Meagan Judkins
I can only see notes on my essay, not on my short story, am i missing
something?
Meagan Judkins
before i post questions. i found my short story....