Understanding the psychology and philosophy of mass genocide and violence is crucial for developing effective strategies to prevent and respond to these tragedies. Such devastating events are perpetuated by social, cultural, and political factors. Bystanders and perpetrators both bear significant responsibility. Psychological elements like dehumanisation, social dynamics, and deference to authority, as well as philosophical explanations like racism, nationalism, and idealogy, all have an impact on the commission of genocide and other acts of mass violence. Analysing the psychological and philosophical underpinnings of perpetrators to show their motivations, beliefs, and attitudes towards victims will greatly aid in preventing and responding to these tragedies. This evaluation is necessary in order to assess the moral duty of bystanders in reducing violence. 

 

The Psychological and Philosophical Aspects:

 

Psychological Factors and Philosophical Justifications: 

 

Genocide and mass violence are influenced by psychological factors such as dehumanisation, group dynamics and submission to authority, alongside philosophical justifications like racism, nationalism and idealogy. Psychology distinguishes itself from other sciences by acknowledging fundamental truths about the mind that transcend cultural barriers. In individuals with limited coping mechanisms, anything other than typical, customary, and cognitively straightforward thinking heightens anxiety. According to Lemkin, genocide refers to a coordinated set of distinct activities intended to destroy a group’s fundamental way of life. These considerations encompass cultural, political, social, legal, academic, spiritual, financial, biological, physiological, religious, psychological, and moral concerns. They require us to think about our health, nutrition, family life, child care, as well as birth and death. Such actions also involve pondering the honour and dignity of peoples, as well as the future of humanity as a global society. Gerontologist Steven K. Baum, who holds an MA in psychopharmacology from New Mexico State University, believes “We are all genocidalists. Put the average person in a similar situation and they will “just follow orders.”  

 

Conventionalism and Social Conformity: 

 

The categorisation, symbolisation, dehumanisation, organisation, polarisation, identification, extermination, and denial are stages of genocide development. A key component of authoritarianism is social conformity. Social conformity is important because the authoritarian relies on external standards because they lack internal standards to determine what is right and wrong. Situations that are excessively open and unstructured can lead to unnecessary anxiety. It is necessary to present and define one’s identity, sentiments, and needs in clear and unambiguous terms.There is a sense of historical change in racism, for example the decentralised political and social moment: Black Lives Matter. The noble forebears of a “fallen race” may not be subject to prejudice. Those who persecute ethnic groups they consider “backward” may acknowledge that their own ancestors were previously just as primitive or that the group’s living descendants may yet advance after many generations. As a result, prejudice that encourages genocide may come from beliefs in a victim group’s inherent inferiority or historical anteriority, or even from a belief that a group with supposed superiority poses a threat of dominance. Raphael Lemkin was a Jewish-born Polish attorney who founded the Genocide Convention. In this book where he first offered his new idea of “genocide” which at the time was during Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, he took great care to describe his newly founded idea as composite and multidimensional. He did this by deriving the phrase from the Greek word genos (tribe, race) and Latincide (as in tyrannicide, homicide, and fratricide). Lemkin believes that genocide is not just mass murder, though it does entail that, and that it is also not always ordered by a state entity or force. 

 

Human Cruelty and Role of Animals in Dehumanisation: 

 

Some specialists have asserted that group dehumanisation alone is sufficient and explicit hatred may not be necessary. An important component of each genocide is the use of animals. When considering dehumanisation from a bottom-up perspective, it is challenging to imagine instances that don’t involve hatred towards foreigners. In reality, both phenomena are abundant, and dehumanisation often takes the form of teasing and dysphemism— typically, names for diseases or animals. The psychological act of portraying or treating people or groups as less than human is known as dehumanisation. It involves depriving people of their humanity, empathy, and morality. Propaganda, stereotyping, prejudice, and violence are just a few ways that dehumanisation can happen. The victims are frequently dehumanised and degraded by the use of metaphors or symbols. The perpetrators perpetuate the notion that the victims are less civilised, less intelligent, or less deserving of human rights by comparing them to animals. This representation helps legitimise and normalise the acts of violence committed against them. Dehumanisation serves as a psychological tool that people use to do violent acts against others without necessarily experiencing a strong personal anger or hatred for them.

 

Simplistic Thinking and the View of Good and Evil: 

 

Statistics clearly demonstrate a correlation between simplistic thinking and increased bias.  The notion that there is a gap between good and wicked individuals provides at least two consoling aspects. It does this by first producing a binary logic where Evil is essentialized. The majority of us believe that Evil is a thing, a trait that some individuals are born with while others are not. As their destinies play out, “the corrupt tree produces evil fruit” (Matthew 7:17). We define Evil by pointing out the truly terrible dictators of our time, like: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, and other figures who have planned mass killings. However, we must also address the less egregious, more common crimes committed by drug dealers, rapists, sex traders, con artists who prey on the elderly, and the extreme bullying that children and adults may face. Maintaining a division between good and evil allows “good” individuals to avoid taking responsibility for their potential involvement in the creation, maintenance, continuation, or acquiescence to situations that lead to wrongdoing such as crime, violence, bullying, and terrorism. They may justify their inaction by accepting the status quo as an immutable reality. In professor Philip Zimbardo’s “The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil”, it questions if we are born good, corrupted by a wicked society, or are we born bad, saved by a good society. As with violence between people, genocide against groups has always happened and most likely will continue to do so.

 

Violence as A Part of Human Nature: 

 

The depth of human cruelty knows no bounds. For instance, the Rwandan Genocide which occurred between the 7th of April to the 15th July, 1994, a 45-year-old Rwandan woman was raped by her 12-year-old son as an Interahamwe held a hatchet to his throat. Her five other children were forced to hold open her legs–in front of her husband. We can presume that most people are moral beings the majority of the time. But picture this morality as a gear shift that occasionally slips into neutral. That results in morals being disengaged. Humans are complex, virtuous savages whose qualities have been weakened by interaction with negative influences, harmful ideologies and toxic social norms. The idea that humans are born wicked—genetically bad seeds—stands in stark contrast to this notion of people as the helpless victims of an all-powerful, evil civilisation. Unless individuals are changed into logical, sensible and compassionate humans by education, religion and family, or under control by the discipline forced upon them by the authority of the government, our species is propelled by food cravings, boundless appetites and hostile instincts. The history of humanity is the history of violence, including war and genocide, invasion and colonisation, the establishment of God- or Gods-approved empires in both polytheism and monotheism, the deadly union of democracy and empire, as well as revolt, massacre, torture, mutilation and cruelty. Violence’s origins starts at the beginning, reflecting on how much of humanity’s early development is shaped by its shared primate evolutionary history, predispositions to violence, especially intergroup aggression and status as a primate with other primates. Such evolutionary tendencies may have shaped human history and may still have a significant impact now. One of these is genocide. Violence is a natural part of human interaction rather than something that should be avoided. 

 

Role of Bystanders and Perpetrators: 

 

Bystanders and Moral Responsibility:

 

The moral responsibility of bystanders in mitigating violence needs to be evaluated.  It is difficult to witness the suffering of others while remaining silent. In an attempt to justify their passivity and reduce their guilt, passive bystanders tend to distance themselves from victims, increasingly devaluing them. This behaviour further diminishes the likelihood of them taking action. As a result, some witnesses joined the perpetrators. The results of a Danish study are interesting since they revealed a lack of emotional development. Danish Nazis in the ranks, many of whom could be regarded as bystanders, were discovered to be ambient— “socially full” but “emotionally empty”; lacking a stable mind of their own; relying instead on others and adjusting to whoever was in power.  Researchers found the following characteristics among “ordinary Nazis” in the same study. They exhibited a lack of depth in thinking and emotions, had poor coping mechanisms, were highly vulnerable to stress, possessed lower self-esteem, held rigid and racist beliefs, and, like their perpetrators, often perceived themselves as victims.

 

Psychological and Philosophical Foundations of Perpetrators:

 

Analysing the psychological and philosophical foundations of perpetrators reveals their motivations, beliefs, and attitudes towards victims. Psychopathy is characterised by impulsivity, self-centeredness, and a lack of remorse. The psychopathy of the perpetrators exhibits only subtle differences. “Extraordinary” human wickedness cannot ever be reduced to a single psychiatric label. By doing so, one would deny the inherent capacity for evil within each of us and instead assign it to a select group of people. Undoubtedly, there were some criminals in the Third Reich who were crazy psychopaths or had other mental health issues. However, were there enough of them for us to judiciously regard psychopathology as the main factor contributing to involvement in extreme evil? Most of the perpetrators of the Holocaust and other instances of mass murder and genocide were extraordinary only by what they did, not by who they were, with the exception of a small number of the architects of the extermination process and a few sadists who enjoyed participating in it. They could not be immediately recognised as possessing “killer” personalities. The majority did not have a diagnosable mental illness. They weren’t labelled as sadists either at home or in their social circle. Furthermore, they did not have any history of abuse. In other words, the majority of those who committed acts of extreme evil could not be identified by their upbringing, personalities, or prior political membership or behaviour as being men or women who were especially likely or suitable for carrying out genocide. “Ordinary” people don’t do “extraordinary” evil until they’ve convinced themselves that what they’re doing is moral. To avoid being perceived as immoral, how can offenders redefine acts of extraordinary evil?  Their belief that killing or being willing to kill members of another group is necessary for the protection and security of their own group partially justifies their behaviour. In his chronicle of the Rwandan genocide, Philip Gourevitch, an American author and journalist, writes: “Perpetrators of a slaughter like the one just inside the door where I stood need not enjoy killing, and they may even find it unpleasant. What is required above all is that they want their victims dead. They have to want it so badly that they consider it a necessity.” By portraying their actions as serving morally righteous or socially beneficial objectives, extreme evil is made personally and socially acceptable. The perpetrators may hold this explanation in such high regard that their wrongdoing becomes not only morally acceptable but also a clear-cut moral requirement. The perpetrators can then argue that their wickedness is necessary for their own self-defence, including defending their community’s core values, combating brutal oppressors, upholding peace and stability, freeing humanity from enslavement, or upholding their country’s promises. However, in many cases, the displayed vulnerability of perpetrators serves as a form of self-justification and mental manipulation that does not exactly reflect reality but rather arises naturally from the portion of our mind that desires to see ourselves as victims or potential victims.

 

Mass Genocide in History and the Role of Idealogical Conviction:

 

The behavioural spectrum identified by American psychologist Philip Zimbardo in his study of eleven guards is highly relevant to the analysis of Reserve Police Battalion 101. Approximately one third of the guards displayed traits of cruelty and toughness. They took pleasure in their newfound authority to engage in cruel and capricious behaviour, continuously devising new methods to torment individuals. The middle group of guards demonstrated a tough yet fair approach. They played by the rules and didn’t intentionally treat prisoners badly. Only two guards showed benevolence, refraining from punishing prisoners and occasionally offering them small acts of kindness. The widespread violence during the Rape of Nanjing exemplified how the majority of perpetrators dehumanized their victims, treating them as little more than cattle. Tens of thousands of women were raped as entire families were murdered, along with the elderly and little children. For months after the incident, bodies were left all over the streets. At least one-third of Nanjing’s buildings were plundered and torched by the Japanese, who were determined to destroy the city. According to various eyewitness accounts and subsequent analysis, between 20,000 and 80,000 individuals, including young girls and elderly women, suffered brutal rape and torture. After being attacked, several of them—including gang rape victims—were dismembered and executed. Similar omissions on German views against Jews are evident throughout the testimony. One significant justification for such omissions lies in a strict legal perspective. German law stipulates that having a base motive, such as racial animosity, is one of the requirements for homicide to be classified as murder. Anyone in the battalion who openly admitted to harbouring anti-Semitic views would have significantly jeopardised the legal standing; anyone who spoke about the anti-Semitic attitudes of others ran the prospect of having to testify against the former comrades. Perhaps the Holocaust is where the influence of ideological conviction on the actions of perpetrators is most clearly defined. Hitler’s “Mein Kampf”, published in the fall of 1925, served as the cornerstone for Nazi philosophy, which was based on the idea that race is the root of all civilisation. The highest objective of this philosophy was racial purity. It came with the dual of promoting this objective wherever it could be achieved and eradicating anything or anybody who stood in the way of fulfilling this objective. According to this worldview, Sparta and Rome serve as instances of what would happen to people who failed to maintain their racial purity. The committed ideologist felt compelled to eliminate any threats to their ideology rather than relinquish the comfort it provided and admit to any errors. Those who committed heinous acts readily employed this overarching philosophy to rationalise and justify their actions. 

 

Methodology: 

 

There are diverse approaches to prevent genocide and mass atrocities. This includes targeting governmental institutions and the education system. Previous successful prevention programs have depended on garnering the interest and attention of high-ranking officials. However, conflicting objectives and a pervasive culture of crisis-driven reactivity make it challenging to garner and maintain high levels of attention. Policy responses to perceived genocide or mass atrocity threats have become the norm. The absence of a comprehensive policy framework, an ongoing interagency process for developing and implementing preventive initiatives, and adequate institutional infrastructure dedicated to this purpose. “Preventing Genocide: A Blueprint for U.S. Policymakers” offers a comprehensive framework. While this blueprint is designed for U.S. policymakers, its principles can be applied globally, transcending national boundaries. Education can diminish ignorance, promote coexistence, foster respect for all individuals, and help reduce hate speech and prejudice. Educating adults is as important as educating children, as anyone can incite violence. Three distinct types of hegemony exist: military, political, and economic. In the past, some nations have exerted all three of their powers simultaneously, while others have only focused on one sort of hegemony while being weak in others. Efforts can be directed towards countries with significant political, economic, and military influence to influence policy changes. According to data from the Lowy Institute (as of 2023), countries such as the United States, China, Japan, India, Russia, South Korea, and Australia feature in the top 10 across multiple categories. Notably, both China and the United States rank in the top 10 in all categories. Psychological and philosophical drivers of mass genocide and violence play a pivotal role in the development of effective strategies for the prevention and response to such atrocities. 

 

Comprehensive power: 

1. United States 
2. China 
3. Japan
4. India
5. Russia
6. Australia
7. South Korea
8. Singapore
9. Indonesia
10. Thailand 

 

Economic capability:

1. United States
2. China
3. Japan
4. India
5. South Korea
6. Singapore
7. Russia
8. Taiwan
9. Australia
10. Indonesia 

 

Military capability:

1. United States
2. China
3. Russia
4. India
5. South Korea
6. Japan
7. Australia
8. North Korea
9. Singapore
10. Pakistan

 

Resilience:

1. United States
2. Russia
3. China
4. India
5. Australia
6. New Zealand 
7. Indonesia
8. Malaysia
9. North Korea
10. South Korea 

 

Future resources:

1. United States
2. China
3. India
4. Russia
5. Japan
6. Indonesia
7. South Korea
8. Pakistan 
9. Australia
10. Vietnam 

 

Economic relationships:

1. China
2. United States 
3. Japan
4. Singapore
5. South Korea
6. Australia 
7. Thailand
8. Malaysia
9. India
10. Vietnam 

 

Defence networks:

1. United States
2. Australia
3. Japan
4. South Korea
5. Singapore
6. New Zealand 
7. China
8. India
9. Philippines 
10. Russia

 

Diplomatic influence: 

1. China
2. United States
3. Japan
4. India
5. Australia
6. South Korea
7. Indonesia
8. Russia
9. Vietnam 
10. Singapore 

 

Cultural influence: 

1. United States
2. China
3. Japan
4. India
5. Australia
6. Malaysia
7. South Korea
8. Thailand 
9. Singapore
10. Russia
    

Conclusion:

 

By analyzing the psychological and philosophical underpinnings of mass genocide and violence, as well as understanding the roles played by bystanders and perpetrators, policies and interventions can be informed by these insights. While it is true that instances of genocide and mass violence have decreased over time, the potential for these atrocities to occur in the future remains a serious concern. It is important to continue studying the psychological and philosophical factors that contribute to these events, as well as developing effective strategies for prevention and response. By doing so, we can help ensure that such atrocities remain a thing of the past and that future generations are spared from their devastating effects.

 

Written by Vanessa Li and edited by Maisarah Madawi. Published on 16/7/23. Header image by Unsplash.

Citations: 

 

Baum, Steven K. The Psychology of Genocide: Perpetrators, Bystanders, and Rescuers. Cambridge University Press, 2008.

 

Bokova, Irina. Education as a Strategy to Prevent Genocide: Irina Bokova Participates in Ministerial Side Event about the Prevention of Genocide. UNESCO, 2016, https://en.unesco.org/news/education-strategy-prevent-genocide-irina-bokova-participates-ministerial-side-event-about.

 

Browning, Christopher R. Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. Harper Perennial, 1998.

 

Docker, John. The Origins of Violence: Religion, History, and Genocide. UNSW Press, 2008.

 

Kiernan, Ben. Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to Darfur. Yale University Press, 2009.

 

Lowy Institute. The Asia Power Index 2021: The Pandemic Paradox. The Interpreter, 2021, https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/asia-power-index-2021-pandemic-paradox.

 

Murphy, Nathan. Hegemony Through the Ages. Study.com, 2021, https://study.com/academy/lesson/hegemony-definition-examples.html.

 

Nanjing Massacre. History.com, November 9th 2009, www.history.com/topics/asian-history/nanjing-massacre.

 

Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/.

 

U.S. Department of State. Preventing Genocide: A Blueprint for U.S. Policymakers. United States Institute of Peace, 2008, https://www.usip.org/publications/2008/12/preventing-genocide-blueprint-us-policymakers.

 

Waller, James. Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing. Oxford University Press, 2002.

 

Zimbardo, Philip. The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. Random House, 2007.