With the US government increasingly embracing inhumane policies, I want to offer a few observations from my experience in Rwanda and what lessons it might offer for this moment. 1/20
As background, I lived in Rwanda in 1992-93 and watched the country move from optimism about possible transition to pessimism and fear as leaders divided the country along ethnic, regional, and political lines. 2/20
1) Atrocities do not require majority support. A committed minority with a passive or intimidated majority can accomplish considerable harm. Most Rwandans did not support the genocide but it happened anyway. 4/20
2) State support makes committing atrocities easier and more effective and makes opposition more difficult. The Holocaust and the 1994 genocide in Rwanda were legal and opposing them meant opposing the state. 5/20
3) Ideology does not work as many think. It does not convince most people. Instead it serves to single our potential victim groups and to sows confusion and fear. Most Hutu didn’t hate Tutsi … 6/20
…but came to see them as different and possibly allied with the invading RPF. Ideology is most important for the committed core of supporters, not the general public. 7/20
4) Comparative study shows that atrocities are never inevitable and that levels of violence can be reduced through things such as early and forceful condemnation by religious and other public leaders, popular protest, and media exposure. 8/20
See for example Scott Straus’s recent book on how genocide has been avoided in some African countries: amazon.com/dp/0801479681/… via @amazon 9/20
See also Helen Fein’s classic “Accounting for Genocide,” which explains why Jews in some Nazi-occupied states were killed in greater numbers than others. amazon.com/dp/0029102200/… via @amazon 10/20
What does all of this mean in Trump’s America? 1) Even though the majority does not support scapegoating immigrants, we need to take the threats seriously and oppose them actively. 11/20
2) Sorry Jeff Sessions, but the fact that actions may be legal does not make them moral or acceptable, but the fact that the US government is supporting anti-immigrant actions makes them harder to oppose. 12/20
3) Scapegoating immigrants has been a core point in @realDonaldTrump’s rise, from his attacking Mexicans as criminals and rapists in his first speech to the initial Muslim and refugee ban to today’s “No Tolerance” policy. 13/20
Trump’s promises to protect “real” (meaning white, non-elite) Americans from an immigrant threat energizes his base and drives public policy. 14/20
The anti-immigrant ideology also confuses issues, for example conflating refugees (those fleeing imminent threats) with other types of migrants so that the media and public consistently fail to distinguish between asylum-seekers from others. 15/20
By conflating all immigrants into a single group and then associating them with the worst members of the group – criminals, M13 gang members – Trump’s rhetoric treats opposing policies like child separation as support for open borders. 16/20
4) US treatment of immigrants does not have to get worse. We won’t stop the descent toward atrocity by convincing Trump’s committed supporters but by marginalizing them and energizing the majority. 17/20
As the ideology confuses issues, we need to work to clarify them. We need to be precise with our language and not get drawn down to the level of those promoting hatred. Strong, consistent, loud condemnation can have an impact. 18/20
Continuing to expose what is going on and its impact is also key. Working to gain maximum access to detention facilities and investigating the treatment of immigrants can help sway broader public opinion. 19/20
We can change the direction of our country, but it will not be easy, because at the moment, the national government is not on our side. We will not all be unified in our approaches, but we CAN stop the authoritarian drift. 20/20
