Genocide denial functions to preserve belief in a just world.

Evidence

Many have denied, without reference to the history and definition of the term, that genocide has occurred in Bosnia. These denials have done harm. No one wants to believe that a people are being exterminated because of race, religion, or ethnic identity and that governments who have the power to stop it refuse to do so. If an entire people are being killed, then on some level we may wish to believe, as we are constantly being told about Bosnia, that “there are no innocents in this war,” that the people suffering deserve what they get. To acknowledge even the possibility of genocide, the mass killing of people simply because of who they are, calls into question fundamental beliefs about the possibility of a just foundation to our existence. Denial, however thinly argued, can be effective in lessening public appetite for the difficult process of enforcing the Geneva Genocide Convention. — Michael A. Sells, The Bridge Betrayed, 110

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Denial is a reliable predictor of further genocidal massacres — Gregory H. Stanton, Ten Stages of Genocide, 16

Related

• A few denials can disrupt efforts to halt genocide in progress (similarity 0.86)
• Denial is a reliable predictor of further genocidal massacres (similarity 0.83)
• Resisting genocide requires first confronting one’s own traditions’ crimes (similarity 0.81)
• Denial always follows genocide and signals further massacres (similarity 0.81)
• Denial of past genocide signals readiness for future genocidal massacres (similarity 0.80)
• Rewarding genocidal impunity in Bosnia would model success for future perpetrators worldwide (similarity 0.79)
• The Bosnia genocide was religious in four distinct, compounding senses (similarity 0.78)