Powerful words such as “fascist,” “Nazi,” and “genocide” are often used carelessly.

Ever since 9/11 the political atmosphere in this country has been highly charged. Emotions on all sides of the political debate run high, and it is not uncommon for opponents to throw epithets at each other.

By that I do not mean run-of-the-mill curse words, but politically loaded and emotion-laden bombs. Powerful words such as “fascist,” “Nazi” and “genocide” are often used carelessly. But the gratuitous use of such words can have harmful ramifications.

For example, one may disagree with the Bush administration’s policies regarding Iraq or the ongoing struggle against Islamic fundamentalist terror, but to label supporters of such policies “fascists” or to describe the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as “genocide” is extremely pernicious.

For one, those on the receiving end of such emotion-laden terms may feel taunted and insulted by such invective. Example: I loathe the Nazis; the genocide they committed against my people horrified me as a child, and will haunt me for the rest of my life.

I also happen to be a supporter of the Iraq war and the overthrow of the Taliban in Afghanistan. But to label people like myself “fascists” or supporters of “genocide” is offensive — and hurtful.

Further, resorting to such language suggests that one is incapable of or unwilling to engage in reasoned debate rooted in facts. It indicates a weak argument fueled by emotion over reason.

The foundation of democracy and a hallmark of the university environment is that topics are discussed in a rational manner, that facts and well-reasoned arguments trump histrionics and hyperbole.

There are many legitimate reasons to oppose U.S. actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, but there is no legitimate argument to justify labeling such actions “mass genocide” — as has occurred on this campus.

Let’s look at the facts.

The U.S.-led forces removed a regime that was itself genocidal. Saddam’s regime ethnically cleansed and systematically murdered tens of thousands of Kurds in the north of Iraq. His regime drained the ancient marshes of the Maadan, the Marsh Arabs, destroying their ancient way of life while killing thousands.

The Baathists killed tens — perhaps hundreds — of thousands of Shiites. And Saddam Hussein launched 39 Scud missiles at Israel and repeatedly pledged to destroy the Jewish state, which constitutes a threat of genocide.

As for the Taliban in Afghanistan, not only did it harbor al Qaeda and refuse to hand over al Qaeda leaders, the regime treated women worse than animals and systematically slaughtered the Hazara, a local ethnic group. The United States ended the Taliban’s gender apartheid.

Did the U.S. kill innocent people while removing two of the world’s most odious regimes? Yes, but there has never been a war in the history of humanity in which innocents were not harmed. Tragic deaths of the innocent, however, do not constitute “mass genocide.”

If that is one's measuring stick for what constitutes genocide, then every war in history has been genocide. But if every war is genocide, then the term genocide has been rendered meaningless.

Once the term genocide loses its true meaning, one debases the memory of the victims of actual genocides. One belittles the memory of the six million Jews murdered in the Holocaust; of the extinct native tribes of the Americas; of the over one million Anatolian Armenians murdered by the Ottoman Turks, or of the 1.7 million Cambodian victims of Pol Pot’s Marxist nightmare. Abusing the term belittles the memory of 800,000 Tutsis in Rwanda who were hacked to death, and serves to remove the focus from the ongoing genocide in Darfur, Sudan.

The same holds true for labeling political opponents “Nazis.” The Nazis have come to represent pure evil — and for good reason. Not only did they murder six million Jews, but they exterminated millions of others and plunged the world into World War II.

You may not like Bush, but if Bush is a Nazi, then one can infer that the Nazis were no worse than Bush. If that’s true, then the Nazis weren’t so terrible after all because no rational person can argue that Bush has created extermination camps to eliminate millions of people from a specific ethnic group.

Words do count. They should be used with care, especially in an institution of higher learning.

> Comments