Tomorrow We Will Be Killed With Our Families

In Hotel Rwanda there are two sides to the community. The Tutsi and the Hutu, a division made by Belgian colonizers. Apparently the lighter and taller Rwandans were treated better in the duration of the Belgians visit, these were the Tutsi. But after leaving, this conflict continued on for the rest 20th century and well into the 21st. But to some, the division is pointless, given that they were and will always will

The two ethnic groups that were include in the Rwanda Genocide was the Tutsis and Hutus. The Tutsis were the minority population in Rwanda, but they held all the positions of authority. On the other hand, the Hutu made up around 85% of Rwanda’s population, but held no political power, they were denied higher education and land ownership. The size of the nose and the color of the eyes were the factors that determined whether a person was Hutu or Tutsi. The Tutsis disapprove of the colonial rule of the Belgians and demanded to become more independent. After World War II, the Tutsis felt impatient and that it was time they took matters in their own hands to pursuit their independence. In 1959, the tension and violence between the Tutsis and Hutus were greatly increased.

Rwanda is a country located in Central Eastern Africa, with an extensive history of colonization, after Belgium attained control in 1924. Belgium’s rule however also marked the beginning of a lengthy ethnic rivalry between the Hutu and the Tutsi people. Belgium favored the Tutsi the minority at 14 percent of the population over the Hutu, the majority at 85 percent, simply because the Tutsis were more resembling of the Europeans. “Colonial policy helped to intensify bipolar differentiation between Tutsi and Hutu, by inscribing “ethnic” identification on identity cards, by relegating the vast majority of Hutu to particularly onerous forms of forced cultivation and corvee, and by actively favoring Tutsi in access to administrative posts, education, and jobs in the modern sector,” (Newbury, 12). Belgium’s control fueled the Hutu’s resentment towards the Tutsis because the Tutsis received superior treatment for decades. Thus, when Rwanda finally acquired independence in 1962, the Hutus fought for control over the government, highlighting the first warning sign of the genocide to come. Many Tutsis were killed afterwards, while many others fled to neighboring countries to escape the violence.

In the case of the Rwandan Genocide, the Hutus and Tutsis resented each other due to this innate behavior, and Belgium amplified it further. However, these wired tendencies can be disposed of with nurturing. Therefore, it is essential in such cases that the different groups find a middle ground because a distinction between “us and them” only develops into further discrimination. Hence, it is pivotal to spot signs of genocide as a means to prevent it. Secondly, the lack of international response during the Rwandan genocide serves to highlight the significance of outside intervention.

In 1885, European superpowers got together to divide up the continent of Africa for the colonization of the countries. Among them, Belgium had received the country of Rwanda. The practice of colonialism was common during the time period as European nations feigned to extract natural resources from African countries which were seen as gold mines. Being outnumbered, the Belgians knew they would have to find ways to maintain power in Rwanda. In doing so, they implemented this by dividing the indigenous people of Rwanda through the means of hegemonic racism. Those with dark skin, wide noses, and short were labeled as Hutus, while those who fit the European ideal of beauty with a lighter skin tone, tall, and smaller noses were labeled as Tutsis. While Belgium held power over Rwanda, they deemed the Tutsis as the superior race despite them being the minority race and gave them positions of power over the Hutus. However, on November 1959 the Hutus formed a rebellion and gained independence from Belgium. The dynamics of the hierarchy of privilege quickly changed as the Hutus were on the top and the Tutsis became the oppressed and many fled the country. Although the dreadful reign of colonialism was over, it’s everlasting effects still haunted the country of Rwanda, which is prevalent in the film Hotel Rwanda that depicts the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. In the film Hotel Rwanda, social stratification, racism, and gift giving are heavily prevalent.

William Hogan Research Paper Plan Title: Parallels between Holocaust and Rwandan Genocides Background Argument Counter Argument Rebuttal Conclusion Thesis: Genocide is important to understand so we can help prevent future violence on humanity. Political, cultural, economic, and ethnicity differences led to terrible modern day genocides in Rwanda and during the Holocaust. Parallels between the Holocaust and Rwandan genocides can be drawn from the role the state played in mobilizing, organizing, and allowing genocide to take place. 1st: 3-4 pages: synthesize and analyze research and give examples of genocide general, understanding, health, and Holocaust/Rwanda comparisons/differences.

In 1994, a tragedy occurred in Rwanda where millions of Tutsis’, the minority, were brutally murdered by the Hutu, the majority. This event is known as the Rwandan genocide and left many people wondering what could have caused this devastating event to occur. Over the years, many theories have surfaced and among those were the theories of Peter Uving. In both Why Did People Participate in Genocide? A Theoretically Informed Synthesis and The Condition of Structural Violence Peter Uvin seeks to explain why violence occurs in society. Nevertheless, the two articles are different in the sense that Why Did People Participate in Genocide? A Theoretically Informed Synthesis is primarily focused on the other theories which include political scientists,

Fourth, this creation of divide only further racial tensions. Before the Rwandan genocide, European scholars introduced the racialized concepts and established a hierarchy regarding the Tutsis and Hutus which only served to divide the two groups for years which then resulted in the Rwandan genocide due to the division and elevated place of hierarchy the Tutsis had over the Hutus who had felt marginalized more most of their country's

Because the genocide was, “conducted in ethnic terms” (Jones, pg. 16), I pray to God that I Immaculee can teach you my greatest gift to love your enemies for they are you.

Rwanda, a small country in the middle of Africa bordered by Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo was controlled by the German after they arrive in 1890. But after the World War 1, Belgium gained control of Rwanda (Hymowitz & Parker, n.d.). Few years after the Belgium colonizes controlled the country, In order to strengthen the Belgian and German control, the Belgian colonists divided Rwanda’s unified population into distinct groups. Not to mention that the Hutu were about 85% of the population, the Tutsis were 14%, and the rest were Twa. The Hutus and Tutsis were not aware about the results of this classification in the future. Actually, not too far from that date the Belgian colonization put one group above the

This source’s goal is inform its audience about the motives behind any genocide – Power, Psychological resentment, Purification and Pecuniary gain. Rwandan Genocide against Tutsis in 1994 depicts all these motives behind the massacre. But the most profound factor which fueled the transmission of genocidal ideology was the longstanding and deeply ingrained ethnic differences and polarization between the Hutus and Tutsis backed by the motive of Pecuniary gain.by the policy makers and top guns, who commit this crime and hide behind the facelessness of regimes or governments.

Genocide is “the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, ethnic, political, or cultural group”. In Rwanda for example, the Hutu-led government embraced a new program that called for the country’s Hutu people to murder anyone that was a Tutsi (Gourevitch, 6). This new policy of one ethnic group (Hutu) that was called upon to murder another ethnic group (Tutsi) occurred during April through June of 1994 and resulted in the genocide of approximately 800,000 innocent people that even included women and children of all ages. In this paper I will first analyze the origins/historical context regarding the discontent amongst the Hutu and Tutsi people as well as the historical context as to why major players in the international

For years, Rwanda has been a hotbed of racial tension. The majority of the Rwandan population is made up of Hutu's, with Tutsi's making up the rest of it. Ever since European colonial powers entered the country and favoured the Tutsi ethnic group over the Hutu by putting Tutsi people in all important positions in society, there has been a decisive political divide between the two groups. This favouring of the Tutsi over the Hutu, and the Hutu subjugation as an ethnic lower class resulted in the civil war and revolution of 1959, where the Hutu overthrew the Tutsi dominated government, and resulted in Rwanda gaining their independence in 1962.

Is there a difference between genocide and war? The idea and concepts of conflict are often misunderstood. To many, any form of conflict is war. War can be defined as a direct violent encounter between two or more opposing parties with a view to gaining access to an object of their mutual interests. It is usually accompanied by the use of weapons such as guns, bows and arrows, machetes, sticks, biological weapons, and weapons of mass destruction. (Insert bibliography #1). Genocide has been described as a specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against particular groups, with the intent to destroy the existence of such groups (insert bibliography #1). Having said that, one common factor often exhibited by genocide perpetrators is to destroy a group perceived to be a threat to the ruling power. The purpose of this paper is to take a look at both the historic and political causes for the Rwanda Genocide, and to distinguish whether ethnicity was the cause or was it the aspect of the conflict.

Prior to colonial era, Rwanda had larger population of Hutus compared to Tutsis and Twa. Rwanda as a country was divided into three ethnic groups i.e. Hutu (approximately about 85%), Tutsi (14%) and Twa (1%) (United Nations). Although, Tutsis were the minorities, they belonged to the higher strata compared to the other ethnic groups; Tutsis were privileged and had power and control over the Hutus and Twas. “Hutus were formerly bound to their Tutsi patrons via client ship” (Sinema, 2012). When Rwanda was colonized by Germany followed by Belgium, they favored Tutsis as they represented the upper class prior to the colonization. These created a social system like feudal system where there was a power difference between the Hutus and the Tutsis. Tutsis were considered as lord and the Hutus on the other hand, were considered as peasants. As a consequence, this created an ethic tension between the Hutus and the Tutsis and created a system more like apartheid. Nonetheless, they managed to co exist in Rwanda until they were decolonized. Although there is no social distinction between the Hutus and the Tutsis, the conflict between these tribes increased tremendously after the independence from Belgian that led to mass murder and ethnic cleansing of the Tutsi by the Hutu.