Part of a series on |
Genocide |
---|
![]() |
Issues |
Related topics |
Category |
Part of a series on |
Denial of mass killings |
---|
Instances of denial |
|
Scholarly controversy over mass killings |
Related topics |
Genocide denial is the attempt to deny or minimize the scale and severity of an instance of genocide. Denial is an integral part of genocide[1][2][3] and includes the secret planning of genocide, propaganda while the genocide is going on,[1] and destruction of evidence of mass killings. According to genocide researcher Gregory Stanton, denial "is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres".[4]
Some scholars define denial as the final stage of a genocidal process.[1] Historian, Richard Hovannisian states, "Complete annihilation of a people requires the banishment of recollection and suffocation of remembrance. Falsification, deception and half-truths reduce what was, to what might have been or perhaps what was not at all."[5]
Prominent examples include: the denial of the Armenian, Bosnian, Cambodian, and Rwandan genocides, denial of the Holocaust, and denial of genocides against colonized indigenous peoples.[6]
The distinction between historical revisionism and historical negationism, including genocide denial, rests upon the techniques and motivations which are used.
Historical revisionists and negationists rewrite history in order to support an agenda, which is usually political or ideological, by using falsification and rhetorical fallacies in order to obtain their desired results. Exposure of genocide denial and revisionism surged in the early 21st century, facilitated by the propagation of conspiracy theories and hate speech on social media.[6]
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search