Psychosocial roots of genocide: risk, prevention, and intervention

Abstract

Staub (1989), Rummel (1996), and others (e.g. Hirsch, 1995; Kressel, 1996; Stanton, 1998) 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.