This article reviews the current state of comparative genocide theorizing, focusing on theories that attempt to account for the causes of genocide and the processes of genocidal killing. The literature is divided into three broad categories, based on the relative weight given to (a) individual or group agency, (b) structural factors, or (c) processes of identity construction in accounting for the origins and unfolding of genocidal destruction. The discussion of agencyoriented approaches focuses on theories that suggest that genocide is driven, in terms of decision making and perpetration, by elite decision makers, front-line perpetrators, and societal behavior. The literature on structural approaches is broken down into theories that stress the importance of culture, institutional organizations, societal cleavages, structural crises, regime type, modernity, and ideology. The final section reviews the literature on processes of collective identity construction. The article suggests throughout and in conclusion that although comparative genocide theorizing has come a long way in proposing a number of different explanations for the onset of genocide and the nature of genocidal processes, more work needs to be done with respect to the precise operationalization and testing of theories according to more rigorous comparative methodological practices.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

If we want to understand why political elites choose to commit genocide, we need to inquire into how elite perpetrators reconstruct the collective identity of the victim group such that genocide becomes the only possible policy option. This article argues that elites decide to commit genocide, and not some other less catastrophic policy of repression or violence, when three conceptual ''switches'' concerning the identity, interests, and future actions of the victim group are ''turned on'' by the perpetrators. First, members of the victim group lose their (often marginal) status within the political community and are constructed as outsiders, to whom rights and obligations are no longer owed. Next, they come to be seen as dangerous enemies whose continued physical presence is seen to pose an overwhelming threat to the political community. This second mortal-threat conception consists of three mortal-threat ''motifs'': the struggle between the perpetrator and victims as an epic battle; the victims as the controlling force behind, or controlled by, powerful threatening external forces; and the victims as carriers of deadly biological contagion. Finally, the victims are viewed as subhumans who can be killed without compunction. The process of identity reconstruction as a whole is underpinned by a pre-genocide history of exclusionary and authoritarian intergroup norms and practices, and of authoritarian approaches to conflict management, and is triggered by serious economic, political, or security crises.