An argument that the holocaust should be named a genocide

The treaty made Germany take full responsibility for the war, reduced the extent of German territory, severely limited the size and placement of their armed forces, and forced Germany to pay the allied powers reparations. These restrictions not only increased social unrest but, combined with the start of the Great Depression, collapsed the German economy as inflation rose alongside unemployment. In the German parliament, the Nazi party, led by Adolf Hitler, gained popularity.

An argument that the holocaust should be named a genocide

InWinston Churchillwhen describing the German invasion of the Soviet Unionspoke of "a crime without a name". The book describes the implementation of Nazi policies in occupied Europeand cites earlier mass killings.

Lemkin defined genocide as follows: Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation.

It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.

It happened to the Armenians, then after the Armenians, Hitler took action. Inthe first session of the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that "affirmed" that genocide was a crime under international law and enumerated examples of such events but did not provide a full legal definition of the crime.

Many instances of such crimes of genocide have occurred when racial, religious, political and other groups have been destroyed, entirely or in part. It contains an internationally recognized definition of genocide which has been incorporated into the national criminal legislation of many countries, and was also adopted by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Courtwhich established the International Criminal Court ICC.

An argument that the holocaust should be named a genocide

Article II of the Convention defines genocide as: The first draft of the Convention included political killings, but these provisions were removed in a political and diplomatic compromise following objections from some countries, including the USSRa permanent security council member.

The Soviet views were also shared by a number of other States for whom it is difficult to establish any geographic or social common denominator: The Convention was manifestly adopted for humanitarian and civilizing purposes.

Its objectives are to safeguard the very existence of certain human groups and to affirm and emphasize the most elementary principles of humanity and morality.

In view of the rights involved, the legal obligations to refrain from genocide are recognized as erga omnes. When the Convention was drafted, it was already envisaged that it would apply not only to then existing forms of genocide, but also "to any method that might be evolved in the future with a view to destroying the physical existence of a group".

The Convention must be interpreted in good faith, in accordance with the ordinary meaning of its terms, in their context, and in the light of its object and purpose.

Moreover, the text of the Convention should be interpreted in such a way that a reason and a meaning can be attributed to every word. No word or provision may be disregarded or treated as superfluous, unless this is absolutely necessary to give effect to the terms read as a whole.

Thus, irrespective of the context in which it occurs for example, peace time, internal strife, international armed conflict or whatever the general overall situation genocide is a punishable international crime. Germany case that, inthe majority of legal scholars took the narrow view that "intent to destroy" in the CPPCG meant the intended physical-biological destruction of the protected group, and that this was still the majority opinion.

But the ECHR also noted that a minority took a broader view, and did not consider biological-physical destruction to be necessary, as the intent to destroy a national, racial, religious or ethnic group was enough to qualify as genocide. It noted that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Court of Justice had agreed with the narrow interpretation that biological-physical destruction was necessary for an act to qualify as genocide.

Radislav Krstic — Appeals Chamber — Judgment — IT ICTY 7 19 April [34] paragraphs 8, 9, 10, and 11 addressed the issue of in part and found that "the part must be a substantial part of that group.

The aim of the Genocide Convention is to prevent the intentional destruction of entire human groups, and the part targeted must be significant enough to have an impact on the group as a whole.

The judges continue in paragraph 12, "The determination of when the targeted part is substantial enough to meet this requirement may involve a number of considerations. The numeric size of the targeted part of the group is the necessary and important starting point, though not in all cases the ending point of the inquiry.

The number of individuals targeted should be evaluated not only in absolute terms, but also in relation to the overall size of the entire group.

In addition to the numeric size of the targeted portion, its prominence within the group can be a useful consideration. The intent to destroy formed by a perpetrator of genocide will always be limited by the opportunity presented to him. While this factor alone will not indicate whether the targeted group is substantial, it can—in combination with other factors—inform the analysis.

At that time however, only two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council were parties to the treaty: France and the Republic of China. Only in the s did the international law on the crime of genocide begin to be Sociology 23 June Final Project, Assignment 2: Nazi Germany and Holocaust The Holocaust was the genocide of around six million European Jews during World War II.

An argument that the holocaust should be named a genocide

(Holocaust History) Nazi Germany led by Adolf Hitler had targeted every single Jew to be perished. The Holocaust was a specific event in 20th century history: the intentional systematic annihilation of six million Jews and 'undesirables' by the Nazis and their collaborators between and The word 'Holocaust' comes from the Greek word Holocauston.

The argument that the Native Americans did not suffer genocide in todays terms fails when one looks at the original definition the argument that anything is genocide, even the Nazi atrocites. From the Holocaust to slavery in America, from the Armenian Genocide to the Guatemalan Genocide, it is an oddity of revisionist history that perpetrators of mass violence claim to be victims of those they sought to annihilate as they deny the very act of annihilation.

While one could argue that a person denying a genocide or holocaust may be doing so out of sheer ignorance, it is often difficult, if not impossible, to determine one’s intent, thus the law cannot discriminate on such a basis and must make the law all-encompassing.

In closing, the Holocaust as well as all acts of genocide was a horrible event that the world needs to come to terms. Until we do come to terms with these events, they can and will happen again. The students of today are the ones that can make a difference, and if we as students can say, “No this is wrong” then we will be well on our way from preventing future instances of hate.

The Holocaust - HISTORY