Podcasts about Raphael Lemkin

Our Election in Christ (7)  (audio) David Eells – 2/15/26 I'm going to continue speaking today about election and talk about the children and the work of the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit that giveth life; … (Joh.6:63). In the Book of Romans, we found out that before Jacob and Esau were even born, Jacob was called God's elect. (Rom.9:10) And not only so; but Rebecca also having conceived by one, even by our father Isaac— (11) for [the children] being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, (12) it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. (13) Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. Well, just as I'm sure you have questions, I had some questions, too, when I got this far in my revelation about election and predestination. What about the children? What about the babies? What about the doctrine of an “age of reason” that the Church has had for so many years? They say every child goes to be with the Lord, if they die before they reach the “age of reason,” and after that age, then they become accountable. Then it becomes their responsibility to accept the Lord and walk with the Lord. And so on. To me, that doctrine seemed contrary to election, according to everything I understood. I really wanted to know for myself, so I began to do some research. I decided to seek out how all of this fits together about children and election, but I want to remind you that both Jacob and Esau went past the stage of childhood; Jacob went on to manifest as a vessel of honor, and Esau as a vessel of dishonor. Neither one of them died as a child or as a baby. Let me share with you what I discovered. We know that, according to election, there are sons of God and sons of the devil, based on what God makes out of the clay and what a person becomes in their life (Romans 9:21). But, according to nature, I'd like to show you another teaching: (Heb.12:9) Furthermore, we had the fathers of our flesh to chasten us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of [our] spirits, and live? Some translations add in the word “our” to “Father of spirits” in this verse, but the word “our” is not in the ancient manuscripts of the Nestle's or Received Text, and there's no numeric pattern for that word to be there. He's the “Father of spirits,” as He's called elsewhere in the Bible. You may be questioning, “So is God the Father of our spirits or is He the Father of every spirit?” The answer can be found here: (Num.16:22) And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation? And another place says in (Num.27:16) Let the Lord, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation. That gives us two witnesses that He's “God of the spirits of all flesh.” When God breathed into Adam the breath, or the spirit, of life, the spirit that He gave Adam was a fresh, clean human spirit (Genesis 2:7), and I believe God gives everyone a fresh, clean human spirit. Now I want you to look at something that you may find surprising. Once you understand election and God's predestination of the elect, you can see how there are sons of God and there are sons of the devil. We've seen that the “wheat” are the sons of God and the “tares” are the sons of the devil. The wheat and the tares were sown in the earth, and in the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matthew 13:24,36-43), the earth was the hearts of men. Universally, the hearts of men are that “earth” in which God sows His seed and in which the devil sows his seed. But what about that heart before it manifested the seed of God or the seed of the devil? When Paul preached to the pagans at the Areopagus, he told them, (Act.17:24) The God that made the world and all [things] (The word “things” is not in the original; it was added by the translators.) therein, he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; (25) neither is he served by men's hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all [things]. Again, the word “things” is not in the original. “He giveth to all life, and breath.” The word there for “breath” is the Greek word pneuma, and it's the same word translated as “spirit” in other places in the New Testament. The words “breath” and “spirit” both come from the same word pneuma, which is where we get our word for “air.” As we read on down, we're going to see if this word “all” really means “all” because this word “all” has to be judged by its context in the rest of the Scripture. We read again this text without “things.” (Act.17:25) Neither is he served by men's hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all; (26) and he made of one every nation of men (God made all men) to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined [their] appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation (Everybody came from Adam according to (Act 17:26) and he made of one every nation of men… And, Eve is called the “mother of all living” in Genesis 3:20, so we know that everybody came from Adam and Eve, contrary to some doctrines of men.); (27) that they should seek God, if happily they might feel after him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us (That shows each person on this earth is individually responsible for seeking God, but not everybody will do that and they are going to be held responsible.): (28) for in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain even of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Paul is agreeing with what those pagans were saying about us receiving our being in God. He's saying that it's true. (Act.17:28) For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain even of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. “We are also His offspring.” You know, Christians like to correct this theology and say, “For we are all children of God.” That's not true because we are not all children of God, but we are all His offspring in a way. Then Paul goes on to say, (29) Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and device of man. (30) The times of ignorance therefore God overlooked; but now he commandeth men that they should all everywhere repent: (31) inasmuch as he hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. Well, how are we all the “offspring of God”? (Joh.1:1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All [things] were made through him (He's talking about people, not things, which is not in the numeric pattern. The Greek word there is the adjective pas, and it simply means “all, the whole, every kind of.”); and without him was not anything made that hath been made. So the Word made everything; He made Adam. We can read a confirmation of this here: (Col.1:16) For in him were all [things] created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him. Everything was created through Jesus and for Jesus. He is the first-born of the creation of God. This is talking about from the very beginning of all creation. It all came to be because it was created through Christ. (Joh.1:4) In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And over in Proverbs it says, (Pro.20:27) The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord, Searching all his innermost parts. The Father created all things through Christ, and Christ was the medium through which the Father used to create all things and all men as in these texts. It was Jesus, the Son of God Who created all things and breathed into Adam. (Gen.2:7) And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life (Or the “spirit.” The Hebrew word there is neshamah and is translated as both “breath” and “spirit” in the Old Testament.); and man became a living soul. The Bible says that the first man, Adam, was a natural being. (1Co.15:44) It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual [body]. (45) So also it is written, The first man Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. (46) Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; then that which is spiritual. (47) The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is of heaven. (48) As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. His natural man came from the earth, but his spirit came from God. God breathed into Adam, and the breath, the Spirit, came out of God and went into man. Some theologians like to argue that the “breath of life” is the “breath of lives.” I'm not sure about that, but we know that in the loins of Adam, in the seed of Adam, was all mankind (1 Corinthians 15:21-22). And God breathed into Adam a fresh, clean, pure Spirit to be the spirit of man, but it wasn't long after this that instead of following after his spirit, man followed his flesh and corrupted himself on the earth. (Gen.6:12) And God saw the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth. (17) And I, behold, I do bring the flood of waters upon this earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is in the earth shall die. Adam started out innocent before God, but in following his flesh, he got further and further away from God, and Adam's children got further and further away from God, until God had to destroy them. Truly, nothing has changed; we're in the same position today. God gives the natural child a fresh, clean spirit, which is the breath of life that He breathes into them. With this spirit, they have an opportunity to follow their spirit, and your conscience is a part of your spirit, so when you're following your conscience, you are following your spirit. We have to choose. You can follow your conscience, or you can follow your flesh, and as we know, everybody follows after their flesh. (Joh.1:5) And the light shineth in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it not. This sounds very much like what Peter said: (2Pe.1:19) And we have the word of prophecy [made] more sure; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a lamp (We've learned that the “lamp” is the “spirit of man,” according to Proverbs 20:27.) shining in a dark place (The “dark place” is your soul, which is your mind, will and emotions.), until the day dawn, and the daystar arise in your hearts. In the beginning, God gave Adam a “lamp” and it shined forth into his human nature, but Adam's offspring, who all started out the same way, began to follow after their flesh more and more, which corrupted their soul and eventually corrupted their spirit. If we follow after the flesh, the soul is going to be corrupted, and then when we follow our corrupted soul, our spirit will eventually be corrupted. Everybody starts out with a fresh, clean spirit, but they also start out with the corrupt nature that was passed down to them through their parents. “The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” The last Adam, or Jesus, is the one who gives us a new spirit when we are born again and become a new creation. (2Co.5:17) Wherefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature: the old things are passed away; behold, they are become new. Jesus is the second Adam; He is the Father of a new, born-again creation because the first creation corrupted itself. Except for one thing, babies start out in the place of Adam because they are given a fresh, clean spirit from God, one that's not corrupted. However, their soul is corrupted because their parents passed on their blood. (Lev.17:11) For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life. That gives the child a lot to overcome. The Bible says of God, (Exo.34:6) And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, the Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abundant in lovingkindness and truth, (7) keeping lovingkindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear [the guilty], visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation. So we see that the sins of the parents are also passed down to the children from one generation to another generation and on and on. So, live holy. (Joh.1:6) There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John. (7) The same came for witness, that he might bear witness of the light, that all might believe through him. (8) He was not the light, but [came] that he might bear witness of the light. (9) There was the true light, [even the light] which lighteth every man, coming into the world. This should be turned around because the numeric pattern proves that the sequence is wrong. What it actually says is, “The true light was, which coming into the world, lighteth every man.” Jesus is the true light that “lighteth every man.” (12) But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God. As far as the new creation, Jesus' spirit is that new spirit that comes into every man as their lamp to show them the way. It shines in the dark place of their soul in order to dispel the darkness. You can see the same pattern repeated with babies. Like Adam at the beginning of creation, Jesus breathes into them the spirit of life, and they start out innocent when they are born, but they don't stay that way long. And the Bible doesn't teach that it has anything to do with some so-called “age of reason”; theologians have come up with that doctrine. What the Bible does say is, (Isa.53:6) All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way.... Well, in order to go astray, you had to have been with God in the first place. (Rom.3:9) What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin (Of course, the Greeks weren't under the Old Covenant. Paul is talking about the New Covenant.); (10) as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one; (11) There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God (He's talking about the Jews and the Gentiles.); (12) They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable; There is none that doeth good, no, not, so much as one. They all turned aside. Jews and Gentiles all turned aside. That means, in some way, they started out with God. In some way, babies start out with God. (Psa.58:3) The wicked are estranged from the womb: They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies. This says they start going astray from the time they are born, but at birth, they are with God. They go astray because they follow their fallen nature, instead of following after their fresh, clean spirit, which was given from God. They go astray following after their flesh and become more and more corrupt. If you have a clean spirit, but you follow after the flesh, your soul will die. (Job.36:8) And if they be bound in fetters, And be taken in the cords of afflictions; (9) Then he showeth them their work, And their transgressions, that they have behaved themselves proudly. (10) He openeth also their ear to instruction, And commandeth that they return from iniquity. (11) If they hearken and serve [him], They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures. (12) But if they hearken not, they shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge. (13) But they that are godless in heart lay up anger: They cry not for help when he bindeth them. (14) They die in youth.... “Their soul dieth” is what it literally says in the original Hebrew and your Bible should have a footnote explaining this. Strong's concordance is based on the Received Text and uses noar, which is a different Hebrew word altogether. (14) They die in soul, And their life [perisheth] among the unclean. (15) He delivereth the afflicted by their affliction, And openeth their ear in oppression. (16) Yea, he would have allured thee out of distress Into a broad place, where there is no straitness; And that which is set on thy table would be full of fatness. (17) But thou art full of the judgment of the wicked: Judgment and justice take hold [on thee.] (18) For let not wrath stir thee up against chastisements; Neither let the greatness of the ransom turn thee aside. Therefore, if a person were to listen to the Lord and follow after the Lord, their soul wouldn't die, but the natural process of degeneration sets in as soon as a person is born. They begin to go astray by following after their flesh, but the point is that they don't start out that way; they start out with the Lord. I don't think responsibility has anything to do with reaching an “age of reason.” I think that responsibility has more to do with the degeneration of the spirit than it does with reason. Children who are raised up with Godly parents, parents who discipline them and teach them the truth, don't become as corrupt as quickly as other children. Their conscience doesn't become as defiled as that of other children because discipline is a motivation to do what is right. It's a motivation to obey your conscience and obey your spirit, and not obey your flesh. If a child is raised with discipline, they don't become corrupted as quickly as a child who is not raised with discipline. Little children go bad and become evil very quickly without any discipline, and that's why I don't think that there is any particular age called the “age of reason,” where God imputes responsibility. It's not an age that makes you accountable; it's truth that makes you accountable. The more truth you go against, the more your conscience is defiled. The Bible is very plain: (Jas.4:17) To him therefore that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. That doesn't mention any particular age. “To him it is sin,” but where there was no law or, in other words, when they didn't know that what they were doing was sin, then sin was not imputed to them. (Rom.5:13) For until the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Being held responsible has to do with knowledge; knowledge determines whether God imputes iniquity to you or whether He doesn't impute iniquity to you. Yet, knowledge must be incorporated to bear fruit. I believe that whether a child is raised with discipline or whether they're not raised with discipline, they end up in the same place. Eventually, what happens is that their soul and spirit become corrupt. At that time, they need to be born again. I can't say if there's any particular age for that because the Bible doesn't teach it. But somewhere during that time, I believe that a person whose spirit becomes corrupt must be born again; their spirit must be born again. Adam was pure before God when he was in his innocence, even though he was not born again. That was the natural birth that he had. It was when Adam got away from his innocence that he fell. God gave Adam a clean spirit and He gave Adam only one law, but still Adam failed. He followed the flesh and he fell away. Now there is a place of innocence from childhood on up because of ignorance. Let me show you that in the story of Abijah, the son of Jeroboam. Jeroboam was a wicked king over the northern 10 tribes, and he led Israel into apostasy. God had prophesied to him that he was going to be King over Israel (1 Kings 11:29-37; 12:20), but he led Israel in the wrong way (1 Kings 12:26-33; 13:33,34). When Jeroboam's son was sick, he asked his wife to disguise herself and go to the prophet Ahijah to see what was going to happen to their son. God spoke to Ahijah the prophet, who was blind, and told him that Jeroboam's wife was coming, and God gave Ahijah a word of prophecy for her. (1Ki.14:7) Go, tell Jeroboam, Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel: Forasmuch as I exalted thee from among the people, and made thee prince over my people Israel, (8) and rent the kingdom away from the house of David, and gave it thee; and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right in mine eyes, (9) but hast done evil above all that were before thee, and hast gone and made thee other gods, and molten images, to provoke me to anger, and hast cast me behind thy back: (10) therefore, behold, I will bring evil upon the house of Jeroboam, and will cut off from Jeroboam every man-child, him that is shut up and him that is left at large in Israel, and will utterly sweep away the house of Jeroboam, as a man sweepeth away dung, till it be all gone. (11) Him that dieth of Jeroboam in the city shall the dogs eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the birds of the heavens eat: for the Lord hath spoken it. (12) Arise thou therefore, get thee to thy house: [and] when thy feet enter into the city, the child shall die. (13) And all Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him; for he only of Jeroboam shall come to the grave, because in him there is found some good thing toward the Lord, the God of Israel, in the house of Jeroboam. Here, this child's parents were some of the most wicked in all of Israel, yet there was something good in this child toward the Lord. I believe the Lord was saying that the child's spirit was still good. Do you remember what happened when the disciples wanted to know who was the greatest? (Mat.18:1) In that hour came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven? (2) And he called to him a little child, and set him in the midst of them, (3) and said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye turn, and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven. (4) Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. What was Jesus talking about? Jesus was showing the disciples how a little child is submissive. In every case in the Gospels, it says “little child” (Mark 10:15; Luke 9:47) because, as you know, some older children are not submissive and trusting of their father; they're not clean on the inside. Another place of innocence is a child who is killed by abortion or dies from miscarriage. (Ecc.6:3) If a man beget a hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years are many, but his soul be not filled with good, and moreover he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth (In other words, speaking of a miscarriage.) is better than he. So a man can live a full life, but not live in the goodness of the Lord, and not be a vessel of honor. This is saying it's better to have been born dead. (4) For it cometh in vanity, and departeth in darkness, and the name thereof is covered with darkness; (5) moreover it hath not seen the sun nor known it; this hath rest rather than the other: (6) yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, and yet enjoy no good, do not all go to one place? He's talking about death here, not about going to the same place in Sheol, because this man went to Hades and the child went to Abraham's Bosom, but they both went to Sheol (Luke 16:22-26). This shows us that God at least considers innocency among children or babies. Abijah was a small child and God did not impute iniquity to this small child. That leads me to believe the further we get away from birth, the more dangerous it becomes because we become more responsible as we acquire knowledge. Innocency is not based on some “age of accountability” or “age of reason,” as theologians have told us, because you can't find that in the Bible. Saints, God imputes iniquity with knowledge. (Jas.4:17) To him therefore that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. God showed His election through Jacob, who manifested a vessel of honor, and Esau, who manifested a vessel of dishonor. This is what they were elected to do. Although every child is born with a fresh, clean spirit, they also receive the nature of their parents, and so they have a choice to make. They can choose to follow after their spirit, or they can choose to follow after the nature of their parents. As we've seen, everyone chooses to go the way of the flesh, and then their soul becomes corrupt, and eventually their spirit becomes corrupt. When the spirit becomes corrupt, that child has to be born again to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. I haven't found that there is any particular age at which the spirit becomes corrupt for all mature differently. Some children are raised with discipline and are more conscientious, while others are raised with no discipline, and they become very corrupt, very quickly, but I do believe that when the spirit dies, that person is responsible before God, and they must be born again. Yes, we are given a fresh, clean spirit from God when we are born, but that spirit dies from following after the flesh, and it becomes corrupt. This is what I'm calling “death” here. It's not a physical lack of existence but the spirit becoming corrupt. When that happens, then we are held responsible. Jesus was the one who breathed into Adam the breath of life, and as the Scriptures tell us, (Joh.1:1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made. (4) In him was life; and the life was the light of men. (Col.1:16) For in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him; (17) and he is before all things, and in him all things consist. God the Father created everything through Christ. There is nothing created that wasn't created through Christ. Jesus breathed into Adam the breath of life, but the whole race of Adam fell and became corrupt. Then Jesus, the second Adam (1Corinthians 15:47), breathed again; He breathed His spirit of life into His new creation. And, did you know that you still don't have to follow your spirit after being born again? You can, once again, choose to follow your flesh. A born-again person has the opportunity to follow their spirit and go with God, or they can follow their fallen nature and go the way of the rest of creation. We were given a fresh, clean human spirit from God, like Christ's human spirit, but we have a fallen soul because “the life of the flesh is in the blood.” That means after we are born again, we must overcome the disadvantage of the fallen nature that was passed on to us through our parents. The apostle Paul explains to us about his battle against the fallen nature that was passed on to him. He says, (Rom.7:23) I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity under the law of sin which is in my members. (24) Wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me out of the body of this death? He wanted power over the body of death. Paul was a Christian, and he wanted to serve God. Do you know what God did to give Christians power over the body of death? He gave them the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Without the baptism of the Holy Spirit, a person doesn't have that power. I'll prove this to you: (Rom.8:7) Because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be: (8) and they that are in the flesh cannot please God. (9) But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God (that's the Holy Spirit) dwelleth in you. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ (that's your born-again spirit), he is none of his. Christ was man in that He had a human spirit, soul, and body. He was God in that the Holy Spirit dwelt in His spirit. (1:3) Concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, (4) who was declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness. This in turn affected His DNA. When we are born again, our human spirit is born again. The Holy Spirit comes to do three things. Jesus said, (Joh.16:14) He shall glorify me: for he shall take of mine, and shall declare [it] unto you. First, the Holy Spirit comes to give us the Spirit of Christ, which is our born-again spirit, our fresh, clean spirit. Second, as we follow the Holy Spirit, our soul becomes born again. If we bear fruit in the realm of the soul, we will receive a born-again body. This is the manifestation of Christ in you, spirit, soul and body. Even if you have the Spirit of Christ, if you don't have the Holy Spirit, you don't have power over the body. (Rom.8:9) But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. If you don't have the Spirit of Christ in you, or, in other words, if you don't have a born-again human spirit, you don't belong to Him because Jesus had a born-again human spirit. (10) And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin (That's the situation Paul was in.); but the spirit is life because of righteousness. Before the disciples received the Holy Spirit, even though they had received their born-again spirit, they didn't have the greater power over the flesh. As Jesus said to them, (Mat.26:41) … The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. Did they have a born-again human spirit? Yes. Jesus told His disciples, (Joh.15:3) Already ye are clean because of the word which I have spoken unto you. You can't be clean without a born-again spirit, and they had a reborn spirit through the Word that was spoken into them. Paul says, “And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness.” So here you have a born-again person who is born-again in their spirit, but they don't have the greater power over their body, “the body of death.” Paul was crying out, “Who shall deliver me from this body of death?” Christians didn't have the greater power over their “body of death” until they received the Holy Spirit. (Rom.8:11) But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you (that's the Holy Spirit), he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to your mortal bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth in you. People think this is talking about the resurrection of the dead, but Paul said, “shall give life also to your mortal bodies.” That's talking about this physical body. Where you had death in your mortal body and had no greater power over it, God gave you life through His Spirit that dwells in you. Paul is talking about two different spirits here. Most religions I've experienced teach that when you are born again, that's when you receive the Holy Spirit. Even the Pentecostal denominations say, “When you are born again, you receive the Holy Spirit, but when you are baptized in the Holy Spirit, you receive more of it.” Again, that's not what the Bible teaches. You can't find a place in the New Testament where the Christians didn't go on to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit as soon as they found out about it. It was never supposed to be optional, the way it is today. I'm not saying that a person is lost if they don't have the Holy Spirit because Paul said a person belonged to God if they had the spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9); they just didn't have the greater power without having the Holy Spirit of God. As a matter of fact, back in the Old Testament, we can find the same New Covenant promise of receiving the Holy Spirit, and one of the clearest places to see it is in Ezekiel. (Eze.36:24) For I will take you from among the nations, and gather you out of all the countries, and will bring you into your own land. (25) And I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean.... This is what Jesus did with His disciples. He told them, (Joh.15:3) Already ye are clean because of the word which I have spoken unto you. God gave them a born-again spirit through the Word. He said in (6:63) It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life. He spoke life into them. (Eze.36:25) And I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. (26) A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you (Theologians put a lowercase “s” here and I believe they're right. The word “spirit” here should be a lowercase “s” because it's talking about your human spirit.); and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. (27) And I will put my Spirit (They capitalized “Spirit” here, and they're right again. This is talking about the Holy Spirit.) within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes.... The Holy Spirit is power from God. (Act.1:8) But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. In other words, the Holy Spirit is the power to be a witness by walking as Jesus walked (1 John 2:6). (2Co.3:2) Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men; (3) being made manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in tables that are hearts of flesh. You see, it's how you live your life, not just what you say, that makes you a witness. (Eze.36:27) And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep mine ordinances, and do them. (28) And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God. As soon as the Church started, the baptism of the Holy Spirit came right along with baptism in water. How did the Church go so far astray as to think that people can live the Christian life without everything that God provided? It was never meant to be that way. We are commanded to be full of the spirit of God. (Eph.5:15) Look therefore carefully how ye walk, not as unwise, but as wise; (16) redeeming the time, because the days are evil. (17) Wherefore be ye not foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (18) And be not drunken with wine, wherein is riot, but be filled with the Spirit; (19) speaking one to another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord. If you obey the corrupt nature that's been passed on to you genetically through your parents, you will begin to fall into corruption: first flesh, then soul, then spirit. The “death” is continually taking place because the more corrupt you become, the more dead you become. It's a spiritual death, not a physical death, but it ends in physical death because our spirit is our connection with the Holy Spirit. When our spirit is given to us at birth, it's clean and pure. In Hebrews (10:22,26,27; 11:15-17), the Bible talks about “defiling” your conscience. Your conscience is a part of your spirit, and it tells you right from wrong, but the more you disobey and ignore your conscience, it will become more and more quiet. Eventually, if we don't listen to our spirit, we come to the place where we don't hear it anymore, and that means we come to the place where we aren't led by it anymore. As a child grows up, they become more and more corrupt because they follow their flesh. I believe that the corruption process may be slower if you raise up a child in the way they should go (Proverbs 22:6; 23:13,14), but still they are going to fall into corruption. They will need to be born again because they don't have the Holy Spirit to empower them to follow their human spirit. The devil wants to take possession of our soul, which is our mind, will, and emotions, and he does this through our flesh. God wants to take possession of our souls, but the way He takes possession is through our spirit. So here we are with our soul, or in other words, our natural life, our nature, in the middle. We've been given a spirit, and we've been given flesh. As a born-again Christian, we have a decision to make: Are we going to follow the flesh and die, or are we going to follow the Spirit and live? If we follow the Spirit, we're following God. If we follow the flesh, we're following the devil. When a child is born, they don't have the spirit of God, so they don't have the ability to make a choice. They always follow the flesh, and they always die in their soul but less so with good parenting. When I say “die,” I'm talking about spiritual death while you are alive because you are held accountable when you know to do good. (Jas.4:17) To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. Sin is imputed when you know what's right and what's wrong. (Rom.5:13) For until the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. The older a child gets, the quieter their conscience becomes because they get more and more used to disobeying and rebelling against it. And so they come to the place where they must be born again. Jesus is not saying that a little child must be born again. A little child doesn't have to be born again to enter the Kingdom because their spirit is not dead yet, but the older they become, the more corrupt their soul becomes, and then the more corrupt their spirit becomes until they must be born again in order to see the Kingdom of Heaven. A little child is very open to God. Their spirit is still alive. You can talk to them about God, and they understand, and they easily receive what you teach them, but if you don't teach them anything, they don't have that strength. We have to train our spirit to take the sword of the Spirit. (Eph.6:13) Wherefore take up the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and, having done all, to stand. (14) Stand therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, (15) and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; (16) withal taking up the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the evil [one]. (17) And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. The Word of God is our sword, Saints. Without the Word of God, your spirit is defenseless. You need to educate your spirit by putting the Word of God in there. When I was a little child in the Catholic Church, they told me certain things were wrong that weren't wrong, and so if I did them, my conscience smote me. Even when I was a little child, my conscience told me when I was doing wrong. The Bible tells us that this is true, and we are never supposed to go against our conscience but rather educate it. (Rom.13:5) Wherefore [ye] must needs be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience' sake. And here's another example: (1Co.10:25) Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, eat, asking no question for conscience' sake, (26) for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. (27) If one of them that believe not biddeth you [to a feast,] and ye are disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience' sake. (28) But if any man say unto you, This hath been offered in sacrifice, eat not, for his sake that showed it, and for conscience' sake: (29) conscience, I say, not thine own, but the other's; for why is my liberty judged by another conscience? (30) If I partake with thankfulness, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? (31) Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. (32) Give no occasion of stumbling, either to Jews, or to Greeks, or to the church of God: (33) even as I also please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the [profit] of the many, that they may be saved. When I became born again, I had to re-educate my conscience according to the Word of God in order to have the sword of the Spirit. The sword belongs to the Spirit; it doesn't belong to the flesh. The Word of God empowers your spirit to win the battle against your flesh and the devil. (Eph.6:12) For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood (This is referring to fighting with physical weapons against physical enemies.), but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual [hosts] of wickedness in the heavenly [places]. Did you know that it's possible to have the baptism of the Holy Spirit but still not obey the Holy Spirit? Just because you have the Holy Spirit doesn't profit you. What matters is that you are walking in faith and obeying the Holy Spirit because, if you are not walking in faith, you're not going to get anywhere. People who are filled with the Holy Spirit walk closer to God. They have more faith, and they have power over the flesh. Jesus said, (Act.1:8) But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. But you can offend the Holy Spirit and become reprobate, or rejected, by the Holy Spirit. (Eph.4:30) And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, in whom ye were sealed unto the day of redemption. How do you “grieve” the Holy Spirit? (Heb.6:4) For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, (5) and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, (6) and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. (7) For the land which hath drunk the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them for whose sake it is also tilled, receiveth blessing from God: (8) but if it beareth thorns and thistles, it is rejected (This is the Greek word adokimos and it means “failing to pass the test; unapproved; counterfeit”; or, in other words, “reprobated.”) and nigh unto a curse; whose end is to be burned. You grieve the Holy Spirit by not doing His works and therefore you don't bear any fruit. The ultimate end of this is reprobation. (Tit.1:15) To the pure all things are pure: but to them that are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. (16) They profess that they know God; but by their works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. Did you know that just because you are filled with the Holy Spirit doesn't mean you are going to stay filled with the Holy Spirit? I know this is contrary to what many Pentecostal denominations teach, but if you look in the Book of Acts, you'll see that the same people who were filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost were later filled again with the Holy Spirit. (Act.2:4) And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. So they were filled with the Holy Spirit and then after Peter and John were released from prison, they prayed, (4:31) And now, Lord, look upon their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants to speak thy word with all boldness, (30) while thy stretchest forth thy hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of thy holy Servant Jesus. (31) And when they had prayed, the place was shaken wherein they were gathered together; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spake the word of God with boldness. The same people were refilled with the Holy Spirit. You ask, “David, why would somebody need to be filled with the Spirit more than once?” Jesus gives us the answer. He said, (Joh.7:38) He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, from within him shall flow rivers of living water. (39) But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believed on him were to receive. The power of the Holy Spirit flows out and is used up as we minister according to the command of Jesus. Notice, it's a river, not a pond. (Mat.10:7) And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. (8) Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons: freely ye received, freely give. I'm not saying that the Holy Spirit ever leaves you completely; I'm saying that it takes staying in fellowship with God to stay filled with the Holy Spirit. It's not just a one-time thing, like some Pentecostals believe. We just read, (Act.4:31) And when they had prayed, the place was shaken wherein they were gathered together; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit. How can you be filled twice, unless you've been emptied once? If Jesus taught that out of your innermost being shall flow rivers of the Spirit,” then this power is imparted to the need around you. It has to come out, and then it has to be replenished. The point is that we have to maintain our relationship with God because, if we don't, we won't stay filled with the Holy Spirit. Even so, the gifts of God are without repentance (Romans 11:29). He won't take the gifts back. For instance, He won't necessarily take speaking in tongues back, but you may speak in tongues and yet not be filled with the Holy Spirit. A person has to stay filled with the Holy Spirit, as the Bible clearly teaches in Acts. The people who were preaching in Acts 2 were the same people who were filled with the Holy Spirit again in Acts 4. Personally, I believe you have the capacity to receive more of the Spirit when you are full of the Word of God. Jesus said, (Joh.6:63) It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life. Therefore, if you receive more of His Word, you will receive more of His Spirit. That's why Jesus breathed on the disciples and in (20:22) … saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Spirit, even though it wasn't manifested until Pentecost, when the rushing mighty wind came.” Most Pentecostal denominations believe that having the Holy Spirit makes you a shoo-in for the Kingdom of Heaven, but having the Holy Spirit doesn't make you immune to sin. Having the Holy Spirit is not what saves you. Some have the Spirit but don't serve Him.  Obeying the Holy Spirit is what saves you from sin. (Rom.8:11) But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to your mortal bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Life came out of Jesus. Life came out of His Words when He spoke. Life came out of Him when He laid hands on people. Life came out of His garment and healed the woman who touched Him. Life was in Him and that life was imparted to others, but that's not the case with a person who's not filled with the Holy Spirit. It's more difficult to walk with God, without being filled with the Holy Spirit. From the Book of Acts, you can see that the very foundation of Christianity is to repent, receive a born-again spirit, and then be filled with the Holy Spirit. The typology of the Temple in the Old Covenant makes this very clear. We are supposed to be temples “not made with hands” (2 Corinthians 5:1; Acts 7:47-49) or, in other words, without the works of man. (1Co.6:19) Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own; (20) for ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body. When Solomon built the Temple, it represented the house “made without hands,” so there couldn't be the sound of tools, symbolizing man's works, while they were building it (1 Kings 6:7). After the Temple was built and they had sanctified it (1 Kings 8:1-9; 2 Chronicles 5:1-10), it still didn't have the Spirit of God in it. But when they had the dedication of the Temple, the Spirit of God came in the form of the Glory Cloud and dwelt in the Temple (1 Kings 8:10,11; 2 Chronicles 5:13,14). You see, the Temple was designed for the Holy Spirit to dwell in. What good was the Temple without the Spirit? I think in this regard, a lot of people are going to fall away because they will not obey the Scriptures and receive the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the power to do what you have to do. There were times when I just didn't think the Holy Spirit was there, but right when it was necessary, the power showed up and completely awed me. And no matter what situation we find ourselves in, the Holy Spirit can manifest Himself in us and enable us to walk as Jesus walked. The Lord also pointed out to me that it was Judah who dwelt in Zion. The name Judah means “praise,” and so Judah identifies the Spirit-filled people, the full-Gospel people. The name Judah separates us from the rest of Christianity, who haven't received the Holy Spirit. The northern 10 tribes of Israel went further astray and “missed the boat” many more times than the tribe of Judah. The northern 10 tribes worshipped the false “Christ,” the two golden calves which they set up. I believe that the Lord showed me this is a type for our day. The northern 10 tribes represent the non-Spirit-filled groups, and Judah represents the Spirit-filled groups, the ones who inhabit Zion. Zion was the city that escaped when Babylon conquered the people of God. A modern-day example of this is the Armenian genocide. The word “genocide” was first coined by historian Raphael Lemkin in 1943 to describe the systematic murder of the Armenians by the Ottomans. Only the Spirit-filled Christians escaped. They fled when they were warned because they believed in prophecy and they believed the prophets God sent to them, but many, many non-Spirit-filled Christians were killed. Some estimates are that as many as 1.5 million lost their lives in that holocaust. The Happiest People on Earth by Demos Shakarian, and John and Elizabeth Sherrill, published by Guideposts Magazine in 1975, tells the story of Demos Shakarian. His grandfather left Armenia for America when the Russian prophet Klubniken foretold that an “unspeakable tragedy” was coming to Armenia. Well, people, now the same thing is getting ready to happen in America, where most of the people who call themselves “Christian” have not yet been filled with the Spirit of God, and they're not giving any heed to all the prophetic warnings that another holocaust is coming. The Spirit of God makes you respect prophets and prophecies. The Spirit of God opens your eyes to dreams, visions, revelations, and the deeper things of the Spirit. We've seen that when the disciples needed more power from God to stand up to and endure the persecution they were receiving, they came together and prayed, and God filled them again with the Holy Spirit. Not only does every Christian need to be baptized in the Holy Spirit, but we also need to be continually baptized in the Holy Spirit. Amen.

Hvad skal der til, hvis Europa skal kunne forsvare sig selv uden hjælp fra USA? Det giver vi et bud på i ugens Radio Information, hvor vi også fortæller den utrolige historie om to holocaustoverleveres indflydelse på den internationale retsorden – og så anmelder vi Wuthering Heights. --- Vil USA være der for os, hvis Europa skulle blive angrebet? Og kan vi forsvare os selv, hvis ikke? Det er de ubekvemme spørgsmål, som udgør bagtæppet for weekendens sikkerhedskonference i München. Niklas Hessel har set nærmere på, hvad der konkret skal til, hvis Europa skal vikle sig ud af sin afhængighed af USA og blive i stand til at tage vare på sin egen sikkerhed. Det bliver dyrt og besværligt, men det er ikke umuligt, hvis altså viljen og sammenholdet er der.  Har Israel begået folkedrab? Eller forbrydelser mod menneskeheden? Debatten raser for tiden blandt eksperter og lægfolk. Og vil man for alvor forstå diskussionen, er den utrolige historie om ophavsmændene til de to begreber et godt sted at starte. Hersch Lauterpacht og Raphael Lemkin var begge store juridiske begavelser fra det 20. århundrede, de var begge jøder, og de undslap begge Holocaust. Men de kom op med hvert deres forskellige begreb til at indfange grusomhederne – rent juridisk. Anton Geist har været en tur i de historiske arkiver for at fortælle hele historien bag den aktuelle debat. Og efter al den død og ødelæggelse, har vi vist brug for noget kærlighed – og så er det jo heldigt, at Lone Nikolajsen har været i biografen og se Emerald Fennells nye filmatisering af Wuthering Heights – Stormfulde højder – der netop har fået premiere lige op til Valentinsdag. Et tematisk tyndt, men visuelt overvældende drama med silende regn og indestængt liderlighed i lange baner, lyder dommen. Lone uddyber sidst i programmet.  

Girolamo De Michele, in dialogo con Wu Ming 1 e con interventi del filosofo Stefano Bonaga, presenta il suo libro Il profeta insistente. Raphael Lemkin, l'uomo che inventò la parola genocidio (Neri Pozza, 2025). Modo Infoshop, Bologna, 1 dicembre 2025.

Con Giulio Boccaletti, fisico, autore del libro, Il futuro della natura. Soluzioni per un pianeta che cambia? (Mondadori) parliamo dei temi dell'ambiente superando un dibattito che spesso, a torto, vede il progresso umano e la sostenibilità ambientale in maniera contrapposta. Nella seconda parte le recensioni ai libri seguenti:- Lucie Taïeb, Freshkills. Riciclare la terra, AnimaMundi edizioni- Girolamo De Michele, Il profeta insistente, Raphael Lemkin: l'uomo che inventò la parola "genocidio", Neri Pozza- Pierluigi Battista, Il professore ebreo perseguitato due volte. Tullio Terni e l'ipocrisia italiana, La nave di Teseo- Cecilia Sala, I figli dell'odio, Mondadori- Pietro Caliceti, I guardiani del tempio, Baldini Castoldi.Il confettino, i consigli di lettura per i più piccoli, di questa settimana:- Luca Tortolini - Marco Somà, Quello che (non) so sull'amore, Terre di mezzo.

In mid-September, the UN issued a report stating that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. Israel vehemently denies the charge. Genocide is the crime of crimes. It is a highly charged and loaded word.  To verify it requires clear and unambiguous evidence. The term was coined by the Polish Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin. Genocide combines the Greek prefix “genos” (race, tribe) with the Latin suffix “cide” (killing). Lemkin was aware of the Armenian genocide carried out by the Turks earlier in the 20th century. During the Holocaust, he lost many family members. Lemkin and others were responsible for the Genocide Convention, which was passed unanimously by the UN in 1948. In addition to the recently released UN report, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, as well as two prominent Israeli rights organizations, B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, declared that Israel's military actions in Gaza constitute genocide.

Want to skip ads? Subscribe now.  A U.N. commission reported that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, provoking denials and denunciations from Israel's government and its U.S. supporters. What explains the endless wrangling over a term coined by Raphael Lemkin to define the crime of national destruction, even as Israeli officials openly express their intent to make Gaza uninhabitable? In this episode, scholars Dirk Moses and Sonia Boulos argue that the search for answers must begin in 1948. Further reading: Education After Gaza After Education After Auschwitz by Dirk Moses (Berlin Review) The “G Word,” Liberal Israeli Elites, and the Prospect of Decolonization by Sonia Boulos (Journal of Genocide Research)

Allt fler talar om folkmord för att beskriva Israels krig i Gaza, men varför är begreppet så laddat? Vad får det för följder om vi slår fast att ett folkmord pågår framför våra ögon? Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Israel försvarar sin krigföring i Gaza med att man vill utplåna Hamas, få tillbaka gisslan och att det är Hamas som orsakar död och förstörelse genom att gömma sig bland civila. De som menar att Israel begår folkmord pekar på att Israel har visat uppsåt att utplåna palestinierna genom svält och att förhindra nödhjälp och i retoriken om deportation. Vilken betydelse har det hur vi benämner det som sker i Gaza?Det var den polskjudiske juristen Raphael Lemkin som myntade termen genocid, folkmord, för att beskriva nazisternas mord på 6 miljoner judar, och även andra fall där folkgrupper dödats. 1948 antog FN konventionen om folkmord, en konvention som även innebär att omvärlden har en skyldighet att ingripa och förhindra att folkmord begås. Har folkmordskonventionen haft någon effekt?Efter förintelsen myntades uttrycket ”aldrig igen”. Aldrig mer skulle världen bevittna folkmord och övergrepp mot mänskligheten, något som var centralt när internationell rätt utvecklades efter andra världskriget. Vad blir följderna om vi slår fast att Israel begår ett folkmord framför våra ögon?Medverkande: Lena Halldenius, filosof och professor i mänskliga rättigheter, Mark Klamberg, professor i folkrätt och Klas-Göran Karlsson professor emeritus i historia.Programledare: Cecilia Strömberg WallinProducent: Marie Liljedahl Veckans tips:Vägen till Nürnberg: En berättelse om familjehemligheter, folkmord och rättvisa - Philip SandsTotally Unoffical: The Autobiography of Raphael Lemkin - Donna-Lee Frieze, Raphael LemkinShake Hands with the Devil - Roméo Dallaire

Welcome to What Matters Now, a weekly podcast exploring key issues currently shaping Israel and the Jewish World, with host deputy editor Amanda Borschel-Dan speaking with legal expert on genocide Menachem Rosensaft. Rosensaft is an adjunct professor of law at Cornell Law School and lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School, where he teaches the law of genocide -- since 2008 at Cornell and since 2011 at Columbia. A dedicated pro-Israel US Jewish leader, Rosensaft is the general counsel emeritus of the World Jewish Congress and has been part of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, most notably sitting with PLO leader Yasser Arafat alongside four other American Jewish leaders in 1988, after which Arafat said he recognized the State of Israel's right to exist. Rosensaft discusses the important legal and rhetorical distinction between genocide and crimes against humanity or war crimes, feeling that the definition's precision is being diluted in popular use. We learn about the history and evolution of Raphael Lemkin's definition of genocide and the ripple effect it has caused. He emphasizes that Israel cannot be held out as the sole villain in the ongoing war, and explains how Hamas exhibits genocidal intent and ideology. However, the statements from a handful of far-right Israeli politicians is making South Africa's December 2023 legal case accusing the Jewish state of genocide much harder to win. Finally, he rails against the Israeli government's weaponization of the word "antisemitism" for all dissent against the Jewish state, but doubles down on the need for an ongoing peace process leading to a Palestinian state. And so this week, we ask genocide legal expert Menachem Rosensaft, what matters now. What Matters Now podcasts are available for download on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode was produced by the Pod-Waves. IMAGE: Menachem Rosensaft (courtesy) / Palestinians stand on the edge of a crater after Israeli military strikes in a tent camp for displaced people near Al-Aqsa Hospital, in Deir al-Balah, August 21, 2025. (AP Photo/Jehad Alshrafi)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

durée : 00:59:28 - Le Cours de l'histoire - par : Xavier Mauduit - Le mot "génocide" naît sous la plume du juriste juif polonais Raphael Lemkin en 1943. Comment ce concept a-t-il été mobilisé à travers le 20ᵉ siècle ? Comment le crime de génocide est-il progressivement entré dans le droit international ? - réalisation : Thomas Beau, Jeanne Delecroix, Jeanne Coppey, Raphaël Laloum, Solène Roy, Maïwenn Guiziou - invités : Vincent Duclert Historien, chercheur titulaire à l'EHESS, inspecteur général de l'Éducation nationale, professeur associé à Sciences Po Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:59:28 - Le Cours de l'histoire - par : Xavier Mauduit, Maïwenn Guiziou - Le mot "génocide" naît sous la plume du juriste juif polonais Raphael Lemkin en 1943. Comment ce concept a-t-il été mobilisé à travers le 20ᵉ siècle ? Comment le crime de génocide est-il progressivement entré dans le droit international ? - réalisation : Thomas Beau - invités : Vincent Duclert Historien, chercheur titulaire à l'EHESS, inspecteur général de l'Éducation nationale, professeur associé à Sciences Po

Welcome to What Matters Now, a weekly podcast exploring key issues currently shaping Israel and the Jewish World, with host deputy editor Amanda Borschel-Dan speaking with legal expert on genocide Menachem Rosensaft. Rosensaft is an adjunct professor of law at Cornell Law School and lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School, where he teaches the law of genocide -- since 2008 at Cornell and since 2011 at Columbia. A dedicated pro-Israel US Jewish leader, Rosensaft is the general counsel emeritus of the World Jewish Congress and has been part of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, most notably sitting with PLO leader Yasser Arafat alongside four other American Jewish leaders in 1988, after which Arafat said he recognized the State of Israel's right to exist. Rosensaft discusses the important legal and rhetorical distinction between genocide and crimes against humanity or war crimes, feeling that the definition's precision is being diluted in popular use. We learn about the history and evolution of Raphael Lemkin's definition of genocide and the ripple effect it has caused. He emphasizes that Israel cannot be held out as the sole villain in the ongoing war, and explains how Hamas exhibits genocidal intent and ideology. However, the statements from a handful of far-right Israeli politicians is making South Africa's December 2023 legal case accusing the Jewish state of genocide much harder to win. Finally, he rails against the Israeli government's weaponization of the word "antisemitism" for all dissent against the Jewish state, but doubles down on the need for an ongoing peace process leading to a Palestinian state. And so this week, we ask genocide legal expert Menachem Rosensaft, what matters now. What Matters Now podcasts are available for download on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. This episode was produced by the Pod-Waves. IMAGE: Menachem Rosensaft (courtesy) / Palestinians stand on the edge of a crater after Israeli military strikes in a tent camp for displaced people near Al-Aqsa Hospital, in Deir al-Balah, August 21, 2025. (AP Photo/Jehad Alshrafi)See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Avant même d'être reconnu par les Nations Unies en tant que chef d'accusation, le mot " génocide " a répondu à une nécessité : nommer un crime qui vise ses victimes pour ce qu'elle représente dans le regard de ses auteurs. Bernard Bruneteau, professeur d'histoire contemporaine, nous guide dans l'histoire du mot génocide, inventé et fabriqué par un juriste polonais dans les années 1940, Raphael Lemkin.

Desenvolvido em 1944 pelo advogado judeu Raphael Lemkin, o conceito de genocídio é um dos mais importantes cunhados no século XX, mas também um dos mais mal definidos. Essa dificuldade de classificação associada aos interesses políticos de grupos diversos fazem com quem poucos sejam os genocídios consensualmente tomados como tal, uma vez que alguns deles são ferrenhamente negados por parte da comunidade internacional. Convidamos Heitor Loureiro para discutir o conceito de genocídio, como eles ocorrem, qual a lógica dos negacionistas e como o tabuleiro da política internacional por vezes dificulta sua aplicação e as devidas punições àqueles que o cometem contra outros povos.Adquira GENOCÍDIO ARMÊNIO de Heitor Loureiro e os demais livros da Coleção HISTÓRIA FM clicando ⁠⁠AQUI⁠⁠ e use o cupom AMIGO20 para 20% de desconto.Mês de aniversário da Insider ainda rolando! Junte o cupom HISTORIAFM com as promoções no site e você pode chegar a até 30% de desconto! Você também consegue o cupom automaticamente pelo link https://creators.insiderstore.com.br/HISTORIAFM #insiderstore

Roy L Hales/Cortes Currents - In a series of tweets between 2019 and 2021, the Conservative candidate for North Island Powell River, Aaron Gunn, argued against the the idea that residential schools were a form of genocide.  In the first of these he agreed that they were ‘truly horrific events,' but added that people should not refer to them with a loaded word like ‘genocide' that does not remotely reflect the reality of what happened.” He was wrong, residential schools are a perfect example of genocide. Mr Gunn's understanding of the term appears to be limited to ‘killing of a large number of people,' but when Raphael Lemkin coined the term he stated it wasn't necessary to kill people. There were also genocides of political and social institutions, culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups. Lemkin was a Jewish lawyer who fled from his native Poland after the Germans overran it in 1939. He was deeply concerned about NAZI Germany's extermination policy. In his book Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (1944), Lemkin wrote:  “By ‘genocide' we mean the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group. This new word, coined by the author to denote an old practice in its modern development, is made from the ancient Greek word genos (race, tribe) and the Latin cide (killing), thus corresponding in its formation to such words as tyrannicide, homocide, infanticide, etc. Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.” He added that. “Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed population which is allowed to remain upon the territory …” Lemkin also coined the term cultural genocide, which is the systematic destruction of traditions, values, language, and other elements that make one group of people distinct from another.  How does this relate to Aaron Gunn's Tweets? These three appear to be misguided:  “There was no genocide. Stop lying to people and read a book …”;  “I understand that people have a misinformed view of history which they have reached following a steady and persistent attempt to discredit Canada's past in order to undermine its institutions and future.”  “Residential schools were asked for by Indigenous bands in Eastern Ontario when John A MacDonald was still a teenager.” This last remark refers to residential schools in eastern Ontario sometime between 1828 and 1835, when John A MacDonald was a teenager, but according to the Canadian Encyclopedia, the purpose of residential schools changed during the 1870s. “With the passage of the British North America Act in 1867, and the implementation of the Indian Act (1876), the government was required to provide Indigenous youth with an education and to assimilate them into Canadian society.” 

Sein Leben lang kämpfte Raphael Lemkin um Gerechtigkeit für die Opfer staatlicher Gewalt. Die Völkermord-Konvention, die vor 75 Jahren von den Vereinten Nationen angenommen wurde, gilt als sein Lebenswerk. Doch sie ist noch immer fragil. Paris am 9. Dezember 1948: Die Vollversammlung der Vereinten Nationen nimmt einstimmig ein Gesetz zur Verhütung und Bestrafung von Völkermord an. Im Mittelpunkt des internationalen Interesses steht an diesem Tag ein polnischer Jurist, der es sich zur Lebensaufgabe gemacht hat, dem Vernichtungswahn ein Ende zu bereiten. Sein Name: Raphael Lemkin. Die Völkermord-Konvention ist sein Lebenswerk – eine Art Epitaph für seine Eltern, die in Auschwitz umgebracht wurden. Einst wurde er als «Einstein des Völkerrechts» gefeiert; nach seinem Tod 1959 geriet Lemkin weitgehend in Vergessenheit. Erstsendung: 8.12.2023

TESTO DELL'ARTICOLO ➜ https://www.bastabugie.it/it/articoli.php?id=8034IL RAPPORTO DELLA VERGOGNA SCREDITA AMNESTY PIU' CHE ISRAELE di Stefano Magni "Amnesty International è giunta alla conclusione che Israele stia commettendo un genocidio a Gaza". E il lettore fa un balzo sulla sedia. Se Amnesty International, dunque la più autorevole ong internazionale per la difesa dei diritti umani, è giunta anch'essa a questa conclusione, dopo il mandato di cattura per Netanyahu e Gallant spiccato dalla Corte penale internazionale, dopo il processo per genocidio indetto dalla Corte internazionale di giustizia, dopo che Papa Francesco ha pubblicamente scritto che Israele sta probabilmente compiendo un genocidio... beh, verrebbe da pensare proprio che ci sia un serio sospetto di genocidio a Gaza, commesso da Israele? O no? I pochi filo-sionisti rimasti devono arrendersi a questa "evidenza"? Neanche per idea.Prima di tutto, bisogna leggere il rapporto di Amnesty International prima di capire di cosa stiamo parlando. E bisogna anche, prima ancora di leggerlo, ricordare bene cosa significhi la parola "genocidio" così come è stata formulata da Raphael Lemkin, giurista ebreo polacco, nel 1944, alla vigilia della sconfitta della più grande potenza genocida europea, la Germania nazista.Ebbene, il genocidio è: "piano coordinato di differenti azioni mirante alla distruzione dei fondamenti essenziali della vita di gruppi nazionali, con l'intento di annientarli". Per Amnesty International, Israele sta agendo con l'intento dichiarato di eliminare il popolo palestinese a Gaza. Poi però nel suo stesso rapporto si contraddice più e più volte.Prima di tutto, il documento parla di una "distruzione senza precedenti", ma per le stime su morti e feriti e quanti di essi siano non combattenti si basa solo sulle cifre fornite dai palestinesi. Cioè da Hamas, che è l'unica organizzazione terrorista internazionale che ha il controllo di Gaza e che diffonde informazioni per fare propaganda.I NUMERIStando all'Onu i morti accertati sono 8119, come abbiamo già avuto modo di scrivere su queste colonne. Poco più di 8 mila morti sono una tragedia, ma su una popolazione di oltre 2 milioni di palestinesi sono un genocidio ben strano. Un "genocidio a bassa intensità" si potrebbe dire. Lo sarebbe anche se prendessimo per buone le statistiche di Hamas, che per altro sono del tutto implausibili, se non altro perché progrediscono con una regolarità disarmante, nei periodi di tregua come in quelli di escalation.Ma anche 42 mila morti, su 2 milioni di abitanti di Gaza non sono troppo rivelatori di un intento genocida. Il ritmo con cui una popolazione viene eliminata è una caratteristica indicativa di un genocidio in corso. Gli armeni subirono un milione di morti in poco più di un anno, lo stesso lasso di tempo in cui gli israeliani avrebbero ucciso (stando a Hamas, ripetiamolo) nemmeno 50 mila palestinesi.I nazisti eliminarono fisicamente 6 milioni di ebrei in Europa dal 1939 al 1945, circa 1 milione all'anno facendo la media, ma considerando soprattutto che il grosso venne eliminato solo dal giugno 1941 (occupazione dell'Urss occidentale) al gennaio del 1945 (liberazione dei primi campi di sterminio). In Ruanda, gli hutu sterminarono l'etnia tutsi al ritmo di 200 mila morti a settimana, arrivando a 1 milione di vittime in poco più di un mese. La conta dei morti è macabra, d'accordo, non ci sono sicuramente vittime di serie A o di serie B, ma serve a capire, per lo meno, le dimensioni del problema e di cosa stiamo parlando.Prevenendo la critica sui numeri, Amnesty afferma che comunque Israele sta negando alla popolazione di Gaza tutti i mezzi che le permettono di vivere (cibo, acqua, energia, ospedali) e tutti i suoi siti culturali e religiosi (scuole, moschee, centri culturali). Però poi non spiega cosa ci facciano quelle file di camion che portano aiuti alimentari ai palestinesi (anche e soprattutto dal territorio israeliano) e come mai, dopo un anno e due mesi di guerra, non sia ancora scoppiata una carestia.Anche i rapporti più allarmanti parlano di "rischio carestia", ma non è documentata alcuna mortalità di massa per fame e stenti, come avverrebbe in una carestia. Per una carestia indotta artificialmente, come quella in Ucraina nel 1932-33, morirono dai 4 ai 7 milioni di contadini, più del 10-15 per cento della popolazione di allora. Non si vede nulla di simile a Gaza, nemmeno stando ai rapporti più allarmanti.Quanto alla distruzione dei simboli e siti della cultura palestinese, Amnesty dimentica di dirci come vengano usate le moschee e le scuole che vengono colpite dagli israeliani. D'altronde, forte della sua imparzialità, sicuramente non crede alle "fonti di parte", cioè ai video con cui l'esercito israeliano mostra le armi catturate al loro interno, o i terroristi uccisi nei raid contro di esse. Hamas, se usa scudi umani e utilizza ospedali, scuole e moschee per lanciare i suoi attacchi o mettere al riparo i suoi comandanti, non è da considerarsi colpevole di crimini di guerra?NESSUN INTENTO GENOCIDA: TRE ERRORI IN UNA FRASEInfine, ma non da ultimo, un genocidio è un'azione deliberata. Gli israeliani vogliono deliberatamente eliminare (del tutto o in parte) la popolazione di Gaza? Non c'è traccia di alcun ordine di questo tipo. Non ci sono neppure i sintomi tipici di un genocidio o di una pulizia etnica, come tante volte abbiamo visto, ad esempio, nei Balcani: campi di filtraggio, deportazioni, rastrellamenti e uccisioni deliberate di tutti coloro che hanno il passaporto sbagliato, il cognome sbagliato, o frequentano la parrocchia sbagliata. Ecco, non si vede nulla di tutto questo, né i campi, né le colonne di deportati, né le fosse comuni piene di civili.Israele afferma di combattere una guerra contro i terroristi e di fare tutto il possibile per evacuare i civili nelle zone in cui l'esercito colpisce. Ebbene, Amnesty accusa Israele anche di queste evacuazioni, denunciandole come "deportazioni". Come "prova" dell'intento genocida, cita qualche scatenato di destra, minoritario nel governo Netanyahu, con ragionamenti del tipo "non fornire aiuti umanitari a Gaza finché Hamas non libera tutti gli ostaggi".Ragionamento che non indica alcun intento genocida, per altro. E che è una politica neppure seguita dal governo, visto che gli aiuti umanitari continuano ad arrivare a Gaza, ma un centinaio di ostaggi ancora vivi sono nelle mani di Hamas fino ad oggi.Il rapporto di Amnesty International, insomma, giunge alla conclusione che è in corso un genocidio, perché quel che sta avvenendo a Gaza è inserito in un "contesto" (parola magica) genocidario. E quale sarebbe questo "contesto"? Citiamo testualmente: "Nel contesto del sistema di apartheid di Israele, del blocco disumano di Gaza e dell'occupazione militare illegale del territorio palestinese che dura da 57 anni". Già il numero di aggettivi (disumano, militare, illegale) dovrebbe far suonare un campanello di allarme sulla serietà di questa analisi.Ma in una frase troviamo tre errori da matita blu. Sistema di apartheid: un paese multi-etnico in cui un arabo è membro della Corte Suprema e può anche condannare il premier ebreo? Occupazione militare illegale del territorio palestinese: quale territorio palestinese, considerando che nessuno Stato di Palestina è mai stato riconosciuto? I territori contesi fino al 1967 erano a loro volta occupati da Egitto (Gaza) e Giordania (Cisgiordania) e anche la loro presenza militare su quegli stessi luoghi era illegale, per il diritto internazionale. Quindi chi è l'occupante e chi il liberatore? Il blocco inumano di Gaza: Israele dovrebbe aprire le frontiere di una regione da cui partono razzi e attacchi terroristici tutti gli anni, dove un'organizzazione terrorista internazionale regna sovrana?Insomma, il rapporto di Amnesty serve a un solo scopo: delegittimare Israele con frasi e dati ad effetto. Ma l'unico scopo che otterrà, almeno per i governi che ancora ragionano, sarà quello di screditare se stessa. Da autorevole organizzazione per i diritti umani, è diventata un'organizzazione militante di estrema sinistra.

So this episode is very late. Unfortunately, Ian had an upper respiratory infection and was pretty much bedridden for three weeks. You can still hear the sickness in his voice, but we wanted to make sure that we at least discussed East West Street a little bit. East West Street is part memoir, part historical text, and part legal scholarship. The text explores many people's lives-including the author's grandfather-focuses largely on Raphael Lemkin who coined the term 'genocide' and Hersch Lauterpacht who introduced the term 'crimes against humanity'. This text was different from what Ian expected, but we still learned a lot and had an interesting conversation about history and what we learned in school.    Coming up at the end of December is Ronnie's pick which is Atalanta by Jennifer Saint. 

O jurista polonês Raphael Lemkin cunhou o termo genocídio em 1944. Desde então foi elaborada uma convenção da ONU contra o genocídio e instituído um Tribunal Penal Internacional para julgar esse tipo de crime. Mas afinal, o que é genocídio? E faxina étnica? Gravado em dezembro 2024 Instagram: @abcdageopolitica Chave PIX: abcdageopolitica@gmail.com Apoio pela plataforma da ORELO Vinheta musical: Longzijuan

Als Jurastudent bewegt Raphael Lemkin der Völkermord an den Armeniern, der ohne Anklage bleibt. Fortan setzt er sich dafür ein, dass staatliche Gewalt bestraft werden kann.

Wenn ein Mörder für den Tod eines anderen Menschen büßt, wer büßt für den Mord an ganzen Volksgruppen? Die Frage bewegt Raphael Lemkin bis zu seinem Tod am 28.8.1959. Von Almut Finck.

The events of World War II and its immediate aftermath had significant influence on American Jewish political identity. In the wake of the Holocaust, and as the extent of the destruction continued to be revealed, many Jewish Americans took it upon themselves on both local and national levels to tell the story of what happened, advocate for the victims, and lobby for changes to international law to try and prevent future atrocities. Through political activism, literature, liturgy, and more, individuals such as Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-born lawyer who served on the legal team of Chief U.S. Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Tribunal Robert H. Jackson and himself a survivor, spent the years following World War II seeking justice and remembrance for those who were lost.

In recent years, scholars have rediscovered Hannah Arendt`s "boomerang thesis" – the "coming home" of European colonialism as genocide on European soil – as well as Raphael Lemkin`s work around his definition of genocide and the importance of its colonial dimensions. Germany and other European states are increasingly engaging in debates on comparing the Holocaust to other genocides and cases of mass killing, memorialization, "decolonization" and attempts to come to terms with the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung").  Colonial Paradigms of Violence: Comparative Analysis of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Killing (Wallstein, 2022), part of the European Holocaust Studies series, offers a variety of perspectives on the connections and entanglements of colonialism and mass violence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In recent years, scholars have rediscovered Hannah Arendt`s "boomerang thesis" – the "coming home" of European colonialism as genocide on European soil – as well as Raphael Lemkin`s work around his definition of genocide and the importance of its colonial dimensions. Germany and other European states are increasingly engaging in debates on comparing the Holocaust to other genocides and cases of mass killing, memorialization, "decolonization" and attempts to come to terms with the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung").  Colonial Paradigms of Violence: Comparative Analysis of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Killing (Wallstein, 2022), part of the European Holocaust Studies series, offers a variety of perspectives on the connections and entanglements of colonialism and mass violence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

In recent years, scholars have rediscovered Hannah Arendt`s "boomerang thesis" – the "coming home" of European colonialism as genocide on European soil – as well as Raphael Lemkin`s work around his definition of genocide and the importance of its colonial dimensions. Germany and other European states are increasingly engaging in debates on comparing the Holocaust to other genocides and cases of mass killing, memorialization, "decolonization" and attempts to come to terms with the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung").  Colonial Paradigms of Violence: Comparative Analysis of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Killing (Wallstein, 2022), part of the European Holocaust Studies series, offers a variety of perspectives on the connections and entanglements of colonialism and mass violence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

In recent years, scholars have rediscovered Hannah Arendt`s "boomerang thesis" – the "coming home" of European colonialism as genocide on European soil – as well as Raphael Lemkin`s work around his definition of genocide and the importance of its colonial dimensions. Germany and other European states are increasingly engaging in debates on comparing the Holocaust to other genocides and cases of mass killing, memorialization, "decolonization" and attempts to come to terms with the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung").  Colonial Paradigms of Violence: Comparative Analysis of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Killing (Wallstein, 2022), part of the European Holocaust Studies series, offers a variety of perspectives on the connections and entanglements of colonialism and mass violence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/genocide-studies

In recent years, scholars have rediscovered Hannah Arendt`s "boomerang thesis" – the "coming home" of European colonialism as genocide on European soil – as well as Raphael Lemkin`s work around his definition of genocide and the importance of its colonial dimensions. Germany and other European states are increasingly engaging in debates on comparing the Holocaust to other genocides and cases of mass killing, memorialization, "decolonization" and attempts to come to terms with the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung").  Colonial Paradigms of Violence: Comparative Analysis of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Killing (Wallstein, 2022), part of the European Holocaust Studies series, offers a variety of perspectives on the connections and entanglements of colonialism and mass violence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

In recent years, scholars have rediscovered Hannah Arendt`s "boomerang thesis" – the "coming home" of European colonialism as genocide on European soil – as well as Raphael Lemkin`s work around his definition of genocide and the importance of its colonial dimensions. Germany and other European states are increasingly engaging in debates on comparing the Holocaust to other genocides and cases of mass killing, memorialization, "decolonization" and attempts to come to terms with the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung").  Colonial Paradigms of Violence: Comparative Analysis of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Killing (Wallstein, 2022), part of the European Holocaust Studies series, offers a variety of perspectives on the connections and entanglements of colonialism and mass violence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In recent years, scholars have rediscovered Hannah Arendt`s "boomerang thesis" – the "coming home" of European colonialism as genocide on European soil – as well as Raphael Lemkin`s work around his definition of genocide and the importance of its colonial dimensions. Germany and other European states are increasingly engaging in debates on comparing the Holocaust to other genocides and cases of mass killing, memorialization, "decolonization" and attempts to come to terms with the past ("Vergangenheitsbewältigung").  Colonial Paradigms of Violence: Comparative Analysis of the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Killing (Wallstein, 2022), part of the European Holocaust Studies series, offers a variety of perspectives on the connections and entanglements of colonialism and mass violence. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

Hey, Hi, Hello, this is the History Wizard and welcome back for Day 9 of Have a Day w/ The History Wizard. Thank you to everyone who tuned in for Day 8 last week, and especially thank you to everyone who rated and/or reviewed the podcast. I hope you all learned something last week and I hope the same for this week. This week we're going to be looking at infighting within Christianity. There are many differing opinions within the faith on the whos and whats and whys and hows, and very oft en they decide to kill each other over these, ultimately minor, differences. The Cathar Genocide, often known as the  Albegensian Crusade, was just such an event. It was a time when the Pope felt threatened by those who he deemed to be heretics and so decided to kill them. But, first it's time to craft our potions. Todays libations, gods I love that word, is called Melting Snow. Take two ounces of sake, 1 ounce of triple sec, 3-4 dashes of black lemon bitters, shake and pour into a rocks glass before gently pouring 1 tsp of grenadine syrup into it. The resulting drink should have the grenadine settle at the bottom initially making a lovely presentation. Though I'd mix it before actually imbibing. With that out of the way let's talk about who the Cathar were. The name Cathar comes from the Greek word katharoi, meaning “the pure ones”. Their other name, the Albegensians, comes from the fact that many adherents during the Crusade lived in or around the city of Albi. Catharism is described as a somewhat dualist, somewhat Gnostic heretical branch of Christianity. Though, it bears mentioning that both are likely exonyms and the followers of this particular faith often self identifies as Good Men, Good Women, or Good Christians. So what is dualism and what is gnosticism? Well in the case of the Cathars they were pretty much the same thing. Dualism is the moral or spiritual belief that two fundamental concepts exist, which often oppose each other. Gnosticism draws a distinction between a supreme, and hidden God above all, and a lesser deity (sometimes called the demiurge) who created the material world. Consequently, Gnostics considered material existence flawed or evil, and held the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the hidden divinity, attained via mystical or esoteric insight. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and enlightenment. Gnosticism preferred people to have personal knowledge and experience with the divine, something that threatened the power of the early Church. Cathar cosmology identified two Gods. One who created the perfect spiritual world and the other, the demiurge who created the imperfect and sinful physical world. The demiurge is often identified as Yahweh and is referred to as Rex Mundi, King of the World. All visible matter, including the human body, was created or crafted by this Rex Mundi; matter was therefore tainted with sin. Under this view, humans were actually angels seduced by Satan before a war in heaven against the army of Michael, after which they would have been forced to spend an eternity trapped in the evil God's material realm. The Cathars taught that to regain angelic status one had to renounce the material self completely. Until one was prepared to do so, they would be stuck in a cycle of reincarnation, condemned to suffer endless human lives on the corrupt Earth. Also, while they revered Jesus Christ, they also denied that he was ever a mortal man, instead believing that both he and Mary were Angels taking the semblance of a human form in order to teach our sin tainted flesh to grow closer to the purity of divinity. Other Cathar beliefs included the pescetarian diet, their view that women were pretty purely to tempt men away from divine purity and some Cathars believed that Eve had sex with Satan and gave birth to a race of giants who were all wiped out in the Great Flood. Cathars also rejected the Catholic priesthood, labeling its members, including the pope, unworthy and corrupted. Disagreeing on the Catholic concept of the unique role of the priesthood, they taught that anyone, not just the priest, could consecrate the Eucharistic host or hear a confession. There were, however, men selected amongst the Cathars to serve as bishops and deacons. Now, while the Cathar Crusade took place over a 20 year period between 1209 and 1229, the persecution against them began almost as soon as they were founded. The Cathars were denounced as heretics by 8 separate church councils between 1022 and 1163. However the true troubles wouldn't begin until 1208 when Pope Innocent III sent a legate named Pierre du Castelnau to chastise Raymond VI, Count of Toulouse for his lack of action against these heretical Cathars who lived on his land. Castelnau withdrew from Toulouse after 6 months of Raymond basically ignoring him. On January 15, 1208 Pierre was assassinated. Innocent suspected, and acted on the suspicion that the assassination was carried out by an agent of Reymond, although this was never proven.  Still, when has lack of evidence ever stopped the Church from killing people? The assassination of Pierre du Castelnau was causus belli for the Albigensian Crusade. The Albigensian Crusade, the Cathar Genocide, took place all around the area known as Languedoc, also known as Occitania. Today the province is a part of southern France, but for a while it was its own region with distinct culture and its own language. Occitan wasn't very similar to French, it was not mutually understandable. In fact it was closer to Catalan than it was to French. Now, because Catharism rejected both the authority of the French King and the Pope in favor of a far more egalitarian relationship with their nation and their God many nobles from France embraced Catharism, at least at a surface level due to their desire to also reject the authority of the King of France. This made Catharism not just a threat to the spiritual and material authority of the Pope, but also a threat to the material authority of the King. After the assassination of Castelnau Raymond VI Count of Toulouse was excommunicated from the Church. Although there was a very brief period when Raymond sent embassies to Rome and exchanged gifts. They reconciled and the excommunication was lifted, only for him to be excommunicated AGAIN on the grounds that he didn't properly meet the terms of reconciliation.  And so it was that in 1209, after assembling an army of about 10,000 men near the city of Lyons that Pope Innocent III declared his crusade against the Albigensians, stating that a Europe free of heresy could better defend its borders against Muslim armies. This crusade against the Albigensians also coincided with the Fifth and Sixth Crusades in the Holy Land. Most of the troops for the crusade came from Northern France, although there would also be volunteers from England and Austria. After some initial dispute over who would lead the quote righteous armies of the Lord unquote Papal Legate Arnaud Amalric was chosen as the commander.  As the Crusaders assembled, Raymond attempted to reach an agreement with his nephew and vassal, Raymond Roger Trencavel, viscount of Béziers and Carcassonne, for a united defense, but Raymond Roger refused him. Raymond decided to make an accommodation with the Crusaders. He was fiercely opposed by Amalric, but at Raymond's request, Innocent appointed a new legate, Milo, whom he secretly ordered to obey Amalric. On 18 June 1209, Raymond pronounced himself repentant. He was scourged by Milo and declared restored to full Communion with the Church. The following day, he took the Cross, affirming his loyalty to the crusade and promising to aid it. With Raymond restored to unity with the Church, his lands could not be attacked. The Crusaders therefore turned their attention to the lands of Raymond Roger, aiming for the Cathar communities around Albi and Carcassonne. Béziers would be the first major engagement of the Cathar Genocide, although at around the same time, another Crusader army commanded by the Archbishop of Bordeaux took Casseneuil and burned several accused heretics at the stake. The crusading armies arrived at Béziers on 21 July, 1209 and demanded that the Catholics of the city leave and that the Cathars surrender. Both groups ignored them and the city settled in for a long siege.  The siege lasted for exactly one day. The troops within Béziers attempted to sortie beyond the gates of their city and after being routed they were pursued through the open gates of the city and it fell within 24 hours. Amalric then proceeded to order the slaughter of every single person, adult or child, within the walls of the city. What follows is possibly apocryphal, a phrase which hears means made up, but allegedly when asked by his troops how they should distinguish between Catholic and Cathar Amalric said “Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius” The literal translation of which is “Kill them. The Lord knows those that are his own” There's some dispute over whether or now Amalric actually said this, but it is agreed that it captures the vibe rather well as the entire city of Béziers was killed. There were no survivors. The death toll is placed at around 20,000 people, though this is thought to be an exaggeration. Raymond Roger was not at Béziers when it fell. He had fled with most of his troops to the city of Carcassonne (yes, like the board game) intending to hold there. After the surrounding towns and villages heard about the slaughter at Béziers they all surrendered without a fight. This made Carcassonne the next major target of Amalric and his band of brigands. The 45 mile march to Carcassonne took the crusaders 6 days to complete. Once arrayed around Carcassonne they settled in for a siege that lasted slightly longer than the one at Béziers. But, after 6 days and after cutting the cities water supply Raymond Roger sought to negotiate. Amalric agreed to parley, but took Roger prisoner while speaking under truce. Carcassonne would not be the site of another slaughter though. All the people of the city were marched out of the city at sword point. They were naked according to Peter of Vaux-de-Cernay, a monk and eyewitness to many events of the crusade, but "in their shifts and breeches", according to Guillaume de Puylaurens, a contemporary. Rogers died several months later, either of dysentery or from being assassinated. In each city the armies approached, they reacted differently and treated the people differently. The fall of Lastours and castle Cabaret took much longer than the others, although this was largely because of the onset of winter. The area around Cabaret was full of communes like Lastours, Minerve, and Bram. After Minerve fell to bombardment from siege weapons, destroying the main well of the commune, it surrendered. The crusaders, now under the command of Simon de Montfort wished to be more lenient to the people of Minerve. He allowed to defending soldiers, the Catholics, and the non-perfecti Cathars. Perfecti was the title of those Cathars who were considered adept in the teachings of their faith. They were roughly analogous to deacons. The Perfecti were given the option to recant their beliefs and return to the Catholic faith. Of the 143 perfecti in Minerve, only 3 elected to do this. The rest were burned at the stake, many walking directly into the flames of their own volition, not even waiting for their executioners to force them. There were some successes for the Cathars though. The siege of Termes almost ended with the Cathar being slaughtered, but in the end them managed to abandon the city and escape before the walls could be breached, owning in part to a massive rain storm.  In May of 1211 the castle of Aimery de Montréal was retaken; he and his senior knights were hanged, and several hundred Cathars were burned. The crusade was turning towards its end. Montfort began to position his troops around the city of Toulouse meaning to crush one of the last major Cathar bastions in France. The Cathars, in their fear, turned to Peter II of Aragon for aid and support. Peter's sister Eleanor was married to Raymond VI. Peter, named a valiant hero for his actions against the Moors was able to use his influence to get Innocent to call a halt of the crusade and used that time to try and negotiate peace. When those peace negotiations failed Peter decided to come to their aid of Toulouse against Simon de Montfort, fearing that Montfort was becoming too powerful and gaining too much influence within the Catholic Church. This alarmed Innocent III who immediately declared the Crusade begun again. Meanwhile Raymond VI had had his excommunication lifted and then reinstated AGAIN during this time. Unfortunately for the Cathars and for Peter II, he would die in his first major engagement with Simon's forces. The Battle of Muret saw a devastating loss for Peter's forces. Despite outnumbering Simon's armies Simon had better tactics and carried the day. The next few years was a flurry of activity and victory fo Simon, who was eventually named the new count over all of Raymond VI's lands that had already been captured. Any land that had not yet been captured  would fall under the control of the Catholic Church who would hold onto them until Raymond VII, who was currently in England with his father, having fled a few years ago, was old enough to govern them himself. The crusade would continue for a few years more, though there were periods of confusion and relative peace. One such period was when Pope Innocent III died suddenly and unexpectedly and the crusade was taken over by the much more cautious King Philip II of France. The crusade was resumed with greater vigor in 1217 on orders from Pope Honorius III and for the remainder of it would center around Toulouse and maintaining control of it. By 1222 Raymond VII, who had returned from exile with his father had reclaimed all the lands that he had lost and the crusaders were firmly on the backfoot. Come 1225 Raymond VII was excommunicated, like his father (now deceased) and King Louis VII of France, son of Philip II (now deceased) renewed the Crusade. The Cathar heresy was going to be dealt with one way or another. The exact number of troops that Louis brought with him to renew the Crusade is unknown, but it is known that it was the largest force to be brought against the Cathars throughout the entirety of the genocide. Louis began his campaign in earnest in June of 1226 and quickly recaptured the towns of Béziers, Carcassonne, Beaucaire, and Marseille, this time with no resistance. Eventually the armies surrounded Toulouse and Raymond, not having the manpower to resist surrendered and signed the Treaty of Paris at Meaux on April 12, 1229. Now, something important to be aware of is that Historian Daniel Power notes that the fact that Peter of Vaux-de-Cernay's Historia Albigensis, which many historians of the crusade rely heavily upon, was published only in 1218 and this leaves a shortage of primary source material for events after that year. As such, there is more difficulty in discerning the nature of various events during the subsequent time period. With the war over we would transition into the next phase of the genocide, that of destroying Catharism as a cultural element and forcing surviving Cathars to repent and convert. With the military phase of the campaign against the Cathars now primarily at an end, the Inquisition was established under Pope Gregory IX in 1234 to uproot heretical movements, including the remaining Cathars. Operating in the south at Toulouse, Albi, Carcassonne and other towns during the whole of the 13th century, and a great part of the 14th, it succeeded in crushing Catharism as a popular movement and driving its remaining adherents underground. Punishments for Cathars varied greatly. Most frequently, they were made to wear yellow crosses atop their garments as a sign of outward penance. Others made obligatory pilgrimages, which often included fighting against Muslims. Visiting a local church naked once each month to be scourged was also a common punishment, including for returned pilgrims. Cathars who were slow to repent or who relapsed suffered imprisonment and, often, the loss of property. Others who altogether refused to repent were burned. The vast majority of those accused escaped death and were sentenced to a lighter penalty. Still, Catharism as a distinct religion was all but destroyed. Raphael Lemkin, who coined the word "genocide" in the 20th century, referred to the Albigensian Crusade as "one of the most conclusive cases of genocide in religious history". And, at the risk of making an appeal to authority fallacy, if the guy who invented the term and died fighting for its recognition in national and international law calls it a genocide, it is one. That's it for this week folks. No new reviews, so let's get right into the outro. Have a Day! w/ The History Wizard is brought to you by me, The History Wizard. If you want to see/hear more of me you can find me on Tiktok @thehistorywizard or on Instagram @the_history_wizard. Please remember to rate, review, and subscribe to Have a Day! On your pod catcher of choice. The more you do, the more people will be able to listen and learn along with you. Thank you  for sticking around until the end and, as always, Have a Day.  

Content warning for discussion of genocide. Welcome to the first spisode of Have a Day! w/ The History Wizard. This episode will discuss the early days of the field of genocide, the process by which it became a crime undernational law, the life of Raphael Lemkin, in brief, and the first time a country was charged with this crime above all crimes Intro and outro music linked here: https://uppbeat.io/track/paulo-kalazzi/heros-time Episode Transcript to Follow: Hey, Hi, Hello. This is The History Wizard and thank you for joining me for the flagship episode of “Have a Day w/ The History Wizard”. As we embark on this journey together we're going to be talking about History, Politics, Economics, Cartoons, Video Games, Comics, and the points at which all of these topics intersect. Anyone who has been following me one Tiktok or Instagram, @thehistorywizard on Tiktok and @the_history_wizard on Instagram, for any length of time. Literally any length of time at all, will probably be familiar with some, if not all, of the information we're going to learn today. However, I hope that you'll bear with me as it is important to, before we dive into the meat of the matter, make sure we've got some bones to wrap it around… Yes, that is the metaphor I'm going to go with. I wrote it down in my script, read it, decided I liked it, and now you all have to listen to it.  For our first episode we are going to be diving into one of my favorite parts of my field of expertise, meta knowledge concerning the field of genocide studies itself. Yes, that's right. We're going to start with the definition of genocide. The United Nations established the legal definition of genocide in the Convention for the Punishment and Prevention of the Crime of Genocide, which was unanimously adopted by the 51 founding members of the UN in the third meeting of the General Assemble and came into full legal force in 1951 after the 20th nation ratified it. This, by the way, is why none of the Nazis in the Nuremberg Trial were charged with the crime of genocide. The crime didn't exist when they were on trial. But, to return to the matter at hand, the definition of genocide can be found in Article 2 of the Convention for the Punishment and Prevention of the Crime of Genocide and reads as follows: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. It is important to note that definition of genocide that the UN adopted is not exactly the same as the definition that Lemkin first proposed to the UN. His definition included economic classes, as well as political parties. There was, significant, pushback against the inclusion of those two categories from the US and the USSR as both nations feared that their many of their own actions could be considered genocide. Lemkin didn't fight too hard for those categories to stay in the definition, he was more concerned with ethnicity, nationality, race, and religion for, what he called, their cultural carrying capacity. Now, despite Lemkin's concern over the destruction of cultures, there is no strict legal definition of cultural genocide. The inclusion of Article 2, subsection E: Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group, could be seen as a nod to this idea, but it's not nearly enough. There was some effort to rectify this oversight in 2007 with the passage of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which states that indigenous peoples have a right against forcible assimilation. But even that is barely a step in the right direction as the UN DRIP is a legally non binding resolution making it little better than a suggestion. Now, where did the word genocide come from? Who made it and why? The term genocide was the brain child of a Polish-Jewish lawyer and Holocaust survivor named Raphael Lemkin. Now, despite Lemkin being a Holocaust survivor and term not gaining legal recognition until 1948, Lemkin actually based his work on the Armenian Genocide, what he originally called The Crime of Barbarity. Fun fact about Lemkin, he spoke 9 languages and could read 14. Anyway, after reading about the assassination of Talat Pasha in 1921. Talat was assassinated by Soghomon Telhirian as part of Operation Nemesis (he was put on trial for the assassination and was acquitted) After reading about the assassination Lemkin asked one of his professors at Jan Kazimierz University of Lwów (now the Ivan Franko National University of Lviv) why Talat was unable to be tried for his crimes before a court of law. The professor replied thusly: "Consider the case of a farmer who owns a flock of chickens. He kills them, and this is his business. If you interfere, you are trespassing." Lemkin replied, "But the Armenians are not chickens". His eventual conclusion was that "Sovereignty cannot be conceived as the right to kill millions of innocent people" In 1933 Lemkin made a presentation to the Legal Council of the League of Nations conference on international criminal law in Madrid, for which he prepared an essay on the Crime of Barbarity as a crime against international law. This is where the world would first encounter the word “genocide” a word that Lemkin had created by combining the Greek root ‘genos' meaning race or tribe, with the Latin root ‘cide' meaning killing.  Lemkin was as a private solicitor in Warsaw in 1939 and fled as soon as he could. He managed to escape through Lithuania to Sweden where he taught at the University of Stockholm until he was, with the help of a friend, a Duke University law professor named Malcolm McDermott Lemkin was able to flee to the US. Unfortunately for Lemkin he lost 49 member of his family to the Holocaust. The only family that survived was his brother, Elias and his wife who had both been sent to a Soviet forced labor camp. Lemkin was able to help them both relocate to Montreal in 1948. After publishing his iconic book “Axis Rule in Occupied Europe” with the help of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Lemkin became an advisor for chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg Trials, Robert H. Jackson. It was during these trials that he became convinced, more than ever before, that this crime above all crimes needed a name and laws to prevent and punish it. Even after the passage of the Convention for the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Lemkin didn't consider his work to be over. The UN was brand new and had little in the way of real authority (something that hasn't changed over the past 70 years). So Lemkin traveled around to world trying to get national governments to adopt genocide laws into their own body of laws. He worked with a team of lawyers from Arabic delegations to try and get France tried for genocide for their conduct in Algeria and wrote an article in 1953 on the “Soviet Genocide in Ukraine” what we know as the Holodomor, though Lemkin never used that term in his article. Lemkin lived the last years of his life in poverty in New York city. He died in 1959 of a heart attack, and his funeral, which occurred at Riverside Church in Manhattan, was attended by only a small number of his close friends. Lemkin is buried in Mount Hebron Cemetery in Flushing, Queens. The last thing I want to discuss in our first episode is the first country to be charged with the crime of genocide before the United Nations. As we have already established, despite the Holocaust being the western world's premiere example of genocide, no one at the Nuremberg Trials was tried for the crime of genocide. So who, I can hear you asking from the future, who was the first country charged with genocide? Why, dear listener, it was none other than the U S of A in a 1951 paper titled “We Charge Genocide, which was presented before the United Nations in Paris in 1951. The document pointed out that the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide defined genocide as any acts committed with "intent to destroy" a group, "in whole or in part." To build its case for black genocide, the document cited many instances of lynching in the United States, as well as legal discrimination, disenfranchisement of blacks in the South, a series of incidents of police brutality dating to the present, and systematic inequalities in health and quality of life. The central argument: The U.S. government is both complicit with and responsible for a genocidal situation based on the UN's own definition of genocide. The paper was supported by the American Communist Party and was signed by many famous personages such as:  W. E. B. Du Bois, George W. Crockett, Jr., Benjamin J. Davis, Jr., Ferdinand Smith, Oakley C. Johnson, Aubrey Grossman, Claudia Jones, Rosalie McGee, Josephine Grayson, Amy and Doris Mallard, Paul Washington, Wesley R. Wells, Horace Wilson, James Thorpe, Collis English, Ralph Cooper, Leon Josephson, and William Patterson. It was Patterson who presented the paper and the signatures before the UN in 1951. The UN largely ignored Patterson and never deigned to hear his case against the US government. And upon his return journey Patterson was detained while passing through Britain and had his passport seized once he returned to the US. He was forbade to ever travel out of the country again. The history of the field of genocide studies is long, unfortunately, far longer than the existence of a word with a legal definition and laws to back it up. We'll be going through the history of genocide in future episode, interspersed with other historical events or pressing issues of great import as we take this educational journey together. I'm going to try and put an episode together once a week, and if that needs to change for any reason I will let you know. Next week, on March 26th, we'll be learning about the Gazan genocide and the vast amount of historical context that goes into this, currently occurring, genocide. I've been the History Wizard. You can find me on Tiktok @thehistorywizard. You can find me on Instagram @the_history_wizard. Have a Day w/ The History Wizard can be found anywhere pods are cast. If you cannot find it on your podcatcher or choice, let me know and I will try and do something about it. Tune in next week for more depressing, but very necessary information and remember… Have a Day!

In the wake of the Holocaust in the 1940s and earlier in the century the genocidal attacks against the Armenians by Turkey and the German slaughter of the Herero and Namaqua peoples in SW Africa, the Polish jurist Raphael Lemkin coined the term genocide. In 1948 the UN adopted the Genocide Convention. On December 29, 2023, South Africa filed a case with the UN's International Court of Justice in The Hague accusing Israel of the crime of genocide in its ongoing assault on Gaza. The Convention defines genocide as “the intent to destroy in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.” Israel has dismissed the South African charge calling it “meritless.”

Sein Leben lang kämpfte Raphael Lemkin um Gerechtigkeit für die Opfer staatlicher Gewalt. Die Völkermord-Konvention, die vor 75 Jahren von den Vereinten Nationen angenommen wurde, gilt als sein Lebenswerk. Doch sie ist noch immer fragil. // Von Beate Ziegs - DLR Berlin/WDR/RB/NDR 1998/Deutschlandfunk Kultur 2023 - www.radiofeature.wdr.de Von Beate Ziegs.

Sein Leben lang kämpfte Raphael Lemkin dafür, dass den Opfern staatlicher Gewalt Gerechtigkeit widerfährt. Die seit 1951 gültige Völkermord-Konvention gilt als sein Lebenswerk. Doch sie ist noch immer fragil. Was können wir heute von Lemkin lernen? Von Beate Ziegswww.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Feature

Avant même dʹêtre reconnu par les Nations Unies en tant que chef dʹaccusation, le mot "génocide" a répondu à une nécessité : nommer un crime qui vise ses victimes pour ce quʹelle représente dans le regard de ses auteurs. Bernard Bruneteau, professeur émérite de science politique à l'Université Rennes 1, nous guide dans lʹhistoire du mot génocide, inventé et fabriqué par un juriste polonais dans les années 1940, Raphael Lemkin. Il est au micro dʹAnaïs Kien.

The award-winning French Algerian American playwright, librettist and activist, Catherine Filloux, has been, for the past 3 decades, traveling to conflict areas writing plays that address human rights and social justice.             Catherine's new play, “How to Eat an Orange,” will open at La MaMa Theatre in New York City, and her new musical “Welcome to the Big Dipper” (written with composer Jimmy Roberts of, “I Love You, You're Perfect, Now Change” fame) will premiere Off-Broadway at the York Theatre in New York. It's a National Alliance for Musical Theatre finalist.             Catherine's play, “White Savior” is nominated for The Venturous Play List. Her many plays have been produced around the U.S. and internationally. I've read her play Lemkin's House and can tell you it's an intense and engaging exploration of the politics of genocide through the surreal landscape of the mind of Raphael Lemkin, the man who invented the word genocide.            Catherine's also the librettist for four produced operas, including New Arrivals, Where Elephants Weep, and The Floating Box. Her works have been played on Cambodian national TV, on Broadway on Demand, and chosen for Opera News Critic's Choice. And her opera, “Orlando,” is the winner of the 2022 Grawemeyer Award--the first opera by a woman composer and woman librettist in the history of the Vienna Staatsoper.             Catherine has traveled for her plays to countries including Bosnia, Cambodia, Guatemala, Haiti, Iraq, Morocco, Northern Ireland, and Sudan and South Sudan on an overseas reading tour with the University of Iowa's International Writing Program.             Catherine received her French Baccalaureate in Philosophy with Honors in Toulon, France, and is the co-founder/co-director of Theatre Without Borders. 

Histoire vivante poursuit sa série sur les conséquences du génocide des Arméniens en 1915. Dans les années qui suivent la Première guerre mondiale, les massacres de masse des Arméniens sont dilués dans un bilan global écrasant. On ne leur rend pas justice et ils perdent définitivement leur droit au retour après le Traité de Lausanne en 1923. Pourtant un évènement fait date dans ce début des années 1920, le procès de Soghomon Tehlirian. Ce jeune Arménien tue dʹune balle de revolver dans une rue de Berlin un certain Talaat Pacha, le 15 mars 1921. Son procès, deux mois plus tard, est lʹoccasion de raconter au grand public le génocide et lʹabsence de justice réelle rendue aux victimes. Au cours de ces journées de juin 1921 la responsabilité de la victime dans le génocide des Arméniens devient lʹobjet central de toutes les attentions. Cʹest Rafael Lemkin, qui invente le mot génocide et sa définition juridique un peu plus de vingt ans plus tard alors que lʹextermination des Juifs dʹEurope est en cours. Un mot forgé aussi à partir du procès Tehlirian quʹil avait suivi avec grand intérêt alors quʹil était étudiant en droit. Avec Sévane Garibian, directrice de lʹouvrage La mort du bourreau : réflexions interdisciplinaires sur le cadavre des criminels de masse, Editions Petra, Vicken Cheterian, auteur du livre Open Wounds, Hurst and Oxford University Press, Anouche Kunth, autrice dʹAu bord de lʹeffacement. Sur les pas d'exilés arméniens dans l'entre-deux-guerres, La Découverte et Annette Becker " Raphael Lemkin, lʹextermination des Arméniens et lʹinvention du mot génocide ", in LʹExtermination des Arméniens de lʹEmpire ottoman. Une série dʹAnaïs Kien Retrouvez toutes les séries dʹHistoire Vivante sur rts.ch/audio Histoire Vivante cʹest aussi tous les vendredis dans les pages de La Liberté et sur RTS 2, le dimanche soir.

We speak with historian Dirk Moses about the origins of the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide: the lawyer behind it (Raphael Lemkin), its influence on the public understanding of genocide, how it has been used, and how political the process of accountability has become. For further reading: The Problems of Genocide, by Dirk Moses and the Genocide Convention.This episode is supported by Indiana University's Presidential Arts and Humanities Program, the Tobias Center, the African Studies Program, the Center for the Study of the Middle East, and the Huh Jum Ok Human Rights Foundation.Sound editing by James Dorton and Emily Leisz Carr, mixing by Seth Olansky, music "Souffle Nocturne" by Ben Cohen.Production by Shilla Kim and Clémence Pinaud.

Where people are killed and abused in warfare and violent conflict, artifacts of cultural heritage are often destroyed and mistreated as well. Indeed, in the World War II-era efforts to promote the then-novel idea of genocide, the Polish lawyer and activist Raphael Lemkin sought to codify the notion that genocide was both personal and cultural. What has come of his efforts? In this episode of International Horizons, we are joined by Irina Bokova, former Director-General of UNESCO and former Bulgarian ambassador to France and Monaco, who discusses the reasons why cultural heritage should be defended and preserved. Bokova provides different examples of how terrorist groups have destroyed ancient cultural heritage, the evolution of the legal frameworks to protect it, and how -- despite the disregard for international law these days -- the protection of cultural heritage is evolving. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Where people are killed and abused in warfare and violent conflict, artifacts of cultural heritage are often destroyed and mistreated as well. Indeed, in the World War II-era efforts to promote the then-novel idea of genocide, the Polish lawyer and activist Raphael Lemkin sought to codify the notion that genocide was both personal and cultural. What has come of his efforts? In this episode of International Horizons, we are joined by Irina Bokova, former Director-General of UNESCO and former Bulgarian ambassador to France and Monaco, who discusses the reasons why cultural heritage should be defended and preserved. Bokova provides different examples of how terrorist groups have destroyed ancient cultural heritage, the evolution of the legal frameworks to protect it, and how -- despite the disregard for international law these days -- the protection of cultural heritage is evolving. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/archaeology

Where people are killed and abused in warfare and violent conflict, artifacts of cultural heritage are often destroyed and mistreated as well. Indeed, in the World War II-era efforts to promote the then-novel idea of genocide, the Polish lawyer and activist Raphael Lemkin sought to codify the notion that genocide was both personal and cultural. What has come of his efforts? In this episode of International Horizons, we are joined by Irina Bokova, former Director-General of UNESCO and former Bulgarian ambassador to France and Monaco, who discusses the reasons why cultural heritage should be defended and preserved. Bokova provides different examples of how terrorist groups have destroyed ancient cultural heritage, the evolution of the legal frameworks to protect it, and how -- despite the disregard for international law these days -- the protection of cultural heritage is evolving. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/architecture

Where people are killed and abused in warfare and violent conflict, artifacts of cultural heritage are often destroyed and mistreated as well. Indeed, in the World War II-era efforts to promote the then-novel idea of genocide, the Polish lawyer and activist Raphael Lemkin sought to codify the notion that genocide was both personal and cultural. What has come of his efforts? In this episode of International Horizons, we are joined by Irina Bokova, former Director-General of UNESCO and former Bulgarian ambassador to France and Monaco, who discusses the reasons why cultural heritage should be defended and preserved. Bokova provides different examples of how terrorist groups have destroyed ancient cultural heritage, the evolution of the legal frameworks to protect it, and how -- despite the disregard for international law these days -- the protection of cultural heritage is evolving. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/art

durée : 00:57:45 - Toute une vie - Le haut lieu de la mémoire de Raphael Lemkin est un tribunal et pas n'importe lequel : Au procès de Nuremberg, les dirigeants nazis de la guerre qui se termine sont jugés et Raphael Lemkin met toutes ses forces au service de son invention juridique : le crime de génocide. - invités : Annette Becker Historienne, professeur émérite des universités à l'université de Paris-Ouest Nanterre La Défense; Bernard Bruneteau Historien; Guillaume Mouralis Historien, Directeur de recherche au CNRS; Philippe Sands Avocat et écrivain

Victoria A. Malko's book The Ukrainian Intelligentsia and Genocide: The Struggle for History, Language, and Culture in the 1920s and 1930s (Lexington Books, 2021) focuses on the first group targeted in the genocide known as the Holodomor: Ukrainian intelligentsia, the "brain of the nation," using the words of Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term genocide and enshrined it in international law. The study's author examines complex and devastating effects of the Holodomor on Ukrainian society during the 1920-1930s. Members of intelligentsia had individual and professional responsibilities. They resisted, but eventually they were forced to serve the Soviet regime. Ukrainian intelligentsia were virtually wiped out, most of its writers and a third of its teachers. The remaining cadres faced a choice without a choice if they wanted to survive. The author analyzes how and why this process occurred and what role intellectuals, especially teachers, played in shaping, contesting, and inculcating history. Crucially, the author challenges Western perceptions of the all-Union famine that was allegedly caused by ad hoc collectivization policies, highlighting the intentional nature of the famine as a tool of genocide, persecution, and prosecution of the nationally conscious Ukrainian intelligentsia, clergy, and grain growers. The author demonstrates the continuity between Stalinist and neo-Stalinist attempts to prevent the crystallization of the nation and subvert Ukraine from within by non-lethal and lethal means. Nataliya Shpylova-Saeed is a PhD candidate in the Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures, Indiana University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Victoria A. Malko's book The Ukrainian Intelligentsia and Genocide: The Struggle for History, Language, and Culture in the 1920s and 1930s (Lexington Books, 2021) focuses on the first group targeted in the genocide known as the Holodomor: Ukrainian intelligentsia, the "brain of the nation," using the words of Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term genocide and enshrined it in international law. The study's author examines complex and devastating effects of the Holodomor on Ukrainian society during the 1920-1930s. Members of intelligentsia had individual and professional responsibilities. They resisted, but eventually they were forced to serve the Soviet regime. Ukrainian intelligentsia were virtually wiped out, most of its writers and a third of its teachers. The remaining cadres faced a choice without a choice if they wanted to survive. The author analyzes how and why this process occurred and what role intellectuals, especially teachers, played in shaping, contesting, and inculcating history. Crucially, the author challenges Western perceptions of the all-Union famine that was allegedly caused by ad hoc collectivization policies, highlighting the intentional nature of the famine as a tool of genocide, persecution, and prosecution of the nationally conscious Ukrainian intelligentsia, clergy, and grain growers. The author demonstrates the continuity between Stalinist and neo-Stalinist attempts to prevent the crystallization of the nation and subvert Ukraine from within by non-lethal and lethal means. Nataliya Shpylova-Saeed is a PhD candidate in the Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures, Indiana University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Victoria A. Malko's book The Ukrainian Intelligentsia and Genocide: The Struggle for History, Language, and Culture in the 1920s and 1930s (Lexington Books, 2021) focuses on the first group targeted in the genocide known as the Holodomor: Ukrainian intelligentsia, the "brain of the nation," using the words of Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term genocide and enshrined it in international law. The study's author examines complex and devastating effects of the Holodomor on Ukrainian society during the 1920-1930s. Members of intelligentsia had individual and professional responsibilities. They resisted, but eventually they were forced to serve the Soviet regime. Ukrainian intelligentsia were virtually wiped out, most of its writers and a third of its teachers. The remaining cadres faced a choice without a choice if they wanted to survive. The author analyzes how and why this process occurred and what role intellectuals, especially teachers, played in shaping, contesting, and inculcating history. Crucially, the author challenges Western perceptions of the all-Union famine that was allegedly caused by ad hoc collectivization policies, highlighting the intentional nature of the famine as a tool of genocide, persecution, and prosecution of the nationally conscious Ukrainian intelligentsia, clergy, and grain growers. The author demonstrates the continuity between Stalinist and neo-Stalinist attempts to prevent the crystallization of the nation and subvert Ukraine from within by non-lethal and lethal means. Nataliya Shpylova-Saeed is a PhD candidate in the Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures, Indiana University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/genocide-studies

Victoria A. Malko's book The Ukrainian Intelligentsia and Genocide: The Struggle for History, Language, and Culture in the 1920s and 1930s (Lexington Books, 2021) focuses on the first group targeted in the genocide known as the Holodomor: Ukrainian intelligentsia, the "brain of the nation," using the words of Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term genocide and enshrined it in international law. The study's author examines complex and devastating effects of the Holodomor on Ukrainian society during the 1920-1930s. Members of intelligentsia had individual and professional responsibilities. They resisted, but eventually they were forced to serve the Soviet regime. Ukrainian intelligentsia were virtually wiped out, most of its writers and a third of its teachers. The remaining cadres faced a choice without a choice if they wanted to survive. The author analyzes how and why this process occurred and what role intellectuals, especially teachers, played in shaping, contesting, and inculcating history. Crucially, the author challenges Western perceptions of the all-Union famine that was allegedly caused by ad hoc collectivization policies, highlighting the intentional nature of the famine as a tool of genocide, persecution, and prosecution of the nationally conscious Ukrainian intelligentsia, clergy, and grain growers. The author demonstrates the continuity between Stalinist and neo-Stalinist attempts to prevent the crystallization of the nation and subvert Ukraine from within by non-lethal and lethal means. Nataliya Shpylova-Saeed is a PhD candidate in the Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures, Indiana University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

Victoria A. Malko's book The Ukrainian Intelligentsia and Genocide: The Struggle for History, Language, and Culture in the 1920s and 1930s (Lexington Books, 2021) focuses on the first group targeted in the genocide known as the Holodomor: Ukrainian intelligentsia, the "brain of the nation," using the words of Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term genocide and enshrined it in international law. The study's author examines complex and devastating effects of the Holodomor on Ukrainian society during the 1920-1930s. Members of intelligentsia had individual and professional responsibilities. They resisted, but eventually they were forced to serve the Soviet regime. Ukrainian intelligentsia were virtually wiped out, most of its writers and a third of its teachers. The remaining cadres faced a choice without a choice if they wanted to survive. The author analyzes how and why this process occurred and what role intellectuals, especially teachers, played in shaping, contesting, and inculcating history. Crucially, the author challenges Western perceptions of the all-Union famine that was allegedly caused by ad hoc collectivization policies, highlighting the intentional nature of the famine as a tool of genocide, persecution, and prosecution of the nationally conscious Ukrainian intelligentsia, clergy, and grain growers. The author demonstrates the continuity between Stalinist and neo-Stalinist attempts to prevent the crystallization of the nation and subvert Ukraine from within by non-lethal and lethal means. Nataliya Shpylova-Saeed is a PhD candidate in the Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures, Indiana University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Those two words -- "never again" -- have echoed through history as a promise to the dead and a warning to the living. Never again will we allow atrocities to be committed with impunity. Never again will the rest of the world just stand by and watch. But now, Vladimir Putin's unprovoked war in Ukraine is testing that promise and the West's will to stop him. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is accusing Putin of genocide, a claim also made by President Biden. Tonight, Christiane looks back at the origins of that word, “genocide,” and two men who ensured the world wouldn't look away after the horrors of World War II: Benjamin Ferencz, the last surviving prosecutor from the Nuremberg trials and the first prosecutor to use the term “genocide” in a court of law; and Raphael Lemkin, the man who coined the word in 1944.  Also in today's show: Christiane visits Babyn Yar, the site of the murder of 33,000 in World War II; journalist Mark Follman, who's spent the past decade focusing on gun violence in America, talks about this week's subway shooting in New York. To learn more about how CNN protects listener privacy, visit cnn.com/privacy

We discuss Russia's escalating attacks on civilians in Ukraine, and similar tactics used previously in Syria and Chechnya.Putin has committed crimes against humanity before. With no real repercussions from the West. If you like our content, please subscribe to our premium episodes. During the Chechen wars, the West was not as outraged as now, because the victims were predominantly Muslim and world leaders at the time still believed Putin was fighting a war “against terror”. It was proved by journalists like Anna Politkovskaya and former FSB officer turned dissident Alexander Litvinenko that was in fact Putin who planned the now infamous Moscow apartment bombings of 1999 as a pretext to start a war with Chechnya. For a more detailed account, listen to our Putin's Rise to Power – Part 2 premium episode. 1, 2 We discuss verified reports of executions, sexual assault, torture, shelling of children hospitals, maternities, and blocks of flats, as well as other horrors emerging from Bucha, Borodyanka, Mariupol, Kharkiv, Dnipro, Mykolaiv, Lviv, Irpin and Odessa. The number of civilian casualties just in Mariupol alone is estimated to exceed 20,000. They are rounding up Ukrainian civilians into camps and many people are “disappeared”. They have even killed dogs and their puppies. As Russia regroups to prepare for the Donbas battle, they are giving a new meaning to “scorched earth”. We go through a brief history of war crimes, and we will analyze the current situation, the West's reaction and what's coming next: General Alexander Dvornikov aka the Butcher of Syria and the Battle of Donbas. 3 Lviv University is the alma mater of the two lawyers who came up with the legal concepts of prosecutions at Nuremberg for genocide and crimes against humanity. Raphael Lemkin introduced the term ‘genocide' in international law and Hersch Lauterpacht coined ‘crimes against humanity' into international law. Putin is winning in Russia. He's losing internationally but he's winning at home, his popularity ratings inside Russia are 83%. On April 11, Putin arrested Vladimir Kara-Murza. The FSB has poisoned kara-Murza twice already. He's now in prison just Alexei Navalny, not likely to be released soon. A 13 km long Russian convoy is approaching Donbas. On the international scene Russia has been kicked out of the UN Human rights Council but not from the Security Council. The US is sending $750 M in military aid to Ukraine. Ukraine also has Bayraktar drones from Turkey. Finland and Sweden move closer to NATO membership. 4 1. Patrice Taddonio, What an ‘Unhinged' Meeting Reveals About Vladimir Putin's War on Ukraine, PBS, March 2022. ⇤2. Greg Myre, Russia's Wars in Chechnya Offer a Grim Warning of What Could Be in Ukraine, NPR, March 2022. ⇤3. Pjotr Sauer, Hundreds of Ukrainians Forcibly Deported to Russia, Say Mariupol Women, The Guardian, April 2022. ⇤4. Ben Arris, Editor in Chief, BNE Intellinews. ⇤

This 2019 episode is about the man often described as the person who coined the term genocide. He was also the driving force behind the existence of the U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.