ABSTRACT
In cases of extreme forms of violence, there is a pattern: there is “us” – the superior, almighty us – and there is “them”, the inferior, dangerous “them” who must be eliminated. My intention is not to reduce genocide to something simplistic but rather to underline, or more precisely to raise, a significant question: how does someone become “the other”, the deadly enemy who pose such a great threat to one’s identity, security, and purity? In what circumstances does such a situation occur? In the twentieth century, particular groups in Romania and Serbia who have been identified as the enemy, the threat, or simply the dangerous “other” have been subjected to policies of discrimination, exclusion, and in the end extreme mass violence. In both cases, Romania and Serbian leaders justified their genocidal policies with nationalist arguments – to protect and preserve national identity and the uniqueness of the nation (supposedly based on religion or ethnicity). In order to understand why and how “the other” was constructed, it is important to look at nationalism, the main “provider” of characteristics, labels, and stereotypes in describing the enemy. The next chapter by Busch provides a further, more conceptual illustration of this process.
