Talk:History of Rwanda
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Habyarimana immediately instituted genocidal programs, which would be directed against all Tutsis and against any Hutus seen as in league with Tutsi interests. " Any source for these "genocidal programs?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.216.150 (talk) 22:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Early discussion
It would be helpful to explain which ethnicity is dying in the part "By April 1991 100,000 were dead, by May, 200,000".
Also, the "The prime minister and her 10 Belgian bodyguards were among the first victims." comes from nowhere. Who's she?
wasnt the belgian catholic church somewhat responsible for the slaughter? they said that the tutsian invading army was comunistic, and that communism was related with satan in some way.. i dont really remember how :/ Noone 12:15, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I haven't heard that before but that's quite a reach. When massive numbers of people of one ethnicity readily rise up and murder their neighbors of another ethnicity in a mass slaughter it is unlikely they were inspired by a church saying that some group was "communistic." Cecropia 14:27, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
France absolving itself of any guilt in Rwanda is hardly "ironic" ("characterized by often poignant difference or incongruity between what is expected and what actually is"). "Expected" pr "hypocritical" would be more apt if we need an adjective. Cecropia 14:27, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
From the article [my emphasis]:
- In a time before memory, the Twa were replaced by the migration of the racially Congoid forbearers of today's ethnic Hutus. The Hutus had been an agriculturalist people making traditionally no use of domesticated animals, and thus were culturally at contrast with the third of Rwanda's ethno-racial g Rwanda's ethno-racial g Rwanda's ethno-racial groups to arrive, the taller, racially Hamitic Tutsis.
Surely these pseudoscientific "racial" terms are derived from now-discredited nineteenth-century theories? Deleting these terms. -- The Anome 11:37, 24 May 2004 (UTC)
Well I wrote the part you shouldnt have deleted. You have reduced biological differences between the Tutsis and Hutus to a difference in height. "Taller" you called it. Scientificly discrediting many arguments for such a broad set of concepts as "race", does not change the basic truth that physical differences carried biologically are real, and in fact provided much of the albeit foolish legitimization of the various attitudes which played and continue to play a part in Rwanda.
There is simply no other description than "racially congoid" which expresses the point being made. "Taller" doesnt cut it. Why didnt you use your eraser on "Pygmy" too? - surely this term is even insulting in many cases. Tridesch
If I recall correctly from my rudimentary African History classes, the Tutsis and Hutus are not properly of different "races." Rather, the Tutsis were essentially just the ruling class, and appeared different because of differences in diet and life style. This article does not appear to address this issue. Given some of the other somewhat dated terminology used, such as "Racially Hamitic", I'm somewhat suspicious of the neutrality of this article. However not beign an expert, the best I can do is flag this down. Peregrine981 17:27, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Much as I suspected, here is an article [1] which discredits much of the wikipedia article. I shall look into some action on the subject soon.
Peregrine981 17:34, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
This depends on what you are calling race. Given the differing physical characteristics and, importantly, the perceptions of the parties involved, race could be correct. The opening paragraphs of the article are now verging on incoherant babble due to some 'expert' vandalizing it.
I would grant that many hutus look exactly like many tutsis, but there are still types who represent 'either or'.
tridesch
[edit] Early history / civilization sections
Any chance of getting some sort of idea what period the events described in the early history / civilization sections take place in? I realize it would be likely impossible to attribute exact dates, but any kind of rough idea would be helpful. Even the "background" section of Rwandan Genocide is more detailed. --Nephtes 15:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ethnic History of Rwanda
Having considerably shortened Rwandan Genocide#Background, I've moved the original Background section to a temp page, Talk:History of Rwanda/Ethnic History of Rwanda. Not all of that belonged in Rwandan Genocide. But it seems like there's information there that has not been incorporated into this article. -- bcasterline • talk 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Problems of lack of sources/citations/references/verification
Please see talk page of Rwandan Genocide and Bibliography of the Rwandan Genocide; much plagiarism previously (and perhaps still) from unacknowledged, unattributed sources in the main body of that article (and perhaps borrowings from it in this one). Since this article has incorporated some material from that article (without providing any references or citations of its own at all), verification is a big problem. Major editing help requested. NYScholar 04:06, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Origins of Tutsi and Hutu breakout article?
I started a section at History of Rwanda#Origins of Hutu and Tutsi to summarize parts of Mamdani's book. However, the section is rapidly getting out of hand. I am now considering breaking out an article Origin of Tutsi and Hutu, into which this section and info at both Hutu and Tutsi may be merged. I think I opposed such a similar proposal long ago, but I've come to the conclusion that a single article to consolidate information and sources may be in the best interests of the topic. Thoughts? - BanyanTree 06:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- To me it makes sense to have a combined article inasmuch as in Rwanda and Burundi these terms are defined in relation to one another. My understanding is that when speaking of origins here, we are speaking of the origins of names, identities, or statuses, not corporate groups -- I think this would be Mamdani's view too. If you have in mind a view of these terms or categories as more corporate "tribal" or quasi-nationalistic bodies of people, I would have a problem: as common language, long histories of intermarriage and a certain degree of other forms of mobility in moving from Hutu to Tutsi status & vice versa show, the rigidification of those statuses or identities into something more like what we usually mean by ethnic groups was substantially a colonial and post-colonial historical process. The genocide was thoroughly modern in its ideology and technologies of mobilization, and had nothing to do with so-called ancient tribal rivalries -- pre-colonial Tutsi-Hutu relations were unequal, but not genocidal, in fact the opposite, built on a division of labor in which the dominant status group's benefits from power made killing Hutu against their interests. In any case, other scholarship than Mamdani's would be relevant including that of Alison Des Forges, Catharine and David Newbury, René Lemarchand and Gérard Prunier (refs are in Mamdani's biblio); also relevant would be works by Leo Kuper from the 1970s on the (smaller) Tutsi genocide against Hutu in Burundi, on called The Pity of it All if memory serves and the other simply Genocide I believe, which looks at the phenomenon more generally but uses Burundi as an example. Chris Lowe 03:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the sources. My intention in breaking out the article was to give detail on the the groups from which the modern day Tutsi and Hutu claim descent, and shed some light on the variations of the Hamitic hypothesis that have spread unsourced through several articles. In that, I feel it is a decent first draft, though without the grooming that comes with multiple editors over time. I agree with the notion that the current conception of Hutu and Tutsi developed from events during the colonial period and since independence, though Rwabugiri's centralization of state power deserves mention as well. If I'm somehow giving the impression in the new article of the tired "ancient tribal hatreds"-argument, please make appropriate changes. I hope to eventually use Mamdani's book to source and expand both this article and Kingdom of Rwanda, but the wiki is full of distractions... - BanyanTree 04:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- There are some additional complexities that perhaps should be mentioned in passing in such an article. One is that the term Tutsi is used in the eastern part of the DRC, but is not necessarily opposed to Hutu. It is applied both to persons whose ancestors migrated into the area in the 18th century or earlier, and to more recent refugees from Rwandan (& maybe Burundian?) civil conflicts. One of the last of the dictator Joseph Mobutu's many despicable actions was fomenting anti-Tutsi violence within then Zaire as a nationalist maneuver, mobilizing several people of several other ethnicities said to be indigenous against the allegedly foreign Tutsi. Mararo Bucyalimwe has written on the deeper 20th century history of that situation. Mobutu's post-genocide actions, along with the presence of many Hutu refugees who were génocidaires or feared being labeled as such, and various invading and proxy factional armies linked to Kagame's Rwanda, Museveni's Uganda and other states fishing in rich troubled waters, have contributed to the tremendous insecurity in Eastern DRC that has produced death tolls far outstripping those in Darfur, even if the reports are exaggerate by a multiplier of five. Further still, a number of nearby and related or interacting pre-colonial kingdoms in what are now Uganda, Tanzania and the DRC also had similar functional or quasi-caste distinctions between herders and agricultural peasants that took on a somewhat ethnic appearance but were similarly somewhat permeable to social mobility in various ways to the Tutsi-Hutu distinction. But they did not use the terms Hutu and Tutsi, but described the distinctions with other terms. The prevelance of similar social and ideational structures in the region should be pointed out in passing. I think some of Ed Steinhardt's work and maybe Iris Berger's would shed some light on those distinctions; maybe the intro to David Newbury's Kings and Clans too now that I think of it, & refs there. Chris Lowe 03:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I had started Banyamulenge several years ago, but it definitely needs an update after reading Mamdani, though I can't figure out a proper article structure - a move to Congolese Banyarwanda and expansion perhaps? Similarly, Ituri conflict as a conflict between the Hema and Lendu has some explicit parallels that are acknowledged by the combatants. Cheers, BanyanTree 04:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] civil war
I deleted this paragraph "Habyarimana immediately instituted genocidal programs, which would be directed against all Tutsis and against any Hutus seen as in league with Tutsi interests. Habyarimana justified these acts by proclaiming it was the intent of the Tutsis to restore a Tutsi feudal system and to thus enslave the Hutu race." This is sheer political propaganda or to the least, wild assumptions. To this day, not even the so-called ICTR international court has been able to produce a single document proving the existence of such "genocidal programs". Ruramaguru (talk) 10:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)