Karl Marx, a conflict theorist, would likely describe the tragedy in Rwanda as a result of a power struggle, steaming from a class system. In Karl Marx’s time, he critiqued the class system containing the proletariat (poor) and bourgeoisie (rich). Marx argued this system allows for one group of people to oppress another group. While he was speaking to classes distinguished by material assets, his two group class system is similar to the two group class system in Rwanda: Hutus and Tutsis. Although, the distinction between the Hutus and Tutsis are uncontrollable characteristics like heritage and physical features. Karl Marx and other conflict theories would look at who is in power and why they are oppressing those not in power. As the name suggests, …show more content…
A postmodernist would see the social crisis as a result form being marginalized. The movie gave a powerful scene when the reporter says if he released the film of the killings, families would watch it in their living room, pause to comment on the sadness of the situation, and go on with their lives. The oppression is a result of all voices not being equal. The Hutus feel as if they need power to be heard. Diversity was also not accepted as in Rwanda, resulting in a limited view. This limited view lead Hutus to believe that you needed to belong to the Hutu family, or you were a “cockroach” that needed to be smashed. Jean Baudrillard, a postmodernist, said, “People become what they consume.” In one sense, the Hutu citizens of Rwanda were consuming what the radio told them. The radio would spread lies about the Tutsis families, promote an agenda of extinguishing all of the Tutsis, dehumanize the Tutsis in any way possible. Because of this information, a postmodernist might suggest the Hutus were misguided in their actions. It is however, hard to say exactly what the perspective of a postmodern social theorist would be, because postmodernism focuses on the conversations of what happened, rather than the answers. Before this class, I had never heard about the tragedy of the Rwandan Holocaust. This points to the marginalization of the Rwandan people that still exists
Though the event occurred almost twenty-one years ago, the Rwandan genocide of 1994 has prompted much discussion about what truly caused the deaths of an estimated 800,000 civilians. Scott Straus, a political scientist and author of The Order of Genocide: Race, Power, and War in Rwanda, makes the claim that it is very difficult to precisely identify what began the genocide in Rwanda for a number of reasons, and also comments that many of the beliefs in regards to the causes and evolution of genocide in Rwanda are incomplete. In his book, Straus focuses on three main aspects: to look closely at the local dynamics of the genocide, to produce an assessment of explanations, and finally to develop a theory that would explain the genocide in Rwanda.
Many innocent lives were taken during the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. Philip Gourevitch’s “We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will Be Killed with Our Families,” explains why the genocide that occurred in Rwanda should not be written off in history as just another tribal disagreement. This book entails the stories of Gourevitch and the people he interviewed when he went to Rwanda. These stories express what people went through during the genocide, the loss they saw, the mass killings they tried to hide from, and the history of what led to the Rwandan genocide. Rwanda’s colonial past did influence the development of the genocide in Rwanda. The hatred between the Hutus and the Tutsis had been going on for many years before the genocide.
In the early 1990s, Rwanda had one of the highest population densities in Africa. The Rwandan population was comprised of Hutus, who made up 85% of the population while the Tutsis made up 14% of the population which “dominated the country,” (BBC , 2014). Before the Rwandan genocide the Hutus and the Tutsis ethnic groups got along with each other. They shared everything. They shared the same language, culture, and nationality. They were even intermarrying between the two groups. Most of the time they worked on farms together. The Hutus were usually in the field and the Tutsis were usually the landowners. When European colonists moved in they took the privileged and “educated intermediaries” and put them into two groups, governors and the governed.
Africa has been an interesting location of conflicts. From the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea to the revolutionary conflict in Libya and Egypt, one of the greatest conflicts is the Rwandan Genocide. The Rwandan Genocide included two tribes in Rwanda: Tutsis and Hutus. Upon revenge, the Hutus massacred many Tutsis and other Hutus that supported the Tutsis. This gruesome war lasted for a 100 days. Up to this date, there have been many devastating effects on Rwanda and the global community. In addition, many people have not had many acknowledgements for the genocide but from this genocide many lessons have been learned around the world.
Class difference by Karl Marx is well described in his Conflict Theory. “Social conflict theory is a macro-oriented paradigm in sociology that views society as
According to Marx class is determined by property associations not by revenue or status. It is determined by allocation and utilization, which represent the production and power relations of class. Marx’s differentiate one class from another rooted on two criteria: possession of the means of production and control of the labor power of others. The major class groups are the capitalist also known as bourgeoisie and the workers or proletariat. The capitalist own the means of production and purchase the labor power of others. Proletariat is the laboring lower class. They are the ones who sell their own labor power. Class conflict to possess power over the means of production is the powerful force behind social growth.
The Rwandan Genocide. A horrible nightmare for many nations, but mainly for Rwanda. After a potential peace treaty going south, the Hutus, viciously murdered close to 1 million Tutsi. The United Nations and the United States stayed out of Rwanda in fear that another Somalia may take place. This paper is taking a look at the sociological ways that explain the chain events. In the tragedy of Rwanda, there have been different sayings of what was the official cause. In this particular case with the Rwandan Genocide the political aspect, the racial divide, and the theory of conflict are the main causes of this genocide.
It is difficult to understand how people can become so ruthless to slaughter innocent people, simply because they are of a different social group. Before the Rwandan Genocide, the greatest known genocide was the Holocaust. While this genocide doesn’t have nearly as many victims, it became known as the fastest yet destructive genocide in history. It is estimated that more than 6 men, women, and children were murdered every minute of every hour of every day in the three month duration of the genocide (“Statistics”). It is hard to imagine how the victims and survivors watched their families and children die right in front of them, while also suffering from physical pain themselves. They were dehumanized, and treated like animals. Philip Gourevitch captured the unmaterialized truth about genocide in his book by interviewing witnesses of the genocide. One of the most terrifying experiences read in the book was about an Adventist complex where thousands of Tutsis were taking shelter. They were informed they would be attacked and told to prepare for their own deaths. Samuel Ndagijimana described the scene to Gourevitch, saying, “We heard shots and cries and they chanted the slogan ‘Eliminate the Tutsis’” (Gourevitch 29). Even Gourevitch could not believe how so much hatred could trigger a group of people to slaughter a different
The film follows the story of a Hutu man, Paul Rusesabagina, as he housed over 1200 Tutsi refugees in his hotel. The Hotel De Milles Collines, a five-star resort in the capital city Kigali, was a safe haven for several hundred Tutsis during the 100 days of slaughter in Rwanda. The purpose of this paper is to focus on the differences between the film Hotel Rwanda and the reality of the Rwandan genocide. I will seek to determine how accurately the film draws from history and how much of the film is fiction. For this essay I will first look at the history of the relations between the Hutus and the Tutsis dating back to the 1950s, so to grasp the background of the country.
The Rwandan genocide occurred due to the extreme divide between two main groups that were prevalent in Rwanda, the Hutu and the Tutsi. When Rwanda was first settled, the term Tutsi was used to describe those people who owned the most livestock. After the Germans lost control over their colonies after World War I, the Belgians took over and the terms Hutu and Tutsi took on a racial role (Desforges). It soon became mandatory to have an identification card that specified whether or not an individual was a Hutu, Tutsi, or Twa (a minority group in Rwanda). The Tutsi soon gained power through the grant of leadership positions by the Belgians. Later on when Rwanda was tying to gain indepe...
For over half a century of Rwanda’s history the Tutsi’s and Hutu tribes had internal struggles for power. It was fueled by ethnic discrimination and persecution caused by the European occupation. During world war one in 1894, Belgium occupied Rwanda as a colony and separated the Tutsi’s and Hutu’s into different classes. The Tutsi’s and Hutu’s were two people who shared the same past, they were cattle herders who were separated by name in how many cattle one owned. The Tutsi’s owned the most cattle and everyone else was Hutu. They used to live peacefully and there was no organized crime, judgment or clashes between the people. But when the Europeans first settled in Rwanda, and they saw these cattle herding people, they established the category Tutsi and Hutu as racial roles. The Germans saw the Tutsi’s as having more European characteristics like lighter skin or straighter noses and that was the first step in causing the tragedy that was to come.
The Rwandan genocide slid under the radar causing thousands of Tutsi to be slaughtered. To start, the term genocide will be defined, the origin will be explained, along with the eight generic stages. In Rwanda, the genocide inflicted immense division of the country and the world. The actions took by the Hutu classified these killings as a genocide, according the these following stages. The Rwandan Genocide didn’t come to a conclusion until the relief came to the Tutsi civilization. The Rwandan genocide which was initiated by the Hutu government, was because of the distrust of the Hutu towards the Tutsi, believing they were out setting a uprising to gain power over the Hutu.
On April 6, 1994, Rwanda experienced a period of great turmoil as thousands of people fell victim to the horrors of the Rwandan genocide. The main targets of the genocide were Tutsis and Hutu moderates. Though the main cause of the genocide was a conflict between two ethnicities, the genocide was also fueled by political factors and social conditions. Rwanda is the smallest sub-Saharan country with a population of about 7 million inhabitants. Although the indigenous peoples of Rwanda are the Twa, they are now the minority. 90% of Rwanda's population is comprised of Hutus, and the rest of the population's majority consists of Tutsi people. Hatred between the two ethnic groups had begun in the pre-colonial era, which was long before the 20th century. The gruesome events of the genocide lasted for 100 days, and during this time many fatalities occurred. The crimes committed during the genocide were fueled by vengeance and hatred. Many places such as schools, churches, and hospitals were used as a place of refuge for vast populations of Tutsi victims; however, these places often became the main sites for mass murder. These events of mass murder simply raised tensions between the Hutus and the Tutsis allowing a numerous amount of hate crimes to continue. The influence of Hutu radio stations and the media played a key role in encouraging Hutus to target Tutsi civilians and the Hutu moderates. The genocide sparked a world response, and it required UN involvement. Because of this event, many people fell victim to violence and brutality at the hands of radicals and extremists.
Like the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide of 1994 was an act of extreme violence that involved all people from every age group and social standing. After the assassination of President Habyarimana, a Hutu, the Hutu population, led by the Hutu-dominated government, decided on the extermination of the Hutu population. In around 100 days, hundreds of thousands of Tutsi lives were lost to their Hutu neighbors in one of the most violent bloodsheds ever to see Africa. While the forms of rationalization may differ in some ways, there was still a level of Christian involvement in the Genocide. The question is, how could Rwanda, one of the most Christian nations in Africa, be a place of such violence and distaste for human life? What factors
Most people haven’t heard of Rwanda so let me fill you in. It’s a little country in the Eastern- South of Africa. Before I get into the messy bits, let’s go back in time, Africa had been colonized by European powers. After that, Europe decided to separate Africa into 50 equal countries, within that Rwanda was formed. Germany took charge of this country but not long after Belgium took it from their hands, Belgium decided to characterized the Rwandans. There were 3 groups: Hutus, Tutsis, and Twas. The Tutsis were favored due to their more “white man” features. Hutus were always taken for granted and were never allowed to be official leaders. After generations of this happening the Hutus decided to strike back and kill of the Tutus, thus beginning