The Paradox of Our Time

In 1994, Rwanda endured a genocide that arose due to racial prejudices and was the consequence of a four years civil war involving the death of tens of thousands of defenseless people. In the help of this example, this paper will attempt to illustrate and validate the theory of Collette Guillaumin posited in "I know it's not nice, but..." the changing face of race", in which she questions and challenges the way in which we think about the term "race".

Three main arguments will be proposed. The idea that the concept of race becomes existent only when a group of people start to believe in it, without any empirical or scientific explanations, will first be suggested. Secondly, it will be argued that the term "race" is used as a political instrument, for the benefit of the supposedly superior group. In Rwanda specifically, it has been used as a strategy to legitimize the control over the state. Finally, the paradox of the term will be illustrated by the tangible and brutal consequences that it produces.

Due to the short length of this paper and the complex past of Rwanda, historical facts and details about the genocide will only be provided if it is useful in explaining what happens once the concept of "race" is socially accepted. An effort will also be made to understand under what process a certain group of people spontaneously accept to use extreme violence towards their neighbors who did not harm them personally. This will lead us to the conclusion that the source of the genocide is racial but that differences arose due to emotional power and constructed feelings against each other rather than factual differences.

Theory

"Race" is an evolving term since it is a notion that initially does not exist, but that became existent for its real consequences and presence in society.

For many years, the notion of "race" was not questioned and simply socially accepted. It was claimed that human groups were differential by nature and that there was a natural line separating them. Physical characteristics such as skin color were strongly attached to this term. Later on, social and cultural aspects became linked to the concept. But, it was still argued that it was the biological features that engender the social and cultural distinctions.

Categorizing human kind is a built up idea that had as a purpose to justify domination or sometimes even obliteration of one group of people over another. This process, involving a supposedly superior category occurred consciously but given the importance and reliance on science, the idea of physical category was not challenged for a long time.

Nowadays, the concept has been rejected empirically by natural sciences, but it does not mean that the mentality has changed concerning the idea that humans are naturally different and that the great divides in society reflect natural differences.

There is no absolute definition of such a theoretically non-existent term, which is the reason why it is often use as a political mean to benefit of a certain category. However, even it is scientifically unfounded, it definitely has empirical effects. Its reality cannot be ignored, for it organizes the world. It is present in politics and history; it is incorporated in law and is the cause for the death of millions of people. "Race" is a pretext employed by states to achieve goals of domination, repression, discrimination, exclusion, exploitation and extermination. The idea of race became existent due to social factors and is therefore a paradoxical term.

"Race": an invented term?

In order to successfully look at the origin of the notion of race in the Rwandan society, it is important to consider the pre-colonial relationship of the two major clans, the Tutsi and the Hutu. Were they different social classes or actual distinct ethnic groups?

The genocide is a result of long-lasting ethnic hatred, (Jefremovas, 1997) but does it suggest that there was always rigid cleavage among the Rwandan society? No, peoples lived harmoniously before the colonizers created strict ethnic divide. There were different clans, but there were no such things as definite entities because people could move from one group to the other by marrying. The country was also a monarchy dominated by a Tutsi king whose power was measured by the number of cattle, thus whoever managed to obtain a great number of cattle could be a Tutsi and highly respected. (Uvin, 1997; Uvin, 2001) Moreover, they were united through their shared language and religion. (Jefremovas, 1997; Uvin, 1997; Uvin, 2001)

During the era of colonization, the concept of "race" was commonly used to justify the acts of Europeans but was also a depiction of Eurocentric mindset in general. The colonialist introduced the myth that Tutsi were superior to the Hutu. (Magnarella, 2001; Uvin, 1997) Colonizers were convinced of the Tutsi's superiority and saw them as more "intelligent, reliable, and hardworking" (Uvin, 1997, p.95) The Belgians therefore distributed each Rwandan a sub-national identity, designated in accordance with the "ethnicity" of their fathers which was defined by physical characteristic. The Tutsi were taller and lighter, which made the Europeans judge them as more capable to rule since they had more similar to Europeans. (Uvin,1997; Magnarella, 2001) The differences between the clans are due to their distinct economic activities. The fact that the Tutsi were cattle farmer, the Hutu dealt with agriculture and the small group of Tawa occupied themselves with hunting and pottery explicate their respective physical traits due to their differences in diet. (Uvin, 2001) Even if some would claim the improbability of the colonizers to create distinctions out of nothing and that there was natural differences in moral, ethical and genetic features of the two groups, it can very well be a result of biased sample; a product of the colonizer's imagination, whereas if all the tall Tutsi were distinctively put together as belonging from the same race, of course it might proof that all Tutsis are tall, but this does not imply that it was naturally so. (Uvin, 2001)

Our main concern however, is that the Belgians categorized them according to what they had judged as being a "race", that the Tutsi were biologically and naturally superior. They created strict racial groups which did not exist before. This imagined hierarchy made the distinctions in power between the ethnicities more rigid and reinforced the Tutsi's ego feeling but also created a feeling of humiliation and inferiority on the side of the Hutu that

...