How Is The Darfur Genocide Socially Constructed

Genocide can be defined as acts of mass violence with the intent to damage or eliminate a whole based on ethnicity, race, or sometimes religion. A social construct is a theory that things are made from human interaction and understanding. Race and ethnicity can both be categorized as a social construct because they vary by culture, by geography, and how people classify or identify them. Many anthropologists study not only social constructions, but also the effect they have on the world. Genocide is one example of how social constructions can be perceived as dangerous to humankind. Darfur genocide is a recent example of how strong ethnocentrism and social constructions can divide any given country. The Darfur genocide started roughly in the year 2003

During the Darfur genocide, the government would attack South Sudan’s African groups (Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa) by airfare. Janjaweed militia burned villages, sexually assaulted children and women, poisoned wells, and carried out other vicious acts. Between the years of 2003 to 2005 there were 200,000 civilian deaths and over 2 million people removed from their homes. The views of the Janjaweed were simple. The southern regions of Sudan had oil, while the North had desert. Janjaweed and the government knew that whoever had control of the oil had the power to trade for money, to arm the military, take over land and continue growing their viewpoints. This idea that the Arab people are superior and deserve the land over the northern Africans is a prime example of ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism falls back on the belief that one’s group is higher or superior to another, which is displayed in the Darfur conflict. The Northern Arab people, who were mostly Muslim, believed that an easy way to justify these violent actions was to seek the southerners as the