Understanding Cultural Genocide in Current Political Contexts: Three Errors in Scholarship

In the current  global political context, loopholes in international law and global norms allow extensive violations of minority rights for the purpose of counter-terrorism or the safety of the state. One such violation, “cultural genocide,” has become embedded in discourse on human rights and genocide. Scholarship defines cultural genocide as the intent to destroy a group through targeting the language, religion, cultural figures, and other acts that endanger the group’s culture. Through an analysis of primary legal documents and scholarly work on genocide and human rights, I argue there are three errors scholars make when applying the term cultural genocide. First, scholars assume the intent to physically destroy the group is required for cultural genocide. In addition, an over-reliance on past court decisions has erroneously shaped scholars’ understanding of when genocide might occur. Third, the Holocaust is often synonymous with genocide, resulting in a hesitancy to declare cultural genocide for fear of undermining the Holocaust experience. These three errors lead to scholars overlooking the need to establish cultural genocide as a legal term. Scholarship must begin to explore cultural genocide as its own unique concept. By examining the Chinese Communist Party’s policies in Xinjiang, I will demonstrate how these three errors result in cultural genocide being divorced from its current political context. Scholarship must begin to move past assumptions centered on physical destruction of groups and explore how cultural genocide operates as its own category.

Accessibility | Non-Discrimination | Privacy | Report It