The Anthropology Of Genocide - WNLibrary

confronting genocide of indigenous peoples 61
Some members proposed at the 1985 meetings of the Sub-Commission on the
Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities that the definition of
genocide be broadened to include ethnocide, but it was opposed by some members
who felt that this might result in political interference in the domestic affairs of states
(ibid.: 16). It was also suggested that the protection of minorities’ culture should
be the responsibility of other international bodies besides the United Nations—
meaning, presumably, organizations such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific,
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the International Labour Organization
(ILO), and the United Nations Industrial and Scientific Organization. Such
a strategy, though, as was noted, might not be very effective, given the lack of enforcement
capabilities and the staffing limitations of these institutions.
TYPOLOGIES OF GENOCIDE
A number of typologies of genocide have been presented, some of which include
actions involving indigenous peoples specifically. Dadrian (1975), for example, identified
five types of genocide: (a) cultural genocide, in which assimilation is the perpetrator’s
aim; (b) latent genocide, the result of activities with unintended consequences
(for example, the spread of diseases during an invasion); (c) retributive
genocide, that designed to punish a segment of a minority that challenges a dominant
group; (d) utilitarian genocide, the using of mass killing to obtain control of
economic resources; and (e) optimal genocide, which is characterized by the slaughter
of a group to achieve its obliteration.
Chalk and Jonassohn (1990:12–15) identified four types of genocide: that designed
(a) to eliminate a potential or future threat; (b) to acquire economic wealth; (c) to create
terror; and (d) to implement a belief, theory, or ideology. As they point out, genocide
associated with the expansion of economic wealth was closely associated with
colonial expansion into Asia, Africa, and the Americas (Chalk and Jonassohn
1990:36). As will be discussed below, destruction of indigenous groups and their societies
has continued and even increased during the twentieth century, due in part
to rapidly expanding business activities and both large-scale and small-scale development
projects (Burger 1987; Gedicks 1993; Wilmer 1993; Hitchcock 1994, 1997).
The process of contact between immigrant and indigenous groups all too often
had tragic consequences. Some groups received especially harsh treatment in the
context of colonial expansion, notably hunter-gatherers (Kuper 1985:151; Gordon
1992; Hitchcock and Twedt 1997). One of the cases cited most frequently is that of
Tasmania (Turnbull 1948; Morris 1972; Jonassohn and Chalk 1987:130, 204–22;
Barta 1987; Tatz 1991:97–98). The white residents of Tasmania planned and executed
what they felt was a Final Solution to the “Aboriginal problem” (Morris
1972:61). As Synot (1993:15) notes, “The most graphic image in Tasmanian history
remains that of a continuous line of armed invaders marching through the bush,
driving tribes of Aboriginals before them into Foresters Peninsula where they were
exterminated.” In fact, however, the “Black Line,” or cordon of military person