Suchergebnisse

Political violence does not end with the last death. A common feature of mass murder has been the attempt at destroying any memory of victims, with the aim of eliminating them from history. Perpetrators seek not only to eliminate a perceived threat, but also to eradicate any possibility of alternate, competing social and national histories. In his timely and important book, Unchopping a Tree, Ernesto Verdeja develops a critical justification for why transitional justice works. He asks, "What is the balance between punishment and forgiveness? And, "What are the stakes in reconciling?"

Political violence does not end with the last death. A common feature of mass murder has been the attempt to destroy any memory of victims, with the aim of erasing them from history. Perpetrators seek not only to eliminate a perceived threat but also to eradicate any possibility of alternate, competing social and national histories. In this timely and important book, Ernesto Verdeja develops a critical justification for political reconciliation. He asks the questions "What is the balance between punishment and forgiveness?" and "What are the stakes in reconciling?"

Developing a normative theory of reconciliation that differs from prevailing approaches, Verdeja outlines a concept that emphasizes the importance of shared notions of moral respect and tolerance among adversaries in transitional societies. Drawing from reconciliation efforts around the world—and interviews with people involved in such endeavors—Verdeja debates how best to envision reconciliation while taking into account the very significant practical obstacles that confront such efforts.

Unchopping a Tree addresses the core concept of respect at four different social levels—political, institutional, civil society, and interpersonal—to explain the promise and challenges of securing reconciliation and broader social regeneration.

Critical genocide studies has emerged as an important strand of scholarship devoted to interrogating the core assumptions of the field of genocide studies. Drawing on these developments, this article outlines a critical approach to modern atrocity prevention that is self-reflective, dialectical, multivalent, and anti-teleological. Part I provides a brief overview of contemporary prevention. Part II elaborates the four elements of the proposed critical approach toward prevention. Part III applies this approach to examine several important issue areas in current prevention work: the importance of global and regional contextualization; securitization and state power; conceptualizations of political violence; the status of expert knowledge; and, the place of civil society in prevention. The article is partly based on interviews with atrocity prevention practitioners.

Critical genocide studies has emerged as an important strand of scholarship devoted to interrogating the core assumptions of the field of genocide studies. Drawing on these developments, this article outlines a critical approach to modern atrocity prevention that is self-reflective, dialectical, multivalent, and anti-teleological. Part I provides a brief overview of contemporary prevention. Part II elaborates the four elements of the proposed critical approach toward prevention. Part III applies this approach to examine several important issue areas in current prevention work: the importance of global and regional contextualization; securitization and state power; conceptualizations of political violence; the status of expert knowledge; and, the place of civil society in prevention. The article is partly based on interviews with atrocity prevention practitioners.

This article presents a theory of reconciliation for postcolonial settler societies. It asks: what are the scope, substance and limitations of a normative theory of political reconciliation for historical wrongs in these societies? The article begins with an assessment of communitarian and agonistic theories and then outlines an alternative based on mutual respect, which includes three core elements: critical reflection, symbolic and material recognition, and political participation. The case of the United States and Native Americans is used to illustrate this alternative theory.

Over the past two decades, scholars have generated a large and sophisticated literature on genocide. Nevertheless, there are still several research areas that require further work. This article outlines a research agenda that analyzes the conditions under which genocide is likely to occur, the multilevel processes of violent escalation and de-escalation, and the ways in which these processes are shaped by, connect to, reinforce, accelerate and impede one another. I argue that scholars should 1) model elite and follower radicalization processes by disaggregating genocidal "intent" over time and space, and exploring how intent emerges rather than taking it as pre-given. Doing so will permit researchers to 2) situate genocide research within a broader context of political violence in order to understand how they are related temporally and spatially, and to decenter analytical domains beyond the standard country level and single victim group in order to gain insight into the dynamics of genocide, including how perpetrator policies vary by group; 3) draw on recent advances in microanalyses of civil war to theorize about subnational patterns of violence diffusion; 4) move beyond problematic contrasts between ideology and rationality to analyze how ideologies frame the strategic choices "available" to genocidal elites.