The Perils of Regionalism:Genocide in Rwanda :: essays research papers

In Priestleys Wrong Ism, he claims that nationalism is not the strength that binds a country together, but rather any of the small local areas we are all accustomed to growing up in that gives us strength. Priestley considers nationalistic ideas and movements to be headed by people who have a love of power and who have left out their regional ties. They no longer have feelings for the areas they came from and any loyalty developed over their lifetime is moire down.Priestley feels regionalism needs to be given more credit. He assumes it provides us with roots and a sense of attachment to our community which affect peoples lives in such a way that it creates a unique bond that contribute be very hard to break. So in a sense, regionalism shapes our identities and I concur with his assumption that people view themselves more as part of their region rather than a part of their nation. Loyalty to ones region can be compromised when individuals allow national power and greed to suppre ss their roots.There are many examples of how nationalism tries to take over a region to destroy its people. For instance genocide, in nearly all examples, has been started by a power-hungry national figure who has an agenda in mind that never takes into account what a local areas wish might be for their future. Hitler is an example of this type of authoritarian oppressor who had a very complex national strategy in place to exterminate the Jews. He certainly did not consider or recognize regional differences in Europe, but rather put forth his own agenda. Genocide is on a whole different level than all other umbrages against humanity. The circumstance I will describe shows how Priestleys concept of internationalism also comes into play demo how our global watchdog agencies, such as the UN, can be slow to respond to an atrocity. For the most part, the UN has avoided and has not responded to many genocidal conflicts. Every time subjects of genocide or other similar crimes against hu manity have come up, debate was intense. This probably occurred because of the many different world perspectives and ideas concerning human suffering. In addition, the punishment of genocide deals with the crime after the annihilation of people occurs. The real problem to be dealt with is that of prevention of such crimes. It seems that a large percentage of every population are erect to obey national authority and be controlled, especially when many of the people are suffering from oppression and