The Eight Stages of Genocide

The eight stages of genocide | Abagond
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/the-eight-stages-of-ge...
Abagond
500 words a day on whatever I want
Feeds:
Posts
Comments
The eight stages of genocide

Thu 16 Apr 2009 by abagond
The eight stages of genocide (1996) are the steps that every genocide goes through. Gregory
Stanton, who had studied the genocide in Cambodia for the American State Department, noticed this
when he saw the genocide in Rwanda unfold in just the same way. He wrote up his findings shortly
afterwards in 1996 and now, before our eyes, the genocide in Darfur is following the very same steps in
the very same order:
1. Classification: the division into us and them. This is extremely common in human society. While it
is not a sign that genocide is on the way, genocide would be impossible without an us and a them.
2. Symbolization: words or symbols are applied to the them: the yellow star that Jews had to wear
under Hitler, skin colour, classifications put on ID cards. Again, this is common and is not a sign of
genocide, but genocide cannot proceed unless there is some sure way to tell people apart.
1 of 14
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
3. Dehumanization: the them become pariahs: they are seen as less than human, as animals or a
kind of disease. The Tutsis in Rwanda were called cockroaches before they were killed by the
thousands. Killing them was no longer murder it was just ridding the country of something bad.
Dehumanizing words, like gook and nigger, belong to this step. Unlike the first two steps,
dehumanization is not common! It is the first sick step on the road to genocide.
4. Organization: To kill people in large numbers you need organization: leaders, followers, a chain of
command, duties, meetings, guns, training, hate speeches. Sometimes it is the government that
does this, but often it is a paramilitary group that seems to be acting on its own (but which the
government is either secretly helping or at least turning a blind eye towards). The killing might start at
this stage, but not on a huge scale. Examples: the SS in Nazi Germany, the Ku Klux Klan in
America, the janjaweed in Darfur.
5. Polarization: The first people killed in any genocide are not the pariahs themselves but those in the
mainstream who speak up for them. The voices in the middle are silenced through threats, arrests
or even killings. Now the message of hate goes unchallenged.
6. Preparation: the pariahs are often separated from the rest of the country into ghettos, camps,
reservations or some undesirable part of the country. Their property is taken from them (they are not
coming back!). This step leaves them defenceless.
7. Extermination: the mass killings, the genocide proper.
8. Denial: The leaders of the genocide downplay it or tell complete lies and say there never was a
genocide. As long as they are in denial the killings can go on.
America has gone through all eight steps with Native Americans, arguably up to step 6 with JapaneseAmericans and at least as far as step 4 with blacks. Now you know why nigger is a bad word.
Stanton says that genocide is preventable by stopping it at one of the early stages.
See also:
genocide (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/04/22/genocide/)
Darfur (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2007/03/30/darfur/)
The genocide in southern Sudan (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/the-genocidein-southern-sudan/)
Hitler (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2006/08/03/hitler/)
The war in Gaza (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/the-war-in-gaza/)
The Delaware (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/the-delaware/)
The Sioux today (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/07/28/the-sioux-today/)
Jim Crow (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/jim-crow/)
Posted in genocide | 51 Comments
51 Responses
2 of 14
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
3 of 14
La Reyna
on Fri 17 Apr 2009 at 23:47:34
Exactly! People visiting this website need to read this. This could be a step to improve racial
and ethnic relations in this country.
La Reyna
abagond
on Sat 18 Apr 2009 at 06:52:54
I agree. America has committed genocide in the past and is fully capable of doing it again.
The dehumanizing mindset is still there. Most Americans do not understand how dangerous
and sick some of ther feelings about race are.
A Sudanese
on Sat 18 Apr 2009 at 20:11:39
Hello, I am a fan of this blog and I enjoy your posts very much but I disagree with your
assertation that the Darfur situation is a genocide. It is most certainly is not a genocide and
that is a myth of the white American/pro-Israeli media. White America has not told the truth
before, so why would it do so now?
Im sure that must have confused you, that post, but here is a short article that will explain the Darfur
situation: http://sudanwatch.blogspot.com/2006/05/strategic-victimhood-in-sudan-by-alan.html . And
even if it were a genocide, the only individuals who could be accused of carrying out genocide, it is
the (very black) Darfur Rebels who are killing other Darfuris for simply belonging to a tribe of their
other Darfur Rebel enemy.
And there are no Arabs in Sudan except for the Rashaida and Hassaniya tribes! They are nomads
the mix-raced Nubians dont really respect the mix-raced of Sudan, the half Nubian/ half Arab hold
all the power.
A White Guy
on Sat 18 Apr 2009 at 21:45:55
A Sudanese Says:
It is most certainly is not a genocide and that is a myth of the white American/pro-Israeli
media.
This sentence alone makes me suspicious of your motives and credibility.
http://www.globalsolutions.org/issues/arab_muslim_silence_darfur_conflict_deafening
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31378
A Sudanese
To A White Guy:
on Sat 18 Apr 2009 at 22:05:59
It is not a genocide Darfuris are most certainly dying, but it is not a genocide.
Are you not suspicious of why the pro-American/Israel media is covering and caring for the
Darfuris in the conflict? I mean, why not the Congolese or why not the people of Sierra Leone?
Obviously Israel doesnt care for the Falasha, so why should they care for central African Muslims of
Darfur?
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
4 of 14
The Arab League isnt something to really take seriously for it is comprised of mostly dictators whom
many were formerly backed by the American government. The Islamist Sudanese government which
implemented Sharia in 1989 was actually once backed by the American government and could not
have taken power in the first place without American assistance.
Dafurs situation is be twisted by the American government and the Israelis to make Arabs look bad
because there are some Arabic speaking individuals involved in the conflict.
A White Guy
on Sat 18 Apr 2009 at 22:43:10
A Sudanese,
Instead of addressing the evil of the mass slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people, you
keep changing the subject, arguing over whether or not to characterize the atrocities as
genocide. Then you blame America and Israel, which is absurd. Both of these are diversionary
tactics.
A Sudanese
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 01:40:17
Im not diverting the issue Im looking at it from a political perspective. The characterization
of the massacres of Darfur as a genocide is dangerous. It gives the Darfur Rebels the
upperhand (who might as well be a terrorist group)because it portrays them as heroes of the
conflict when in fact the situation of Darfur is truly bad (the government) vs. worse (the Darfur
rebels).
The Darfur rebels say they are fighting against the racism the Darfuris suffer from in Arabic speaking
Sudan (which is very much true), but they really just want to be the oppressors (to them, hopefully to
the Arabic speaking regions of Sudan, but the Darfuris of their enemy tribes will do)and not the
oppressed.
Whatever actions the Darfur Rebels do are clearly not helping the Darfuris because they initiated the
fighting in the first place and the government responded with the infamous Janjaweed, taking a
great toll on the Darfuris. And, to put the icing on the cake, they started killing their enemy within the
Darfur Rebels tribes! So they are not only fighting the government, but fighting each other. All of it
results in suffering Darfuris (who are famed to be the most peaceful within Sudan) and the
destruction of much of whatever was Darfurs infrastructure.
The more attention Darfur gets, the longer the fighting will continue because it gives the Darfur
Rebels incentive, the Western attention. They hope that the West will give them power and help
overthrow the government (which is worse because they are even more Islamist than the
government). If Darfur was ignored, like most African conflicts are, the Darfur Rebels would have
stopped fighting because they cannot go against the government without the Wests support, then
causing the Janjaweed to hang up their Western weapons and go home.
Most of the attention Darfur recieves does not help the Darfuris! Look at how corrupt the Save Darfur
scam is none of that money helps the Darfuris, it goes to raising awareness about Darfur.
And, it is not absurd, America and Israel have a hand in the large media campaign for Darfur and
clearly both are against Sudan, since America placed economic sanctions on Sudan and bombed
Sudan in 1998 and Israel bombed eastern Sudan in January of this year. Save Darfur and the media
attention Darfur recieves (which I already said, is crucial and dangerous), is mostly from the Israel
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
5 of 14
lobby because the Israeli lobby to make Arabs look bad (whom the government arent, only half so).
But I am not blaming it only on the Darfur Rebels the governments response fueled the fighting
even further and the fair skinned blacks of Arabic speaking Sudan must acknowledge its racism.
Darfur is a very messy conflict involving nationalism, Islamism, power, and oppression and the
simplification and lie of it as Arabs vs. Africans (which are lies) is dangerous and also, somewhat
racist, since the media has historically portrayed blacks as suffering children and Arabs as the evil
camel riders at its leisure.
nonserviam
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 02:11:37
Oh yes, Israeli lobby has no higher priority than making Sudanese Arabs look bad. Is there
anything in the world that isnt the fault of the Jews?
A White Guy
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 03:19:44
nonserviam Says:
Oh yes, Israeli lobby has no higher priority than making Sudanese Arabs look bad. Is there
anything in the world that isnt the fault of the Jews?
An asteroid can strike the earth and haters will find a way to blame it on America or Israel. No matter
what the tragedy, the propaganda is the same.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/3640623/Hamas-not-the-West-is-behindthe-bloodshed.html
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2004/04
/the_islamic_hydra.html
A Sudanese
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 03:49:06
I was discussing Israels involvement in Darfur. Pro-Zionist institutions often meddle in other
countries affairs and worsen them. Its not Sudanese Arabs, it is just general Arabs
(particularly of regions where there is war between America and/or Israel and Arabs) whom
are being portrayed badly by how Darfurs situation is being presented.
Darfur is an African issue, not an African/Arab issue as it is said to be. I am attempting to explain why
it is shown as an African/Arab genocide and how its portrayal as such has dangerous implications
(such as the Darfur conflict continuing on further than it would have and the possible arresting of
Omar al-Bashir, Sudans leader, on the grounds of genocide by the ICC which would destabilize
Sudan even further by creating a survival of the nastiest showdown for who will occupy al-Bashirs
former position, creating many oppurtunities for pandemonium, or worse, cause Hassan al-Turabi, a
great admirer of the Ayatollah Khomeini if it gives you any indication of his political agenda, to
ascend to power. He shares mutual support with the Darfur rebels, hoping that they weaken the
Sudanese government, whom he helped put in power at first and then isolated himself from after
Omar al-Bashir instead of he became dictator, enough so that he can ascend to power, and
promising the far more intensely Islamist than the current government Darfur Rebels power in the
Sudanese government. Can you not see how this threatens my country?).
Its impossible for there to have been hundreds of thousands of deaths, as the WHO, a more
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
6 of 14
legitimate organization than Save Darfur, theorize that 50-70,000 died in the conflict, most likely of
which 60 75% died of drought and disease as the desertification of the area has made it hard for
the Darfuris to accomplish even a little bit of agricultural success. So much of deaths supposedly due
to the Arab Janjaweed are actually due to the effects of climate change.
In media concerning Darfur, its just Arab Janjaweed killing black Darfuris, when in reality, the
Janjaweed is comprised of people from all over Sudan and, are often are pitch black, and have no
racial agenda. The American government/Zionist lobby are manipulating the situation to help their
own cause, which is to spoil the Middle Eastern Arabs image to justify what is happening to Iraq,
Palestine, and Afghanistan (even though theyre not Arab) and divert attention from these conflicts.
Why else would countries with such power be concerned for what otherwise would have been
perceived as far away tribal killings, as African conflicts are often characterized as?
These two articles explain why:
http://www.eaazi.org/ThorsProvoni/Darfur/FifthQuestion.htm
http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2009/04/harvard-book-store-mamdani-darfur.html
Sudan has a delicate, multi-faceted, and confusing political situation. Sudan exists in its own insular
universe where everyone relates to each other strangely in terms of race, religon, language, gender,
slavery, war, etc. Its internal affairs, current and historic, exemplify how humans cannot cope with
diversity.
And what Ive explained only explains the current relations of northern and western Sudan, not even
the relations of eastern and northern Sudan, the relations of southern and northern Sudan, the
relations of southern and western Sudan, the relations of Chad and western Sudan, the relations of
northern and eastern Sudan with Ethiopia, the relations of northern and eastern Sudan with Eritrea
etc!
Makes you appreciate how clean cut Western politics are, huh?
A Sudanese
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 04:29:45
Actually, I take that back. Sudans internal affairs dont display how humans cannot cope with
diversity, but rather, how those in power are unwilling to share their power with others in
diverse societies.
A White Guy
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 05:29:48
A Sudanese,
Those sites you linked to have have an anti-Israel persuasion. They are a dime a dozen. You
are fixated on Israel and what you call Pro-Zionist institutions. At the same time, you deny
any culpability of the Sudanese leadership.
It doesnt prove anything nor would it be relevant.
does America or Israel have to do with
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
7 of 14
A White Guy
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 05:50:44
To complete my last sentence, what does America or Israel have to do with what is
happening internally in Sudan? You said yourself that Darfur is an African issue.
A Sudanese
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 13:12:36
Those websites are anti-Israel because Israel is a corrupt, murdering, racist police state, and
they are attempting explain how its actions affect other countries.
I am fixated not on those two countries, but I am most certainly fixated (and grieved) about those two
countries involvement in the Darfur issue.
I explained what these two nations have to do with Darfur. America and Israel are responsible for
portraying the issue as it is and this portrayal has extremely negative effects on Darfurs situation,
like Ive said before.
I feel your attitude exemplifies what many of have done. You diverted from my attempt to explain the
(highly complex) political aspects of Darfur, and discussed it as a moral issue of evil. The media has
done a successful job of portraying it as an issue of morality alone as opposed to an issue of
complicated history and politics. The Save Darfur campaign portrays it as a simple moral issue and
does not even give the money raised to Darfur, just to raising awareness, or truthfully, a media blitz.
As Save Darfur has had much attention and aggressive media campaigns, clearly Save Darfur is
attempting to send a message. A message that insinuates that Arabs are nasty and evil and Africans
are weaklings. But, as these things are already stereotypes engravde in peoples minds, why would
Save Darfur and Darfurs media attention be attempting to engrave such even further by spreading
lies about what is truly occuring? And what motive do they have portraying it as such?
This is where Israel and America come in. I explained what these two nations have to do with Darfur.
America and Israel are responsible for portraying the issue as a genocide and this portrayal has
extremely negative effects on Darfurs situation.
The Darfur Rebels and America/Israel both benefit from why Darfur is portrayed this way and how
much attention it gets. America/Israel benefits by diverting attention from the attrocities of Iraq,
Palestine, and the Middle East in general, and by spoiling the Arabs credibility and image, justifying
the attrocities in the Middle East region. I guess that can be, in a way, interpreted as
dehumanization since its at least turning Middle Eastern Arabs into pariahs. The Darfur Rebels are
benefiting, like Ive said before, because building the government up as Arabs and themselves as
suffering Africans benefits their cause because should the government weaken (which it seems like
it will due to other nations reactions to the alleged genocide of Darfur), it gives they and their
supporters (mainly Hassan al-Turabi) oppurtunities to ascend to power. The attention and support
they recieve (one opened up an office in Israel!) gives them the incentive to continue fighting among
themselves and the government and then presenting it to the Internation Community (which has
somewhat isolated the current Sudanese government) as genocide.
And another way America has to do with Darfur is that America implemented the current Islamist
Sudanese government in the first place, taking out the democracy that formerly existed! If the
democracy have stayed, mostly the Darfur Rebels themselves wouldt even had existed, leaving a
conflict like this out of the question.
Darfur is an African issue which (two) other non- African countries are interfering with, making it then,
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
8 of 14
I suppose, a not completely African issue.

I have condescended to explain what I have already explained and have presented the undeniable
facts to you. You, like many, are concerned with the plight of the Darfuris, declaring it an issue of
morality, and yet, are blindly faithful to the state of Israel, whom is responsible for more tragedies
than Darfur ever had from direct conflict, so now, maybe I should question your motives.
nonserviam
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 16:38:41
Funny thing is, AWG, our Sudanese interlocutor doesnt seem to realize that his malign
obsession with Israel and America utterly destroys whatever merit his point that the conflict
in Darfur is more complicated than is commonly perceived might have otherwise had.
A White Guy
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 19:38:18
Nonserviam, that is exactly my point. He is obsessed with blaming Israel and America. I have
to assume he has been propagandized to harbor that animosity. I admit to having little
knowledge on the history of Sudan and I am willing to learn more about it. I might be more
receptive to what A Sudanese has to say if not for his irrational hatred of the aforementioned
countries. I think he is blinded by that hatred and that will remain a stumbling block.
A Sudanese
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 20:42:07
I do not have an obsession with Israel and America, but, as you two were curious as to how
they were involved in the conflict, I obligigingly explained. Then, the pair of you claimed not to
understand or insinuated that I am anti-semetic, so then I retyped something that I had
already typed to try to explain again, making how Israel and America are involved the dominant topic
of the discussion.
The conversation had segwayed into an explanation of how the Darfur conflict is portrayed, why it is
portrayed as such and why its portrayal have negative effects. Unfortuantely, Israel and America are
heavily involved in that and I will not condescend to say for a third time how and why.
I am not propagandized to harbor animosity. Quite the contrary, I grew up in the U.S. and love many
things about it, so to not support these institutions takes a bit of outside thinking.
I have no hatred for these two nations. I am explaining why their actions involving my country are
wrong. If you interperet the stating of uncomfortable truths about powerful nations actions as
hatred, so be it.
If there are other questions about Darfur, such as the Darfur Rebels and the governments relations,
former and current, or anything else, I would be most happy to discuss these issues.
I would also like to say that my point was not nescessarily that the Darfur conflict is more complicated
than it seems, but rather, that Darfur is not a genocide and its characterization as such is dangerous,
false, and motivated.
Oh, and I am a she.
A Sudanese
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 20:42:59
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
9 of 14
Oh, Im sorry I spelled obligingly wrong.
A Sudanese
And semitic too!
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 20:43:28
nonserviam
And segue.
on Sun 19 Apr 2009 at 22:38:38
A White Guy
on Mon 20 Apr 2009 at 04:58:18
A Sudanese,
I didnt know you were a woman. I just assumed you were a man, not having enough
information. Thanks for clearing that up. I want to believe that you are not anti-Semitic. But
you made many comments, such as Israel is a corrupt, murdering, racist police state and frequent
references to Zionist lobby, which is usually code language that the anti-Jewish crowd uses to refer
to Jews. What else am I supposed to think?
abagond
on Mon 20 Apr 2009 at 06:13:45
America and Israel are hardly angels. They both use might to make right and have plenty of
blood on their hands. There are sound reasons to hate both. One can hate both and make
perfectly true statements about the state of the world.
abagond
A Sudanese:
on Mon 20 Apr 2009 at 06:21:00
What I do not understand is why the West makes such a big deal over Darfur and not what
went on in southern Sudan before 2005. Do you know why that is?
A White Guy
on Mon 20 Apr 2009 at 07:10:02
Abagond, I didnt know there was such a thing as angelic country. What country is angelic? If
there are sound reasons to hate America, why do you stay? There are countless millions who
would be happy to trade places with you.
abagond
Wow. Wow.
on Tue 21 Apr 2009 at 06:47:30
You know, life would be so bloody simple if the things we loved were perfect and wonderful
and lah-dee-dah. But life is nothing like that. Maybe you have not lived long enough to know that.
abagond
One of the 12 ways to deny a genocide:
on Wed 22 Apr 2009 at 23:32:43
2. Attack the motivations of the truth-tellers. Dismiss U.S. charges as products of

election-year politics in America, or of anti-Islamic imperialists who have demonstrated their hatred of
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
10 of 14
Arabs in Iraq at Abu-Ghraib prison. This ad-hominem moral disqualification argument was the
red-herring used by the Sudanese Ambassadors at both the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and
the U.N. Security Council. It is aimed to appeal to fellow Islamic countries like Algeria and Pakistan.
Source: http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutgenocide/12waystodenygenocide.html
racerealist
One of the 12 ways to win an internet argument:
on Thu 23 Apr 2009 at 05:40:27
4. Refer to an arbitrary list of overly broad vagaries, written to cover any contingency, and act
as if their interpretation of an argument, somehow applied to said arbitrary list created by anonymous
persons on the internet, invalidates that argument. Gives you a temporary feeling of smug
righteousness, while causing the other person to place his or her forehead solidly in the palm of his
or her hand, and realize that you are incapable of rational, critical thought. Useful for getting people
who are telling truths that make you uncomfortable to
move along.
abagond
on Thu 23 Apr 2009 at 22:26:08
My source was not just some arbitrary list created by anonymous persons on the internet, it
was a list created by Gregory Stanton of the U.S. State Department. He is an expert on
genocide. He is not going to be right in everything he says, of course, but it not just
something I pulled out of Yahoo! Answers or something.
miker
on Mon 27 Apr 2009 at 15:31:46
is there any way to protest against this genocide as a individual, is there any reliable
organisation that wants UN to stop this madness or is it the money and power of Russia &
China that will silence this??..its strange how we are all terrified about past genocides and cry
when we see programs about it on tv, yet we allow a big genocide to take place while we just go on
concentrating on the past.
abagond
Excellent question. Check out Genocide Watch:
on Tue 28 Apr 2009 at 05:17:10
http://www.genocidewatch.org/
miker
are there any statistics on how many people the KKK killed??
on Fri 8 May 2009 at 01:14:21
white girl
on Tue 26 May 2009 at 20:49:12
wow. get a life. you guys are stupid arguing over pointless crap. wanna know how rediculous
you sound? veryyy.
John
on Fri 17 Jul 2009 at 20:34:53
Nobody cares what an uneducated insignificant uncaring person has to say this whole post and its
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
11 of 14
comments are based on information and discussions to keep racial and ethnic hate from
being excused and/or justified its meant to make a point, that people getting treated better or
worse based on who they are is unfair in every way its the type of thing sticks up for your right
as a white girl would you enjoy someone making assumptions or insults about you just because the
name on your comment is white girl, such as a honkey,or white trash whore???????
Wildflower
The time to get outta Dodge is before step 4 if at all possible.
on Fri 4 Sep 2009 at 22:57:06
The survivalist movement amazes me (mostly racist and right wing). Many are highly
paranoid conspiracy theorists, thinking FEMA concentration camps are being built and Obama is
going to come for their guns.
But they prepare in only basically one waydigging into to stay, heavily armed, in a homogeneous
rural area.
Leaving the country is something they cant consider.
If government does comes after them as they fear, their ammo isnt going to hold out long with
bombs being dropped on their heads.
Rosebell
sudanese guy,
on Fri 11 Dec 2009 at 06:09:45
were the zionists involved in killing thousands of black people in south sudan? you cant
admit your government has got blood on its hands and it doesnt matter if you call it a genocide or
mass murder.
lowd-one
A Sudanese,
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 15:58:20
You seem to think that genocide in Darfur is getting more media attention than, say, the war in
Iraq does. The sad fact is that most Americans dont care enough to know the difference between
Rwanda and Darfur. And yes I am saying that what is going on in Darfur is a genocide. Trace the
countries history all the way back to its Belgian colonization and compare it to the 8 Stages of
Genocide. Also, you use far to many stereotypes in your arguments. Yes, many Americans have an
irrational fear of Arabs and Muslims. But I know that America is capable of great wrongdoing and
want to prevent our repetition of history. What America did to the native american population was a
genocide. Slavery was our holocaust, though far too few southern Americans are ashamed of it.
Kit (Keep It Trill)

on Fri 7 May 2010 at 01:55:30
Glad you posted the link to this from your May 6th post. Very informative. Thank you.
askthenightingale
on Sun 16 May 2010 at 05:47:43
Ok.. So I know you said at least step 4 with black people, but I think it is more like step six. the
difference between slavery and genocide for me though is that the goal of slavery was never to kill
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
12 of 14
people (because their labor was need). I think that it was a culture genocide on humanity.
Slavery worked to erase as much of black Americans humanity as possible while keeping
their bodies alive to use as production force. I think that post reconstruction was when
American tried to commit genocide against black people. I think with forced sterilization and other
eugenics moves we got to step 8. Does that make sense, Im not sure if I explained myself well? im
just curious about your opinion.
I just found your blog i really like it!
SW6
on Sun 6 Jun 2010 at 17:54:42
Thank you for this post. Its an important one. Perhaps it should be bumped now and again to
give it exposure.
SW6
Abagond,
on Tue 8 Jun 2010 at 02:41:38
I dont know where else to put something like this.

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0607/doctors-group-bush-administration-conducted-medicalexperiments-detainees/
ManAlive
on Tue 29 Jun 2010 at 13:30:36
What a disturbing, revealing post. I will never use the N-word again.
Italian Man
on Sun 5 Dec 2010 at 17:35:15
To abagond: America is not perfect, but neither is any other country. However, America is the
# 1 country in giving charity and humanitarian work. Characterizing America as evil is an
unfair and unjust claim. America has been placed on a pedestal so high, no one could ever
live up to it. Perhaps people and countrys should look at themselves to blame.
abagond
Serial killers are not perfect either.
on Mon 6 Dec 2010 at 00:18:42
Genocide is pretty rare, much rarer than most Americans want to believe.
Italian Man
on Mon 6 Dec 2010 at 04:31:24
Genocide/ethnic cleansing is not rare. In the last 50 years it has occurred several time. In
Nazi Germany during the 1940s, Rwanda in 1994, Bosnia in 1995, and Darfur presently. So
much for never again.
Watershedd
on Thu 31 Mar 2011 at 09:55:45
Interesting post, Abagond. Also interesting is your response about how to deny a genocide.
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
13 of 14
dee
on Fri 15 Apr 2011 at 07:42:07
I would like to know, given that any mention of the slaughter and genocide that was commited
by the United
States against Native Americans, seems to also be a hushed, lets change the subject, or
that was so long
ago, or, it to like slavery.,never happened, thats a
made up story..deny, deny, deny. African Americans tho
the breathing part of their lives were sparred, after coming
behind the Native Americans, there was also a strong desire, to extreminate them as well, if they
couldnt be
legally owned as property and slaves.., my question, Blacks are on the #4 level of desire by white
americans
who would kill in massive numbers, like was done to the
Indians, and explains in large part, why white males, love
to keep themselves fully supplied with scope rifles, and
30- 50 clip pistols in their homes., what if a poll were
taken tody,is the percentance of white americans, who if they could get away with it.now,
would personally go around, kill as many Black Men, Women and
children, including their co-workers, neighbors, kidss friends..ect.?. about how long, before they
push Blacks
up to level #6?.,Blacks know that Whites hate them, and
have never felt in any way, sorry for the way they have
been treated, Blacks are only still here in this country, for
the pleasing pleasure, for whites to oppress, call names
genocide watch
on Wed 12 Oct 2011 at 23:59:14
Eygpt has already hit step 7. To paraphrase a reporter during the Rwandan genocide How
many acts of genocide does it take to be genocide? This deeply concerns me because I had
hope that we could leave our history of 20th century genocide in the 20th century.
Unfortunately history is prepared to repeat itself again and I am afraid that Egypt may be the first site
of 21st century genocide. So far, even though I am too young to do anything yet, I feel conpelled to
watch Egypt and hope that this situation escalates no further. The Copts in Egypt need help, I just
hope there is someone courageous and powerful enough to help them.
Mahnaz Ahmed
on Mon 12 Mar 2012 at 21:05:44
Genocide is the worst!!! The thought make ma un-easy. The question that goes to mind is that
why do such peoples so these kinds of things??? Its not fair, a person cannot help that they
were born in a family where they might be different like the Jews in the Germens context. Its
just appauling and to think that it still goes on in the world??? Its disgraceful and not needed.
Leaders with such intension should step down, in some countries KILLED.
Nathan K. Rutatina
on Thu 25 Oct 2012 at 15:41:59
Am neither black nor white,but am a Rwandan.Racism towards death is no sense and
primitive but that towards development is sensfull but where can the one towards
development be found?
7/22/2013 1:39 AM
Another White Guy

on Mon 8 Apr 2013 at 19:24:27
Most of your commentary is hateful towards whites and white Americans in particular. Your
brand of politically-correct racism is the worst type, and no better than the Nazis and their ilk.
An Israeli Guy
on Thu 27 Jun 2013 at 17:58:46
All these steps applied and fulfilled by the state of Israel in the extermination of Palestinian
people. Thanks for the post.
Comments RSS
Blog at WordPress.com.
The MistyLook Theme.
Follow
Follow Abagond
14 of 14
Powered by WordPress.com
7/22/2013 1:39 AM

The Eight Stages of Genocide

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The Eight Stages of Genocide

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

The eight stages of genocide | Abagond