The mood switched from lively to somber with the drop of a hat. As we walked through the barely-cracked glass doors into the lobby, the gravity of this place settled into our chests, and we couldn’t help but fall silent.

 

Our group went through the memorial at our own paces, taking in what we could, and listening in on guided tours. The memorial’s patrons were diverse, and numerous languages bounced off of its brick walls. A sensation of dismay and surprise appeared ubiquitous across all groups as we learned about what occurred in 1994 and beyond. At baseline, the Rwandan Genocide describes the mass slaying of Rwanda’s Tutsi (and moderate Hutu) population: between 500,000 to 1,000,000 are estimated to have been violently murdered at the hands of the Interahamwe, a government-backed civilian militia. If one scratches even gently at the surface, it is immediately clear that the conflict is far more tumultuous than meets the eye, with elaborate plans, targeting, and international impact. By “international impact” I mean that withoutBelgian interference (destructive meddling in the realm of the construction of social polarization and stratification based on arbitrary distinctions, among other acts)and colonization it is highly unlikely that the genocide would have happened at all. By “targeting,” I’m talking about the calculated murders of Tutsi children in front of their siblings and mothers, carried out with blunt tools with the objective of maximizing pain. 

 

Rwanda’s Rwandan Genocide is very different from America’s Rwandan Genocide. The version that is fed to schoolchildren as a mid-afternoon snack is so sanitized that one can’t help but wonder why they bother to teach it at all. Perhaps the macabre nature of the event is both what repels and attracts teachers to it, but to include the genocide in the “African” history unit of World History classes without mentioning the magnitude of the atrocities committed, the grand failure of the international community in its entirety and without exception, and the lasting impact on the lives of every Rwandan is exploitive to the greatest extent.   

 

I will never be able to understand the power that the genocide has held over Rwandans and will continue to hold perhaps indefinitely. However, there are ways to consider issues such as these in ways that make them personally life-changing.  In this case, this new knowledge can be applied as a moment to consider semantics. 

 

As an American, it’s very easy to conceptualize this moment in American history as an example of extreme political unrest; this is true and also naïve. As a female American, it’s very easy to conceptualize this moment in history as an example of a frightening time to be female; this is true and also naïve. As a female American Jew, it’s very easy to conceptualize this moment in history as an example of a dangerous time to be anything other than white, male, and Christian; this is true and also naïve. What is also true, and hopefully much less naïve, is that different conflicts carry different weight, and must be understood in terms of the unique frames in which they exist; to use the same language across every one of the world’s many evils is to fail to recognize that evil exists on a spectrum, some simply more wickedthan others. 

 

I will never be able to internalize the Rwandan Genocide on a personal level, but the next time I feel validated in my desire to kvetch, I will do my best to recognize that in theory, the hindrances that I face and those faced by others are equally valid, but in practice are miles from comparable. What I’m talking about is perspective, learning how to recognize that there is a time and place to talk about every issue, and that sometimes it’s better to just listen.