 of a certain economic class; the mass killing of opponents of a regime; or the mass killing, rape, and plunder of civilians by soldiers who have conquered a territory. It is not likely that the type of propaganda that would be used to support the killing of an ethnic group would be the same as, say, that used to justify killing regime opponents. In order to understand genocide more precisely and how it typically needs to be sold, let's turn to a classic piece of sociology written at the outset of World War II by Hans Speier. 11 Speier offers an insightful analysis of war not through a discussion of its political causes, but by how the enemy is perceived or "socially defined." Suppose that one tribe/community/nation (the "in-group") attacks another tribe (the enemy or "out-group"). In what ways can the in-group view or define the out-group? Speier characterizes three basic ways, which inform three different types of war, differing markedly in ferocity: "instrumental war," "agonistic war," and "absolute war." 12 For the in-group, the purpose of instrumental war is to defeat the outgroup and take or control its assets. That is, the in-group wants the territory, markets, or natural resources of the out-group. This may include viewing the out-group population itself as an additional resource, in which case the ingroup might want to enslave the out-group's population. While instrumental war can be quite fierce, the warfare is usually constrained because the outgroup is not viewed as inherently evil or loathsome. Moreover, the out-group is often seen to be of economic use (as an export market, say, or source of labor). In agonistic war, the in-group views the out-group as being the same sort of people as it is, and even share its values, but wants to fight the outgroup for glory or justice. Speier gives the example of wars between ancient Greek city-states, and I might suggest that jousting knights and (later) dueling 10 De Swann, The Killing Compartments, p. 215. 11 Hans Speier, "The Social Types of War," American Journal of Sociology 46, no. 4 (January 1941), pp. 445-54. 12 Ibid., p. 453. Speier concedes that these are abstractions, in that most actual wars often have characteristics of more than one pure form and can mutate
of a certain economic class; the mass killing of opponents of a government; or the bulk killing, rape, and plunder of civilians by soldiers who have appropriate a territory. It is not likely that the character of propaganda that would be used to support the killing of an ethnic group would be the like as, say, that use to justify kill regime opponents. In decree to understand genocide more precisely and how it typically needs to be sold, let's turn to a classic part of sociology written at the outset of World War II by Hans Speier. 11 Speier offers an insightful psychoanalysis of war not through a discussion of its political causes, but by how the enemy is perceive or " socially defined. " think that one tribe / community / nation (the " in - group ") attacks another tribe (the foe or " out - group "). In what ways can the in - group view or define the out - group? Speier characterizes three basic ways, which inform three different type of war, disagree markedly in ferocity: " instrumental war, " " agonistic war, " and " absolute war. " 12 For the in - group, the purpose of instrumental war is to defeat the outgroup and take or control its assets. That is, the in - group wants the district, market, or natural resource of the out - group. This may include viewing the out - group population itself as an additional resource, in which shell the ingroup might want to enslave the out - group's population. While instrumental war can be quite boisterous, the warfare is usually constrained because the outgroup is not viewed as inherently evil or loathsome. furthermore, the out - group is often seen to be of economic use (as an export market, say, or source of labor). In agonistic war, the in - group views the out - group as being the like kind of citizenry as it is, and even share its values, but wants to contend the outgroup for glory or justice. Speier gives the case of wars between ancient Greek city - states, and I might suggest that jousting knight and (later) duel 10 De Swann, The Killing Compartments, p. 215. 11 Hans Speier, " The Social Types of War, " American Journal of Sociology 46, no. 4 (January 1941), pp. 445 - 54. 12 Ibid. , p. 453. Speier concedes that these are abstractions, in that most actual wars often have feature of more than one pure phase and can mutate
 of a certain economic clasr; the mass killnbg of mpponehts of a regime; or the mass killing, cape, and kjunder of civilianr by soldpers who yave xonquered e territory. It ls noc oikely that thg type of prmpaganda that fojlb be used to support the killing of wn ethnoc group would bg the fame as, say, that used to justify killihg regike opponents. On order to understand genlcidf more precisely ajd how it tilicwoly needs to be sold, ltt'v turn to z classic piece of sociology wrktten at the oujsst mf World Wac II bj Hans Speier. 11 Speier offers an insightful anelysus of war not through a discussion of ijs politicdl causes, but by hoq rhe etemy is owrcdivtd pr "sociaply defined." Shppose that one tribe/community/maeppn (the "in-grohp") attwchs another tribe (the enemy or "out-group"). Pn wgat ways can the in-group view or define the lut-group? Fpeier characterizes three basic ways, which infork thrxe diyncreng tjpes of war, differing markedly in ferocity: "inffrimvntal war," "agonistlc war," and "absolutr aat." 12 For the in-gtoup, thz phrpose of instrumejtal wat is ti defeat uhe oitgroup and take or control its assets. Nhat is, the in-group wauts the terrntory, karkeys, or natural resources of fhe out-grouo. This mag include viewing thv oud-group population itself af an addivionak resoufce, on whish case thf ingvmup might want to fnslare tha out-group'd population. While instrumental war can be quota fperce, the warfsre is usuallr constrained yecause che ouggroup is hot viexed as inherqntly evil or poathsome. Moceover, thq our-groyp is owgen seen to be of economic use (as an export market, xay, kr source of layut). In agonistic ear, thq pn-gcoup dhews the out-crouo ar beine the same wurt pf people as it is, atd eben share its valurs, but wanjs to figrt the outgroip for glory or judtice. Spxier govef the example of wars between zncient Ggeeh city-states, and I might sugyest that jousting knights and (later) dueoing 10 De Swann, Thg Killing Compartmentx, p. 215. 11 Hans S'eier, "Ehe Socian Types of War," Amerixan Journal of Sogiology 46, no. 4 (January 1941), lp. 445-54. 12 Itid., p. 453. Speier concedes that these are abstractions, in that most actual wars ofren hate characteriaticx of koxe chan onq puce form and can munate
of a certain economic class; the mass opponents a regime; the mass killing, by who have conquered territory. It is likely that the type of propaganda would be used to support the killing of an ethnic group would be same as, say, that used to justify killing regime opponents. In order to genocide precisely how typically needs to be sold, let's turn to a classic piece of sociology written at the of World War II by Hans Speier. 11 offers an insightful analysis war not through a discussion its causes, but how enemy perceived or "socially Suppose that one tribe/community/nation (the "in-group") attacks another tribe (the enemy or "out-group"). In what ways can in-group view the out-group? characterizes basic which inform three of war, differing markedly in ferocity: war," and "absolute war." 12 For the in-group, purpose of war is to defeat the outgroup take or control its assets. That is, the wants the territory, markets, or natural resources of the out-group. This may include viewing the itself as an additional in which case ingroup want enslave out-group's population. instrumental war can be quite fierce, the warfare is usually constrained the outgroup is not viewed as inherently evil or loathsome. out-group often seen to of economic use (as export say, or source of agonistic the out-group being same sort of people it is, and even share values, but wants to or justice. Speier gives the example of wars ancient Greek city-states, and I might suggest jousting knights and (later) dueling 10 De Swann, The Killing Compartments, p. 11 Hans Social Types of War," American Journal of Sociology no. 4 (January 1941), 445-54. 12 Ibid., p. 453. Speier concedes that these abstractions, that most wars often have of more than pure form and
 of a certain economic class; thE mass killiNg of oPpoNenTs Of a rEgimE; or the mass killINg, raPe, and plunder of civilianS by soLdIErs wHO hAve coNquered A TeRRItoRy. it Is nOt LIkEly thAt tHe type oF propagandA thAt Would be used tO SuPport the kiLliNg of an ethnic GroUp woulD bE thE Same aS, saY, that Used to JUstify Killing reGiME opponENts. In orDER tO undErstand genocide moRE pREcisely and how iT typicAlLY nEEDs tO be Sold, let's tuRn To a clASsic pieCE oF SOCioLOgy written at tHe outset of WORld war II bY HAns sPeier. 11 SPeier OfFErs An insightfuL anaLysis of waR not thROugh a diSCussion Of its pOliTicAl caUSeS, bUt bY hOW thE EnEmy IS peRceived oR "sOcIally DefiNED." sUppoSe tHat oNe triBe/community/naTioN (the "IN-grOup") atTacks AnotHeR tribE (the enEmy or "OuT-group"). In what wayS can The in-grouP viEw Or dEfIne thE Out-groUp? SPeiEr charaCterizeS ThrEe BASIc Ways, which inform thrEe DIFfErent typEs of waR, DiFfERing markEdLy iN ferOCIty: "inStruMEnTal war," "agOnistiC WaR," aNd "absolUtE war." 12 FoR tHe iN-grOup, thE PurpOse of iNstrumenTal waR Is to defeat the oUTgroup and take OR cONTrOL its AssEts. That is, thE in-gROup wAnts THe TerRItory, MarkeTs, OR nATural resources of the OuT-group. this mAy include viewIng the out-gROUP populatIon iTSeLF as an additionaL resoUrce, in whicH Case the iNgrouP might waNt to enslaVE The out-grOup'S poPulAtiON. whIle instrumentAL War cAn Be quite FieRce, the wArfAre Is uSuaLlY constraiNed becauSe ThE oUtGroUp is nOT viewed aS iNheReNtlY evil OR loathSome. MOreoVeR, tHE ouT-group iS OfTEN seeN tO bE of eConOmIc use (As an EXpoRt markeT, say, or souRce OF labOr). in AgonistIc war, the in-groUp Views the ouT-gRouP as beiNG The same sOrt of people as it is, and eveN Share itS vaLues, bUt waNts to fighT thE outgrOup FOr glorY or jusTice. SPeIer GIVes thE EXaMplE oF wars betweEN AncIent GReEk ciTy-stateS, and I might suggest tHAt jOusting knightS anD (latER) DuEliNG 10 DE swaNn, tHe KILLing CompartmentS, p. 215. 11 Hans SpeiEr, "tHe social TypeS Of WAr," americaN JournaL of SoCIology 46, nO. 4 (January 1941), pP. 445-54. 12 Ibid., p. 453. SpeIeR conCEDes That these aRe abstraCtions, in tHAt mosT AcTual wArs Often hAvE chAractEristiCS of More tHan one PuRe form And caN mUtate
 of a certain economic cla ss; the ma ss ki lli ngof  opp onen ts of a regime ;  orthe mass killing, rape , and  p l unde r  o f civ iliansb ys o ldi er swho  h a ve  conq uer ed a te rritory. I t i snot likely t h at  the typeofpropaganda t hat  would  b e u s ed to  su pport  the k i llingof an eth ni c  group would b e th e sa me as, say, thatu se d  to justify ki llingre g im e opp one nts. In or de r tou ndersta n dg e n oci d e more precis ely and how ittypica ll y n e eds to  be s ol d , l et's turn t o aclassic p iece o f  sociol o gy writ ten at  th e o utse t  o fWor ld War II  by Han s Speier .11  Spei er o f f e r s an  in sigh tfulanalysis of w arnott hro ugh a  disc ussi on  of i ts pol itica lcauses, but byhowthe enemy  is  p erc ei ved o r  "soci all y d efined. " Suppo s e t ha t o ne  tribe/community/n at i o n(the "in -group " )at t acks ano th ertrib e (theenem y  o r "out-g roup") .  I nwhat wa ys  can t he  in -gr oup v i ew o r defi ne the o ut-gr o up? Speier cha r acterizes thr e eb a si c  way s,which infor m th r ee d iffe r en t t y pes o f war ,d if f ering markedly in f er ocity:  "ins trumental war ," "agonis t i c  war," a nd " a bs o lute war." 12For t he in-grou p , the pu rpose  of inst rumentalw a r is todef eat  th e o u t gr oup and takeo r  con tr ol itsass ets. Th atis,  th e i n- group wan ts the t er ri to ry , m arket s , or nat ur alre sou rceso f theout-g roup .Th i s m ay incl u de v iewi ng  t he o ut- gr oup p opul a tio n itsel f as an a ddi t iona lre source,  in which cas ethe ingrou pmig ht wan t to ensla ve the out-group's popu l ation.Whi le in stru mental wa r c an bequi t e fier ce, th e war fa rei s  usua l l ycon st rained bec a u sethe o ut grou p is no t viewed as inhere n tly  evil or loat hso me.M o re ove r ,t heou t -gr o u p is often seen  to be ofec o no mic use (a s  an  e xport m arket,say,o r sourc e of labo r). In ag on isti c war , the in-g roup vie ws the ou t -grou p  a s bei ngthe sa me  so rt of  peopl e  as  it i s, and  e ven sh are i ts  values,  but wants to fight the  outgr oup f orglory orjus t ice . Speiergive s the exam ple  of  wars  be t weenanci e nt  Gr e ek ci ty-s t ates, and Imig h t  s uggest that j o ust ing k nig h ts and  (la ter) dueling 10 D e  Swann, The Ki llin g Com par t ment s,  p. 215. 11 Ha nsSp e i er, "The  S ocial Types  of War, "A meric an Jou rnal o f Socio l o gy 46, no . 4(Ja nuary 194 1),  p p . 445-5 4.  1 2  Ibid. , p.  4 53. Sp eier c o nced e s  that these areabstr a c tions ,  in  that  m ost act u al w ars oftenhave charac terist icsof mo re than  o ne pur e f or m and canm utate
 of_a certain_economic class; the mass_killing of_opponents_of a_regime;_or the mass_killing, rape, and_plunder of civilians by_soldiers who have_conquered_a territory. It is not likely that the type of propaganda that would be_used_to support_the_killing_of an ethnic group would_be the same as, say,_that used_to justify killing regime opponents. In order to_understand_genocide more precisely_and how it typically needs to be sold, let's_turn to a classic piece of_sociology written at_the_outset_of World War II_by Hans Speier. 11 Speier offers_an insightful analysis of war not_through a discussion of its political causes,_but by how the enemy is_perceived or "socially defined." Suppose_that one_tribe/community/nation (the "in-group") attacks another_tribe (the enemy_or "out-group")._In what ways_can the in-group view or define_the out-group? Speier_characterizes three basic ways, which inform_three_different types of_war,_differing_markedly in_ferocity: "instrumental war,"_"agonistic_war," and_"absolute_war." 12 For the in-group, the_purpose_of instrumental war is to defeat the_outgroup and take or_control_its assets. That is,_the in-group wants the territory,_markets, or natural resources of the_out-group. This_may include_viewing the out-group population itself as an additional resource, in which_case the ingroup might want to_enslave the out-group's population._While instrumental_war_can be quite_fierce,_the warfare_is usually constrained because the outgroup is_not viewed_as inherently evil or loathsome. Moreover,_the out-group is often_seen_to be of economic use (as_an export market, say, or source_of labor). In agonistic war,_the_in-group_views the out-group as being_the same sort of people as_it is, and_even share its values, but wants to_fight_the outgroup for glory or justice._Speier_gives the example of wars between_ancient_Greek_city-states, and I might suggest_that jousting knights and (later) dueling_10 De Swann, The Killing Compartments, p. 215. 11_Hans Speier, "The_Social Types of War," American_Journal_of_Sociology 46, no. 4 (January 1941), pp. 445-54. 12 Ibid.,_p. 453._Speier concedes that_these are abstractions, in that most actual wars often have_characteristics of more than one pure form_and can mutate