Democide is mass murder carried out by a government. Genocide is an example. So are the massacres carried out by the Mongols, the human sacrifice of prisoners of war by the Aztecs and the political purges of Stalin. It does not count those who die in battle or during an operation on a military target. Capital punishment does not count either.
Stalin, as a winner of the Second World War, helped to shape the meaning of the word genocide so that it condemned Hitler, who killed millions for racist reasons, but not himself, who killed millions for political reasons.
But the word democide itself was shaped by an anti-communist American, political science professor R.J. Rummel. So while it takes in the crimes of Hitler and Stalin it does not count wiping out the American Indians! Because aside from the Trail of Tears and some massacres amounting to no more than 15,000 dead, it was not American government policy! (He also hugely undercounts the democide of the Philippine American War.)
Despite that Rummel’s studies seem to be the most thorough done to date.
As murder, democide must be done on purpose. And as murder, reckless disregard for human life can count too. For governments that would mean things like driving people off their land, not stopping a famine when possible and sending people to wretched prison camps where many will clearly die.
A grey case is Mao’s Great Leap Forward. It led to a famine that killed tens of millions. Rummel at first did not count it as democide since it seemed that Mao changed his policies once he saw his mistake. But it later came out that Mao did not care – that the Communist Party had to force him to change course! So Rummel now counts it as democide.
More have been killed in democides than in war – even before the days of Hitler, Stalin and Mao. Rummel says that governments will kill when they think they can get away with it: power kills, absolute power kills absolutely.
Known democides of a million or more (I use middle values where possible):
- 221 BC-1655: China: 31.0m
- 71 BC-476: Roman Empire: 1.0m
- 400-1900: Iran: 2.0m
- 940-1917: Russia (tsarist): 2.1m
- 1095-1272: Crusades: 1.0m
- 1110-1900: Turkey (Ottoman Empire): 2.0m
- 1206-1900: India: 4.5m
- 1215-1401: Mongols: 29.9m
- 1400-1800: Congo: 2.2m
- 1451-1870: European slave trade: 17.3m
- 1487-1521: Mexico (Aztecs): 1.0m human sacrifices
- 1492-1900: Latin America: 13.8m Amerindians
- 1570-1638: Japan: 1.5m
- 1600-1900: Caribbean: 10.0m slaves worked to death
- 1618-1648: Thirty Years War: 5.8m
- 1651-1987: British Empire: 1.1m (not counting slavery)
- 1681-1787: China: 2.0m rebellions against the Manchus
- 1800-1900: Brazil: 1.5m Amazon rubber companies
- 1826-1827: South Africa (Zulus): 1.5m
- 1850-1864: China: 12.0m Taipeng Rebellion
- 1860-1869: China: 3.0m Triad Rebellions
- 1900-1920: Mexico: 1.4m
- 1909-1918: Turkey: 1.9m
- 1917-1987: Russia (USSR): 61.9m
- 1923-1949: China (Maoist): 3.5m
- 1926-1949: China (KMT): 10.1m
- 1933-1945: Germany (Nazis): 20.9m
- 1936-1945: Japanese Empire: 6.0m
- 1944-1987: Yugoslavia (Tito): 1.1m
- 1945-1948: Poland: 1.6m
- 1945-1987: Vietnam: 1.7m
- 1948-1987: North Korea: 1.7m
- 1949-1987: China (PRC): 35.2m
- 1958-1987: Pakistan: 1.5m
- 1975-1979: Cambodia: 2.0m
- 1983-2005: Sudan: 1.9m
- 1994-1998: North Korea: 1.0m
I added the last two since Rummel only goes up to 1987.
Even by Rummel’s numbers slavery and genocide by whites killed 41.1 million before 1900 – more than were killed by the Mongols (29.9m) or anyone else up to that point except the Chinese (45.0m, though over a much longer period).
See also:
- Murder by government – democide – Rummel’s website
- genocide
- Cherokee Trail of Tears
- Philippine-American War
Following on from Peanut & the original post; slavery is universal & not the practice of one type of group, that whilst over time different groups have experienced harsher or more consistent forms of abuse by enslavement & that while some may argue that larger accounts of democide appear perpetrated by certain peoples, slavery and it’s violent associations; I think remains a mainly economic motivation and not endemic of one or more groups. The fact that some figure more prominently in some examples is a matter of history and opportunity, not predisposition or some primordial presence of exclusive evil. Ruling groups or a powerful individual might historically use reasons of (the so-called term of) race or eschewed religious thinking in support of enslaving cultural groups and people; as a means of convincing through self righteous belief, to ease social conscience or the national psyche’ to do so, though the truer reasons for such is money, power & arrogant ignorance perhaps. I do however find the numbers used in the table of democides to be questionable, that even by estimates some ancient sources to be dubious in it’s accounting? Like the time of the Inquisition, many people think people died in their millions, though the numbers are considered now by some to be in the tens of thousands? Even in more recent history, numbers can be miles apart, Edi Amin for example is said to of killed between 100,000 to 500,000 Ugandans and Pol Pot is recorded to of massacred 800,000 to a possible 3,000,000 Cambodians, what % of each population this represents I am unsure and could therefore paint a greater picture of this terror possibly? However, thats a fair range between numbers on both accounts. Nothing is concrete with these numbers and like history & areas of science are open to theory and approximations, mainly peoples best guess? Although, still a guess none the less, therefore we must be careful when attempting to authoritively classify such numbers as a means of surveying race, culture, religion, politics & death. If the aim is to promote a deficient trait within a select group of people towards murder or abuse then that persons motivation is flawed and can not handle history with the neutrality that like subjects require? What one might find is that because “more have been killed in democides than in war” that ideology is a driving force for such atrocities and not a person’s controversial blood quantum’s or skin colouring, that like DNA research, thus our understanding is with its limitations, so too must these numbers be treated perhaps as loose approximates, thus with conjecture open to revision at any time. Now, as an end point, by yourself giving the following end note; “slavery and genocide by whites killed 41.1 million before 1900 – more than were killed by the Mongol (29.9m) or anyone else up to that point except the Chinese (45.0m).” can those classified as ‘white’ perhaps be made more clearer by distinguishing the many groups and their divergent DNA patterns, within this general grouping of “WHITES” & by comparing those stat’s with ‘Chinese’, what can be gained or learned here? And, what is your point?
LikeLike
@ Mikey
Some like to paint blacks or Africans as the most savage or violent part of mankind. It simply is not true. These are the OTHER crime statistics that they never talk about. They will bring up Rwanda – but, as terrible as that was, it was too small-time to even make this table.
Or: They will point to the Mongols as if they were worse than whites. Well, they were not.
I do not believe that any one part of mankind was born more violent than another. But some do and they throw black misdeeds in my face – as if whites were harmless creatures, which is utterly absurd. They are as violent as they come.
LikeLike
“Democide” is the way of so-called modern life; though I prefer the term “Occidentalism.” Occidentalism, as the dictionary defines, is the ways and mannerisms of European people. Truly this aspect of Occidentalism doesn’t need to be condemned. Early African ancestors pointed out how no one liked fighting more than their European colonizers, an aspect which clearly proved advantageous to the colonization efforts of European countries.
The issue with “Occidentalism” and “Democide” are not that they are practiced, but that they are practiced by African people, whom I refer to as “Originals.”
For take the Congo as an example. An area now suffering from a GENOCIDE; which if one acknowledges that there’s a world government in place, can also be considered a DEMOCIDE. Read the accounts of the foot soldiers. A “Black American” soldier recently died in the Congo–and troops from Rwanda et al. are killing, looting and raping in this country. What does that tell you of Africa’s situation?
Our African ancestors once, in war, tried to frighten one another into submission, thinking, even in war, killing inappropriate unless forced. Yet now, under Occidental (Western–White–European) guidance, we share the same disregard for life which caused our recent revival of misery.
When we speak of Democide (or Genocide), we should speak of the Congo, and truly analyze that world terror. I understand that Abagond’s cut-off for this post was 1987, but the silence on the Congo, which claimed over 5 million lives and many million rapes, hurts; especially as it continues to this day.
As I stated a month ago:
[1]
Hotep (Peace)
[1] http://africanbloodsiblings.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/crisis-in-the-congo/
LikeLike
Simply amazing.
Even to this day, with all the evidence and overwhelming proof, most whites will try to make it seem that blacks are the most savage creatures ever born.
I’ve never been fully able to understand this blindness.
Simply amazing.
LikeLike
Ehm, this is incomplete. What about all the slaves that went to middle east? not a insignificant amount as Americans like to think. Even the most conservative estimates tops most of these stats.
LikeLike
Responses like Mikey’s give me gut laughs. They just don’t get the gist of these posts! They will trot out all sorts of historical facts, stats and ‘articles’, all the whilst missing the point. The point is, is that whites love to pull the blacks are aggressive and violent arguments, while the poor whites are generally good as a group. Sure, there are a few miscreants such as Ted Bundy and the odd criminal, but it is the individual who commits these crimes, it is in no way a reflection on that group. But when it comes to blacks, they will attribute malfeasance behaviour to the group, claiming that all have a propensity towards violent and malfeasance behaviour. Even the good Negroes better watch themselves as their true ‘nature’ are in danger of coming out. This post isn’t about how slavery was perceived or utilized in this and that culture, yet Mikey brings that up.
can those classified as ‘white’ perhaps be made more clearer by distinguishing the many groups and their divergent DNA patterns, within this general grouping of “WHITES” & by comparing those stat’s with ‘Chinese’, what can be gained or learned here?
I find it convenient and hilarious on your end that what constitutes ‘white’ in these arguments, changes if the conditions show whites in a bad light. All of a sudden the question that begs for an answer, is who is ‘white’?
And, what is your point?
What’s yours?
LikeLike
“..what is your point?”
Those who have eyes that can SEE, plainly see this.
The unspoken/unwritten mandate of the white (Borg-ish) collective is – we will assimilate/control you, even if we have to engage in violence/murder to do so.
LikeLike
1885 – 1908: Congo: 10m (Belgium under King Leopold II)
LikeLike
An article from Nat.Geo. from a few years ago came to mind. It covered 20th Century genocide…http://www.sangam.org/2011/06/Genocide_Unearthed.php?uid=4367
Again, it’s Nat.Geo’s rough estimate from 1900-2000+ that probably has democide mixed in.
LikeLike
@ ch555x
Thanks!
@ SomeGuy
Thanks. I noticed that Rummel left out that one too. He tends to low-ball or overlook democides committed by democracies, particularly English-speaking ones.
LikeLike
This only reinforces the idea that we are our own worst enemy. Ego and greedy should be thrown into the pot too.
LikeLike
damn I didn’t realize Stalin killed so much. Why did he kill so many of his own people like that.
LikeLike
Herneith said:
“I find it convenient and hilarious on your end that what constitutes ‘white’ in these arguments, changes if the conditions show whites in a bad light. All of a sudden the question that begs for an answer, is who is ‘white’? ”
That would go along with the ” But…but…others did it too!!!!” argument.
LikeLike
@ Dave,
Just curious, is there a reason that the only thing you got from that was Stalin and how he killed “his own people”?
LikeLike
Ace, it’s not the only thing I got out of it…….Just curious what did you want me to get out of it, that white people are evil or something. I was surprised at the 60million number. Im not an idiot man. I already knew Stalin was a Douche.
LikeLike
It’s bad enough to commit genocides or democides, but to indirectly deny it and magnify the ills of another group of people is perpetually misleading.
Genocides is the result of one of the deadliest kind of hate, political gain and greed are its close companion.
When in these modern times groups of people (all races of people, not whites and blacks alone) can still hate and discriminate to such extents, it is very easy to commit such a crime, as democide, to humanity.
LikeLike
Warning:Goverment can be Hazardous to you Health
LikeLike
and by the way ACE your comment was more like a DEUCE without the wild.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Le Chouchou Du Professeur De La Communication and commented:
This is an excellent post for history. I have never heard about democide before.
LikeLike
I’ll be honest when people’s bias become far too evident the conversation suffers. Look Abagond and Brothawolf and others have argued that all white commenters speak from a script. I’M BY NO MEANS one of them. When you engage me get ready for a real mfr. I wear my emotions on my sleeve . Some people have said my Italian herratage has something to do with that, so be it. I embrace that stereotype because it can be a bad thing, but not usually. At least not in my case because I do have a good heart. I’m not out to hurt anyone, I’m here to voice my opinions. I feel I have a right to do so. I feel just as strongly about your right.
LikeLike
I don’t understand why this guy had to invent his own word for these massmurders and genocides. Well, I guess he needed some tool for his studies or was thinking that the mysterious Left had hijacked other terms.
@mikey: It was IDI AMIN, not EDI AMIN.
@all:
As for Stalin, one has to realise that before he became a “revolutionary” he was a gangster, or bank robber plus some other banditry, “in the name of the revolution” of course (at least as those incidents were later told by the official soviet history). One of his closest friends and older companions was well known gangster and according to some sources his “political protector” was none other than the boss of Georgian underworld at that time. So basically he later ran the whole USSR like a gangster boss, killing off the competition, true or suspected, and spreading terror around. In a vast land that meant that he managed to kill millions.
When Mikhail Gorbatchev rose to the power he stated publicly, based on previously secret KGB documents, that Stalin killed 14-16 million people. That is he murdered them. Of course millions of more died of hunger and disease particulary in the civil war and right after it in 1918-22. And Stalin and the bolsheviks also used hunger as weapon as in case of Ukraine (some 3 million perished, operation was lead by a ukranian guy called Nikita Hrustshev).
Millions of more perished on labour camps and slave work building those mega power plants, factories and cities in Siberia and along the river systems etc.
BUT, and here is the big but, one has to remember that USSR lost some 22 million people during the WW2. And that is usually counted into these figures. Still, good ole Joe Stalin (Yosef Dzugasvili for real, Stalin was his nickname and means a Man of Steal, which did fit nicely) was a pretty bad boy.
As for Mao, he knew what he was doing and believed it was okay. Wiping out tens of millions of people fit right into his thinking of starting a new and creating a New Society. The khmer rouge in Cambodia had the same idea. We can see from the atrocities of the Red khmers what was the idea of Mao’s Great Leap. In Cambodia it was called the Year Zero, a new beginning, clean slate, and that required of killing all those who had been contaminated by the previous culture and life. Just like in China. It is also good to remember that the khmer rouge were backed by the communist China and most loyal friends in UN Great Britain and USA.
LikeLike
White people and Asian people had all the best weaponry, and a head start on travel too. Hence the body count. Another aspect to this is that some cultures tended to record things better than others, which is why a genocide in China would have been recorded, but the interethnic battles in Africa and America were not. With modern recording practices, we get to see the true picture-Like Sudan (400,000) and Rwanda (almost 1, ooo,ooo),
LikeLike
I thought it was, power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely?
Learned something new today.
LikeLike
@ Dave,
Nope, what I was hoping you’d feel the same sense of outrage over the other examples of genocide or democide, which you seem not to. I find it funny that you would notice Stalin out of all of those. See, me? Personally? I find the that the “democides” committed by Western European nations are played down a lot.
Also, you have the right to voice your opinion, and people here have the right to refute it if you present it as fact. Especially if you claim you aren’t out to hurt anyone but take views or positions directly intended to hurt people.
Also, the name puns are “funny”.
@ Pentagon, and somewhat @All
Also many people are quick to point out the atrocities that happen in Africa purely as a proof of pathology in order to excusetheir own racism, but they show no genuine outrage towards it. Idi Amin is only mentioned to prove a point, for example. But you wouldn’t hear about him otherwise. Same with Rwanda. That’s the most disturbing example because most white people refused to call that situation a genocide at all, or really give a crap. However, many people will bring it up now purely to show that “Blacks do it to”. Like the Papa Doc atrocities in Haiti.
However, they will notice that Stalin or Hitler killed a lot of acceptably white people and then the body count stands out to them, then they’re suddenly outraged. Even Stalin depends on the conversation, because when he’s discussed during a debate involving this information, his whiteness can suddenly be questioned, as will the whiteness of his victims. That way the connection to him being white (or his treatment of the Jews) can be cut to avoid any European nation looking bad.
LikeLike
The thinking that government views the people it is supposed to serve are “their” people may have to re-examine this thinking. Sometimes it is the aristocracy killing those they deem “useless eaters.” Government heads become part of the aristocratic class of people if they were not before becoming the leaders of governments.
We people of more visible melanin may need to go back and understand some of the nuances of European history. Maybe European whites unconscioulsy remember a time whan Picts, Moors, Danes, and Mongols, swarthy people, dominated and them militarily and economically. Maybe there is a hint of revenge when it came to the enslavement of black peoples beginning in the 15th century.
It took me a long time to reconcile how in the Baltics when one group was “ethnically cleansing” a people that looked just like them to me at that time could be called ethnic cleansing. They all looked white to me. How could it be “ethnic” cleansing, was the question that remained on my mind. Now, gaining more of an understanding about European history I came to understand why Oliver Cromwell could kill through famine and enslavment of the Irish, selling them into the Caribbean and the American colonies as slaves. His people and the people of the Baltics in the 1990’s understood these people were the remnant of the swarthy hordes that dominated them in previous history.
But, I do have a question to anyone. What is it called when whole races, and nations of people are erased from or white washed in the history books? What kind of ‘cide is this?
LikeLike
@amenta: There was no ethnic clensing in the Baltics in 1990’s. It took place in Balkan, in former Yugoslavias republics. Bosnian war for one.
LikeLike
@Sam thanks for the correction.
@Bulanik, I agree. Perhaps to all you stated.
LikeLike
Rummel’s list is deeply flawed. Not only does it leave out the 23 million Chinese civilians massacred by the Japanese in the 1930s-40s. But it also omits the Hindus killed by the Moghul Empire. Prof. K.S. Lal, suggests a calculation in his book ‘Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India’ which estimates that between the years 1000 AD and 1500 AD the population of Hindus decreased by 80 million. The Moghuls would round up Hindu “infidels” and kill them 10 thousand at a time as a “sacrifice to allah”. In case your wondering, Moghuls is another name for Mongols. So, yes, the Mongols are the “worst” if you want to put it in those terms.
Adding the Mongol, Japanese and Chinese totals produces over 150 million casualties for Asia. Which is more than three times what Abagond claims was killed by “whites”. Now, does this mean Asians are more prone to violence than others? Absolutely not. Asians have among the lowest rates of crime and violence of any population. Instead, this means that regions with large populations rack up large death tolls simply because there are more people to die.
For example, the 23 million Chinese deaths out of a billion people is proportionately small compared to the 800 thousand Rwandan deaths out of a population of 11 million. In the Chinese example, 2.5% of the population was killed. In the Rwandan example, 7.5% of the population was killed. Now, which group is more violent — the group that lost more people or the group that had the highest percentage of deaths?
Moreover, it was never Rummel’s contention that more deaths means a population has a more violent nature. In fact, that was the exact opposite of the point he was making. Rommel’s point is that authoritarian governments are more violent than liberal democratic ones. And, in fact, nearly every one of those democides occurred under an authoritarian regime.
And, since Agabond’s point was to sling mud at whites over the African slave trade I’ll point out that the figure he quoted is nowhere near the concensus. The death toll from four centuries of the Atlantic slave trade is estimated at 10 million. According to William Rubinstein, “… of these 10 million estimated dead blacks, possibly 6 million were killed by other blacks in African tribal wars and raiding parties aimed at securing slaves for transport to America.” In other words, most of the blacks killed each other.
Rubinstein, W. D. (2004). Genocide: a history. Pearson Education. p. 78.
LikeLike
I’d say the nation with the higher population density. Wonder which one that would be?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_density#Ten_most_densely_populated_countries
LikeLike
Does not the treatment of India’s “Dalits” ( previously called “Untouchables”(!)
for the past few thousand years count as democide? These people were the inhabitants of the country conquered and dispossessed by incoming migrants who then conveniently placed them at the bottom of the caste structure they had brought with them. In fact outside the caste structure, to be treated as “pariahs”. How many of them have lost their lives in this situation? T
LikeLike
For those that are surprised that Stalin killed so many, I would like to remind you that this is a man that killed his own son and sent so many ethnic minorities to gulags to be worked to death…
This is from the Pontian Greeks, but I’m sure every ethnicity has songs like this. Anathema se Kazakhstan means Curse you Kazakhstan
LikeLike
Those numbers are insane. I really do wonder why the massacre of the Indigenous people of the Americas was ignored. Weren’t the conquistadors and other explorers acting on the behalf of their monarchs? I don’t know but definitely interesting information.
LikeLike
Latin America was included, but not Anglo / Franco America
LikeLike
[…] democide […]
LikeLike
Government engineered famines by the British Raj in India.
According to some sources*, official British sources seem to score the death rate at more than 85 million deaths but suggest that figures are much, much higher.
“…avoidable deaths in India from British-imposed deprivation in the period 1757-1947 totaled 1.8 billion, an Indian Holocaust and an Indian Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention…”
The last of those famines in 1943, killed at least 3 million.
*http://bharatrakshak.wikia.com/wiki/Famines_in_British_ruled_India:_Their_Causes_and_Consequences
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/thereporters/soutikbiswas/2010/10/how_churchill_starved_india.html
LikeLike
^ Yeah, the figures above seem to exclude India from the British Empire as well as the Transpacific Slave / Coolie trade, each of which should number in the tens of millions
LikeLike
Kiwi, Jefe.
Abagond’s original article says:
Deadly government policies are deadly government policies!
I’m not trying to say that India is more “important” or something like this.
What I mean is that the sub-continent and it’s peoples and their many trajectories are customarily neglected.
It manifests in small and big ways.
It’s manifest in on a thread about democide, as much as it is generally so on a blog like this … yet as probably one of the world’s biggest population and probably one of history’s most exterminated nationalities in the last couple of centuries (in sheer numbers), India is rarely mentioned.
Actually, it seems excluded, an afterthought, in talk about “Asia”, overall.)
Come to think of it, as a place, a source of “impact” in some way, I can think of few occasions when it’s “a subject of investigation” or discussion.
And if it IS mentioned, then often “in passing”. That’s how it appears, at least.
LikeLike
^ thanks for being here and keeping on our toes.
Yeah, I am not fully comfortable with the explanation in the coolies thread too. There is some information missing. For the time being, we can only go on theories.
LikeLike
The Center for the Study of Political Islam estimates that Islam has murdered 260 million non-Muslims in its 1400 year existence, including 60 million Christians and 200 million other non Muslims. The reason; Muhammad in the Koran, Sira and Hadith repeatedly tells his followers (for the ages) “Kill the Kafirs wherever you find them for this is pleasing to Allah and advances Islam.” To set an example, Muhammad personally took part at Quraysh, a Jewish settlement in the Arabian peninsula, in the beheadings of 800 Jewish defenders of the besieged village after promising to spare their lives if they surrendered. Instead, not only did he behead them, he and his warriors first gang raped many of their wives and daughters in front the men and then, following the beheading of the 800 men, sold their families slavery and prostitution. The example Muhammad set has been followed by Muslim armies for Islam’s entire existence, including at Castello di Giovanni in 820 in Sicily where Muslim troops decapitated 8,000 Sicilian men and, as Muhammad would have ordered, raped their women and sold them and their children. This is the same example being followed by ISIS, Al Shebab and others of this evil cult in our own time. Not happy to tell the bald faced lies they already have here, the people who put together this blog claim Crusaders killed 1 million, when historical research put the number at only about 32,000. Violating the 9th Commandment, “Thou shalt no bear false witness,” was once punishable by severe penalties that, depending on the damage the lies did, could include death. Of course, any religion that teaches its followers ‘Taquiya’ or Sacred Deceit, lying to non-Muslims to advance Islam would not surprise anyone by actually lying to cover up its heinous crimes.
LikeLike
@ RPG
Please provide a link supporting your claim of 260 million. Thank you
LikeLike
@RBG
You people really need to read and comprehend what “Taquiya” actually is. It has nothing to do with lying to non-muslims to advance Islam. It has to do with denying ones faith for fear of life or life of their community.
LikeLike
The USSR’s democide of 61.9m is a shocking number. Is it because they help install communist genocide leaders in South East Asia, China and North Korea. For China and North Korea, it is astounding as to how they even could do this as foreign entity… Mind boggling to the max…
LikeLike
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Center_for_the_Study_of_Political_Islam
Please review source!
LikeLike