appears to be better explained in terms of dehumanization of the victims
Sure, but now ask yourself “why?” Why did dehumanization of the victims suddenly become acceptable?
I’m not talking about a reasoned weighing of pros and cons about the necessity of torture—that did not happen. What happened was that it was decided (and I am deliberately using the passive voice here) that it’s OK to declare some people non-humans and accept that laws, not to mention things like decency, do no apply any more.
Why did dehumanization of the victims suddenly become acceptable?
Why did dehumanization of Bosniaks “suddenly” become acceptable to Bosnian Serbs after the breakup of Yugoslavia? Dehumanization seems to run on tribal, emotional levels — on sentiment, as Rorty puts it — and not on consequentialism.
Sure, but now ask yourself “why?” Why did dehumanization of the victims suddenly become acceptable?
I’m not talking about a reasoned weighing of pros and cons about the necessity of torture—that did not happen. What happened was that it was decided (and I am deliberately using the passive voice here) that it’s OK to declare some people non-humans and accept that laws, not to mention things like decency, do no apply any more.
Why did dehumanization of Bosniaks “suddenly” become acceptable to Bosnian Serbs after the breakup of Yugoslavia? Dehumanization seems to run on tribal, emotional levels — on sentiment, as Rorty puts it — and not on consequentialism.