Writing
Summary of Reading
This paper examines ethnocentrism as a source of conflict. The author argues that ethnicity is a unique bond that binds together people who believe to share a common culture, heritage, religion, and language. It is clear from this article that it is difficult for a person to be absorbed into an ethnicity that they do not belong. According to the author, even a prolonged understanding of a given ethnicity does not adequately co-apt an individual to a given ethnicity. This article cites William Graham Sumner as the father of the term ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism refers to the perception by one ethnic group that its culture and way of life is superior in comparison to other ethnicities. Many nations across the world have grappled with ethnocentrism because it threatens nation cohesiveness (Cozic, 1994, p.27). Multicultural nations have more than one ethnicity. This means that an ethnocentric mindset by its population might result to interethnic tensions. Internal interethnic tensions have often resulted to full-scale wars across nations. Some ethnic groups have viewed other ethnicities as being an impediment to their progress. This article attributes interethnic tensions to the ethnic conflicts that have been witnessed in nations such as Kosovo, Liberia, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
According to the article, interethnic tensions in many third world nations were not existent prior to colonization. This article takes the positions that colonial powers increased the magnitude of interethnic conflicts by favoring some ethnicities compared to the other. Colonialists in most cases tended to empower some ethnicities by giving them western education and rewarding them with positions of power. This often spurred hatred and dislike from other ethnic groups that did not benefit from colonialism. A good contemporary example of an incidence whereby some ethnicities were empowered at the detriment of others was in Rwanda. The Belgians who colonized the country tended to favor the Tutsi compared to their counterparts the Hutu. Many historians have argued that one of the main reasons that the main reasons why the Belgians favored the Tutsi was because they believed that this ethnicity had a heritage in the horn of Africa whose descendants were considered as being more European. This created a scenario whereby the Tutsi received higher levels of education compared to their counterparts and ascended to power in Rwanda. Considering that the Tutsi were the minority in Rwanda, constituting less that 15 percent of the country’s population, their continued empowerment and ascendancy to power did not auger well with the Hutu (Mamdani, 2001, p.49). This spurred heightened tensions within the two ethnicities which eventually resulted in the Rwanda Genocide of 1994. This dough tails to the idea of the realist conflict theory.
In the realist conflict theory, this article explains that different ethnicities are in constant competition for power and influence in the territories that they occupy. Using the contemporary example of the Hutu and the Tutsi in Rwanda, the Hutu also wanted to ascend to power like their counterparts. However, the curtailment of this power ascendancy by the Belgians on the Hutu was perceived as a threat to the progress of the Hutu (Groff, 2008, p.44). Therefore, there was a need for the Hutu to respond violently to this arrangement of society. The author of this article introduces another important term that helps describe interethnic conflicts. The term Scape goat has been used to refer to the ethnicity that is associated with the problems or inequalities facing a given ethnic group.
In the case of Rwanda, the Hutu viewed the Tutsi as the Scape goat. The Hutu perceived the Tutsi as being the beneficiaries of the system. This article refers to this concept as social causality. The ethnic groups, which perceive themselves as being disadvantaged, view the Scape goat as being the source of their atrocities. Social causality creates a scenario whereby the dehumanization of the Scape Goat is viewed as being the only option to bring equality within the society (Cottam, 2010, p.205). However, the fact remains that the dehumanization of the Scape Goat does not result into equality. Instead, the casualties of the dehumanization process come from both warring ethnicities. Many people die during ethnic conflicts because ethnicities cannot stand by and allow rival ethnicities to dehumanize them. This article points out that in the case of Rwanda the Hutu militia referred to the Tutsi as cockroaches (Landis, 2012, p.61). This assertion justified the killing of the Tutsi by the Hutu. However, it is worth noting that in the midst of the interethnic crashes between the two ethnicities both Hutus and the Tutsi lost their lives (Avruch, 1998, p. 32).
In conclusion, the author of this article introduces the idea that social causality as a vice in society in some cases creates a situation whereby group think aces rationality and personal values. The pressure and emotions that surround social causality often prompt individuals to act in a way that is contrary to what they believe to be rational and just. This article points out that the researches that have been conducted over the years have found out that the perpetuators of ethnic violence do not view their acts as being wrong (Cottam, 2010, p.207). Due to the emotions surrounding their perception of social causality they view their actions as being justified.
Personal Reflection
I believe that ethnic conflict is a phenomenon that can be avoided through government initiatives. Elements that lead to ethnic tensions such as resources and power should be equally distributed to make sure that causes of conflict are avoided. I also believe that colonial powers are to a large responsible for the ethnic tensions that have resulted across the world especially in post-colonial Africa. The westernization of favored ethnic groups and terming other ethnicities as savages can be attributed to ethnic conflicts in African nations today. Some of the status quo that characterizes many African nations was created by the colonialists.
I wish to explore the Darfur Conflict in the Sudan. I would like to look at the factors that led to this conflict that result to the death of hundreds of people. I also wish to look at whether the separation of North and South Sudan has led to the end of ethnic conflict in the Sudan. I believe that this topic will adequately cover the different theories associated with ethnic conflict.
References
Avruch, K. (1998). Culture & conflict resolution. Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Cottam, M. L. (2010). Introduction to political psychology. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cozic, C. P. (1994). Nationalism and ethnic conflict. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press.
Groff, R. (2008). Revitalizing causality: realism about causality in philosophy and social science. London: Routledge.
Landis, D. (2012). Handbook of ethnic conflict international perspectives. New York: Springer.
Mamdani, M. (2001). When victims become killers: colonialism, nativism, and the genocide in Rwanda. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
