perpetrators, and what this means for Toxification as an early warning identifier.
With the report furthering to explore the implications of my findings, with a
focus on toxifying language being used by Putin and Trump and the importance
of studying this as both examples present early genocidal warnings. I will also
highlight limitations of Neilsen’s toxification model and suggest ways in which to
develop and strengthen it.
Case-Study Overview
Adam Jones highlights that the genocide began after exiled Tutsis in Uganda
formed the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) and later invaded Rwanda. The
assassination of President Habyarimana by an unknown culprit catalysed the
genocide of Hutus against Tutsis in Rwanda, with it beginning the next day. In the
three months of the genocide, around 800,000 people were slaughtered, where
civilian Hutus made up the bulk of the genocidaires (2017, p. 473-480). The role
of the media was a key element of the genocide as it promoted anti-Tutsi
propaganda which encouraged Hutus to participate in the genocidal killings. The
remainder of the report will explore this, with a focus on the language used.
Firstly, in Gregory Stanton’s ten predictable yet unpreventable stages of
genocide, dehumanisation plays a significant role. Stanton terms this as when
one group denies the humanity of the other group where its members “are
equated with animals, vermin, insects or diseases.” (2016). Effectively the
perpetrators use propaganda to indoctrinate people that the victims are
inhuman. The Rwandan Genocide is notorious for the role that the media and
their dehumanising, anti-Tutsi rhetoric had on the genocide. The two most
notorious and influential media outlets publishing said dehumanising
propaganda was radio station RTLM and the magazine: Kangura. Allan Thompson
notes the role the Rwandan media played as it was used to not only dehumanise
76
Made with FlippingBook HTML5