This paper was for my Law & Society Seminar, and is one of my favorite papers ever! When I signed up for the class, I thought it was going to be a sort of philosophy based approach to how law affected important societal issues. Instead, it turned out to be about how legal concepts were shaped and depicted by books, television, movies and the mainstream media… so more of Law & Pop Culture. I honestly almost dropped the class when I found this out, but then my professor mentioned paper topics that included Harry Potter- I was sold!
But with the tone recent political rhetoric has taken, I felt that this paper was more relevant than ever- being careful with the language we use to describe other humans is more than just “snowflakes” or “political correctness” our words can have a much greater effect than we think about when we make the racist joke, or post a meme comparing people to animals, or talk about other ethnicities “invading” or “plaguing” America. These types of language dehumanize our fellow humans and can help ease the way for serious legal and human rights violations.
So here it is: Harry Potter and the Slippery Slope to Genocide
Through her series of books about a boy named Harry Potter, author J.K. Rowling inspired and entertained millions of people across the globe, sending them on a journey through a world filled with magic, fantastic beasts, love, friendship, heroism, and sacrifice. But underneath these pretty pictures of Harry’s world is a seedier, dirtier vision of a world where racism abounds, and intelligent, rational creatures are enslaved, mistreated, and marginalized.
This paper seeks to explore that second world, where J.K Rowling utilizes her magical characters to show us how the dehumanization of marginalized groups can have very dangerous consequences. Part I of this paper looks briefly at the governing authority of the Wizarding world, the Ministry of Magic, and how its structure not only enables, but perpetuates the prejudices against certain groups. Part II focuses on the laws, regulations, and treatment of two human groups within the Wizarding world- Muggles and Mudbloods. Part III delves into what dehumanization really is, and how it can lead to genocide. Finally, Part IV compares instances of dehumanization within Harry Potter, with real life examples from history.
- Harry Potter and the Bigoted Bureaucracy
J.K. Rowling makes it clear, from the very first glimpse readers are given into the Ministry of Magic, that this is not a government that is going to concern itself with equality and justice among all creatures. In the entrance hall of the Ministry, Harry encounters a fountain that is described in the following manner:
A group of golden statues, larger than life-size, stood in the middle of a circular pool. Tallest of them all was a noble-looking wizard with his wand pointing straight up the air. Grouped around him were a beautiful witch, a centaur, a goblin, and a house-elf. The last three were all looking adoringly up at the witch and the wizard.[i]
Thus from the very first sight one would see upon entering the seat of government for the British Wizarding community, we can see the discriminatory views of the general public not only reflected, but reinforced in the very heart of the Ministry of Magic.
The prejudices against certain groups can also be seen reflected in the names of the various departments and sub-departments of the Ministry, such as sub-department The Muggle-Worthy Excuse Committee[ii], and Department for the Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures, which houses a Beast, Being, and Spirit offices, along with liaison offices for Goblins and Centaurs.[iii]
The Ministry of Magic, through their various departments, is also responsible for the passage of laws and regulations that affect the rights of various groups, despite having little to no oversight, checks, or balances to their powers. As Professor Benjamin Barton points out, the Ministry of Magic does not seem to be made up of elected officials, and is primarily an institution focused on administrative rule-making.[iv] This is echoed by Professors Paul Joseph and Lynn Wolf, who look to the fact that the Ministry of Magic seems unconcerned with any sort of fact-finding when Harry is accused of under-age magic in The Chamber of Secrets.[v]
It is also worth noting that the Ministry of Magic appears to rely heavily upon the major (and perhaps only) daily newspaper in the Wizarding community, the Daily Prophet. At times, this reliance seems to cross the line from merely being questionable cooperation on certain issues, to becoming what amounts to full-fledged government propaganda.[vi] Thus the protections against government overreach and corruption that a free and independent press can grant are conspicuously missing from the Wizarding world.
The overall picture that one gleans from J.K. Rowling’s depiction of the Ministry of Magic is not favorable: a bureaucratic nightmare without even the semblance of democratic authority, with no checks and balances, and that clearly embodies- and perhaps even encourages- the prejudices that plague the community. With a government like this, it is no wonder that there is systematic and widespread discrimination against a host of groups that are deemed as “less than.”
- Harry Potter and the “Less Than Humans”
It is universally accepted within the civilized world, that human beings have certain rights on account of being part of the human race. While the extent of these rights remains the subject of some debate in international law, the basic ideas that one has the right to life and liberty are not debated. Therefore it is not necessary to discuss the moral status of the human groups that are subject to discrimination within the world of Harry Potter.
There are two main human groups who are subject to a bevy of racist laws and regulations during the course of the series: Muggles and Mudbloods. Both of these groups will be examined, and compared to real-life human groups who historically suffered similar treatment.
- “Magic is Might”: Muggle Inferiority in the Wizarding World
When Harry is introduced to the Wizarding world, the term “Muggle” is the first to enter his new lexicon, with Hagrid explaining to him that “it’s what we call non magic folk.”[vii] More technically stated, a Muggle is a human being who neither possesses magical powers, nor comes from a Wizarding family.
Hagrid goes on to explain to Harry that the main job of the Ministry of Magic is to prevent the Muggles from realizing that witches and wizards exists, because if they knew, they’d want magical solutions to all their problems.[viii] Indeed, we see this duty laid out clearly by ministry officials when Harry is accused of performing under-aged magic the summer before his second year at Hogwarts, and he is issued the following warning: “any magical activity that risks notice by members of the non-magical community (Muggles) is a serious offense under section 13 of the International Confederation of Warlocks Statute of Secrecy.”[ix]
There is also evidence that the Ministry of Magic has no issues performing magic on unsuspecting Muggles in order to maintain their secrecy. When Harry accidentally blows up his Aunt Marge, then Minister of Magic, Cornelius Fudge tells Harry “…her memory has been modified. She has no recollection of the incident at all. So that’s that, and no harm done.” Further, in Rowling’s supplemental book Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them we are told that when a “rouge Welsh Green dragon” flew among a crowded beach of Muggles, Memory Charms were performed upon them in order to erase the event from their memories.[x] Both of these examples tend to show that the Ministry of Magic “demonstrate[s] little or no concern for any potential damage that Muggles might suffer as a result of exposure to magic.”[xi]
But if the Ministry of Magic is initially merely indifferent to the safety and wellbeing of Muggles, there is a radical change in this implied policy when Voldemort gains power. Again, this can be demonstrated by the fountain in the heart of the Ministry Headquarters, which is replaced by Voldemort. The new fountain bears the slogan “MAGIC IS MIGHT” and the description given of it is extremely chilling:
“It’s horrible, isn’t it?” [Hermione] said to Harry, who was staring up at the statute. “Have you seen what they’re sitting on?” Harry looked more closely and realized that what he had thought were decoratively carved thrones were actually mounds of carved humans: hundreds and hundreds of naked bodies, men, women, and children, all with stupid, ugly faces, twisted and pressed together to support the weight of the handsomely robed wizards. “Muggles,” whispered Hermione. “In their rightful place.”
Under Voldemort’s reign, the killing of Muggles is described as “becoming little more than a recreational sport.”[xii]
The ideas behind the type of dehumanization of Muggles that leads to this disregard for their lives, are evidenced by Voldemort’s insistence on teaching young wizards that “Muggles are like animals, stupid and dirty…the natural order is being reestablished.”[xiii]
- “Mudbloods and the Dangers They Pose to a Peaceful Pure-Blood Society”
When Harry visits Diagon Alley in order to buy his school things, he meets his first fellow Hogwarts student- Draco Malfoy. During their initial conversation, Malfoy introduces Harry to the Wizarding bias against Muggle-borns, asking Harry if his parents were “our kind,” and opining that Hogwarts should not “let the other sort in.” Malfoy reasons that this is because ‘they’re just not the same, they’ve never been brought up to know our ways.”[xiv] Malfoy continues to display this discriminatory mindset when Harry next meets him on the train to Hogwarts, where he informs Harry that, “[y]ou’ll soon find out that some wizarding families are much better than others, Potter. You don’t want to go making friends with the wrong sort.”
Though this bias is evident from the beginning of Harry’s entrance into the Wizarding world, it is not until his second year that he encounters the term “Mudblood”, when Malfoy uses it in reference to Harry’s friend Hermione Granger. Harry can tell right off the bat that this is an insult, but his best friend Ron Weasley must explain the concept to him:
Mudblood’s a really foul name for someone who is Muggle-born – you know, non-magic parents. There are some wizards – like Malfoy’s family – who think they’re better than everyone else because they’re what people call pure-blood… I mean the rest of us know it doesn’t make any difference at all. Look at Neville Longbottom – he’s pure-blood and he can hardly stand a cauldron the right way up… It’s a disgusting thing to call someone. Dirty blood, see. Common blood.[xv]
As is apparent in Ron’s explanation, the bias is based upon the belief that having a “pure” wizard bloodline is the “ideal”, and anything less makes you “lesser”. Harry seems to have grasped this concept later in this series, as evidenced by his thoughts during an encounter between himself, Hermione, and Draco Malfoy’s father, Lucius Malfoy- “Harry knew what was making Mr. Malfoy’s lip curl like that. The Malfoys prided themselves on being pure-bloods; in other words, they considered anyone of Muggle descent, like Hermione, second-class.”[xvi]
Other evidence shows that Mr. Malfoy is not alone in his generation, in thinking lesser of Muggle-borns. Harry’s Godfather, Sirius Black explains this during a discussion of his parents, telling Harry:
…believe me, they thought that Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the Wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having pure-bloods in charge. They weren’t alone either, there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colors, who thought that he had the right idea about things…
But this prejudice was not of a recent invention, as Professor Binns, who taught Harry and his classmates the History of Magic explained when discussing the beliefs of the ancient Hogwarts co-founder, Salazar Slytherin, who “wished to be more selective about the students admitted to Hogwarts. He believed that magical learning should be kept within all-magic families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy.”[xvii] Not only did Slytherin believe Muggle-borns to be untrustworthy, he even left behind a monster, concealed within Hogwarts, so that one day his heir would “be able to unseal the Chamber of Secrets, unleash the horror within, and use it to purge the school of all who were unworthy to study magic.”[xviii]
While we can see that these attitudes are ancient in origin, in more recent times the apparent leader of anti-Mudlblood sentiment was the Dark Wizard, Lord Voldemort. Born as Tom Marvolo Riddle, to a witch mother and a Muggle father, Lord Voldemort developed a self-loathing of his parentage, which he directs against others, while concealing the truth of his own heritage.[xix] Even the name “Lord Voldemort” was a result of Riddle’s disdain for his own father, as he tells Harry:
You think I was going to use my filthy Muggle father’s name forever? I, in whose veins runs the blood of Salazar Slytherin himself, through my mother’s side? I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle, who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a witch?
When Voldemort later regains control of the Wizarding community, he preaches to his followers the importance of keeping the pure-blood families- torturing and murdering those who argue otherwise, such as Charity Burbage, the Professor of Muggle Studies at Hogwarts. Immediately before killing her, Voldemort tells his Death Eaters that:
Professor Burbage taught the children of witches and wizards all about Muggles…how they are not so different from us… Not content with corrupting and polluting the minds of Wizarding children, last week Professor Burbage wrote an impassioned defense of Mudbloods in the Daily Prophet. Wizards, she says, must accept these thieves of their knowledge and magic. The dwindling of pure-bloods… is, says Professor Burbage, a most desirable circumstance…she would have us all mate with Muggles…[xx]
Once he is in power, Voldemort utilizes the Ministry of Magic to further his agenda of oppression, instituting a Muggle-born Registration Commission, whose stated purpose is to “better understand how [Muggle-borns] came to possess magical secrets.”[xxi] The Ministry of Magic rationalizes this radical step by claiming:
Recent research undertaken by the Department of Mysteries reveals that magic can only be passed from person to person when Wizards reproduce. Where no proven Wizarding ancestry exists, therefore, the so-called Muggle-born is likely to have obtained magical power by theft or force. The Ministry is determined to root out such usurpers of magical power, and to this end has issued an invitation to every so-called Muggle-born to present themselves for interview by the newly appointed Muggle-born Registration Commission.[xxii]
According to Remus Lupin, Harry’s former Defense Against the Dark Arts professor, unless one can prove that they have at least one close Wizarding relative during their interview, they will be found guilty of having obtained their magical powers illegally and will be punished accordingly, prompting Ron to insist that he will teach Hermione his family tree so that she can pretend that she is part of the Weasley family if questioned regarding her heritage.[xxiii] Lupin also informs Harry and his friends that Salazar Slytherin’s desire to teach only those of Wizard descent is now a reality, as students must prove their heritage prior to being allowed to attend Hogwarts.[xxiv]
But discriminating against those of Muggle descent is not the ultimate goal of Voldemort, he clearly wants to exterminate all Mudbloods, and thus restore the so-called purity of the Wizarding community. Voldemort makes this clear in the following exchange with one of his Death Eaters, Bellatrix Lestrange:
“Many of our oldest families have become a little diseased over time,” he said as Bellatrix gazed at him, breathless and imploring. “You must prune yours, must you not, to keep it healthy? Cut away the parts that threaten the health of the rest.” “Yes, my Lord,” whispered Bellatrix, and her eyes swam with tears of gratitude again. “At the first chance.” “You shall have it,” said Voldemort. “And in your family, so in the world… we shall cut away the canker that infects us until only those of the true blood remain…”
III. Dehumanization: Definition and Effects
According to Professor of Philosophy David Livingstone Smith, “dehumanization is the belief that some beings only appear human, but beneath the surface, where it really counts, they aren’t human at all.”[xxv] He argues that when a group of people has been dehumanized, they are then viewed as sub-humans, or
beings that lack that special something that makes us human. Because of the deficit, they don’t command the respect that we, the truly human beings, are obliged to grant one another. They can be enslaved, tortured, or even exterminated- treated in ways in which we could not bring ourselves to treat those whom we regard as members of our own kind.[xxvi]
But if dehumanization rests on a determination that some beings are not human- what is it that does make a being human? As Australian psychologist Nick Haslam points out, “any understanding of dehumanization must proceed from a clear sense of what is being denied to the other, namely humanness.”[xxvii]
- Defining Humanity
Defining humanity however is no simple task. For the purposes of this paper, the more prominent philosophical theories regarding humanity will be discussed as a basis for defining humanity.
One of the earliest discussions of humanity is found in the works of Aristotle, who put forth the thesis that it is our ability to reason that distinguishes us from animals, and makes us human.[xxviii] Therefore, the opposite would define a non-human: a being that is incapable of rational thought. But Aristotle also described a middle ground, a being that is capable of some reason, but not to the level of a true human. He called these beings “slaves by nature,” saying, “someone is… a slave by nature if… he participates in reason to the extent of apprehending it in another, though destitute of it in himself… in their case…it is better to be ruled by a master.”[xxix] As we will see later, it is this middle ground that forms the basis for dehumanization.
In the Middle Ages, physician and alchemist Paracelsus put forth a new definition of what it means to be human. According to science historian William R. Newman, Paracelsus argued:
Man has both a spiritual and an animal capacity and that when one calls a man a wolf or a dog, this is not a matter of simile but of identification…when someone acts in a bestial fashion, he therefore actualizes the beast within and literally becomes the animal whose behavior he imitates.
By this definition, the defining quality of humanity is our behavior, not any single quality that we possess on our own, instead our actions define who, or what we are.
Modern philosopher Immanuel Kant however, embraced the Aristotelian theory of rational beings, stating that, “human beings have absolute worth merely because we are humans, and are altogether different in rank and dignity from…irrational animals, with which one may deal and dispose at one’s discretion.” Kant went on to say that non-human animals “have only relative worth, as means, and are therefore called things, whereas rational beings are called persons because their nature…marks them out as an end in itself.”[xxx]
These three views are only a small spectrum of the varied and tangled theoretical tapestry that attempts to depict humanity. The truth is that there is no single theory that accurately and completely defines what it means to be a human, and it is perhaps because of this that dehumanization is able to occur.
- Dehumanization in Practice
Dehumanization occurs when, utilizing the various theories on what it means to be human, a people group is depicted as possessing qualities associated with non-humans, or as lacking in the qualities that make one human. These depictions can occur in many different ways that will be discussed in Part IV of this paper, but this section is more concerned with the effect of such depictions, rather than the depictions themselves.
The effect of dehumanization is simple- the dehumanized is no longer seen as belonging to the human race, and is therefore not required to be treated as part of the human race. As British philosopher Aldous Huxley clearly laid it out, saying:
Most people would hesitate to torture or kill a human being like themselves. But when that human being is spoken of as though he were not a human being, but as the representative of some wicked principle, we lose our scruples…propaganda aims at one thing: to persuade one set of people that another set of people are not really human and that it is therefore legitimate to rob, swindle, bully, and even murder them.[xxxi]
Gregory H. Staton, the president and founder of the human rights organization Genocide Watch puts it even more succinctly, “one group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects, or disease. Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder.”[xxxii] Indeed, we can see evidence of this in the testimony of those who have participated in genocides, who affirm that their participation in the killing was based on a belief that those they killed were not humans, saying such things as: “they are not human beings, they are Kulaks… in order to massacre them, it was necessary to proclaim that Kulaks are not human beings,”[xxxiii] and “don’t worry, you’re not killing humans like you. You are killing some vermin that belong under your shoe.”[xxxiv]
As the sources above clearly show, the effect of dehumanization is that the dehumanized group of people is viewed as lacking in human dignity, and is put at risk for mistreatment or extermination.
- Harry Potter and the Path to Genocide
Reading Voldemort’s words throughout the series, it is not hard to see the parallels between Lord Voldemort and the Nazi dictator of Germany, Adolph Hitler. This view is shared by psychologist Dr. Neil Mulholland who says that the “tendency of some wizards to place a premium on pure blood (that is, on pure breeding) and treating half-bloods and Muggles as second-class citizens is an obvious parallel to our own society’s history,” and that Mudbloods and Muggles are clearly “an allegory for the anti-Semitism and racial ideology of Hitler and the Nazis.”[xxxv]
Indeed, it is not hard to find examples showing a similarity of treatment towards those deemed inferior by followers of Hitler and Voldemort, including the manner in which such treatment is justified through the dehumanization of the inferior groups. Throughout the Harry Potter series, we can see examples of the dehumanization of Muggles and Muggle-borns that closely mirror the dehumanization techniques used by Hitler and other despots throughout history.
For example, under Voldemort’s rule, Wizarding children are taught that “Muggles are like animals.” [xxxvi] Similarly, in Nazi Germany, the Jews were often compared to animals, and Nazi propaganda sometimes went even further, claiming that it “would insult the animals if we described these mostly Jewish men as beasts. They are the embodiment of the Satanic and insane hatred against the whole of noble humanity… the rebellion of the subhumans against noble blood.”[xxxvii] Likewise, during the Rwandan genocide, Tutsis were often referred to as rats and vermin, and even weeds by the Hutu regime that sought their extermination. The dehumanizing idea of weeds is illustrated in the magical context, when the head of the Muggle-born Registration Commission, Dolores Umbridge, creates propaganda leaflets titled “MUDBLOODS and the Dangers they Pose to a Peaceful Pure-blood Society,” which is described by Harry as depicting “a red rose with a simpering face in the middle of its petals, being strangled by a green weed with fangs and a scowl.”[xxxviii]
Muggles were also said to be “filthy,”[xxxix] and this too is echoed in arguments against the Jews, which the Nazis said were a “race of parasites,” who had no sense of the “purity and cleanliness” of the German culture.[xl] This idea of purity is also seen in the rhetoric of Cambodian Dictator Pol Pot, who justified genocide by stating “The party is clean. The soldiers are clean. Cleanliness is the foundation.”[xli]
Another example is seen in Voldemort’s speech to Bellatrix and the other Death Eaters, where he compares the Muggles and Muggle-borns as a disease, and as a “canker that infects us” and must be cut out.[xlii] This closely mirrors language used in the diary of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, when he described the elimination of Jews as “a task for a surgeon. One has got to cut here, and that most radically. Or Europe will vanish one day due to the Jewish disease.”[xliii] In a speech to his fellow SS officers, Hilter’s military commander Heinrich Himmler stated, “We had the moral right, we had the duty to our people to destroy this people… We do not want, in the end…to be infected by this bacillus and to die. I will never stand by and watch while even a small rotten spot develops or takes hold. Wherever it may form, we will together burn it away.”[xliv] Likewise, Pol Pot compared his enemies to a disease, saying, “what is infected must be cut out,” and that “[t]here is a sickness in the Party… if we wait any longer, microbes can do real damage.”[xlv]
Another parallel can be seen in the Muggle-born Registration Commission’s determination that one could prove they were a true Wizard by showing their family tree.[xlvi] This is very similar to the way that one proved they were not a Jew in Nazi Germany: “it was impossible to tell Jews from Germans just by looking at them… So, the guardians of racial purity decided to determine race by descent.” As Professor of Philosophy David Livingstone Smith, points out “typically, the subhuman essence (as well as the human essence) is imagined to be carried in the blood. In this framework, it is vital to prevent human blood from being polluted by subhuman blood.”[xlvii] Both the Death Eaters and the Nazis attempted to protect the “purity” of their bloodlines by utilizing family trees, which was also seen in “purity of blood” laws in fifteenth century Spain.[xlviii]
Dehumanization is a very real and very dangerous phenomenon, one that can have catastrophic effects for those who are subjected to it. While most of us will never have to be directly confronted by these effects, J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter series exposes us to the reality of dehumanization using fictional characters. Not only are the methods of dehumanization used by Voldemort and his followers eerily similar to those used by real-life despots, but the dangerous slippery slope of such behavior is clearly seen as the story progresses.
While the Harry Potter series has a happy ending, real-life dehumanization still occurs today in countries and communities around the world, putting millions of innocent human beings in danger.[xlix] We can learn from Harry Potter, and stand up against dehumanization when we see it, following the advice of Minister of Magic Kingsley Shacklebolt, “We’re all human, aren’t we? Every human life is worth the same, and worth saving.”[l]
[i] J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix 126 (Pottermore Press)
[ii] Id., at 129
[iii] J. K. Rowling & Newt Scamander, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 140 (Bloomsbury Publ’g 2001).
[iv] Barton, Benjamin H. “Harry Potter and the Miserable Ministry of Magic.” 12 Tex. Wesleyan L. Rev. 441 (2005).
[v] Paul R. Joseph & Lynn E. Wolf, “The Law in Harry Potter: A System Not Even a Muggle Could Love”, 34 U. Tol. L. Rev. 193 (2003).
[vi] Benjamin H. Barton, “Harry Potter and the Half-Crazed Bureaucracy”, 104 Mich. L. Rev. 1534 (2006).
[vii] J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and The Sorcerer’s Stone 53 (Pottermore Press)[hereinafter Sorcerer’s Stone].
[viii] Id., at 65.
[ix] J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and The Chamber of Secrets 20 (Pottermore Press)[hereinafter Chamber of Secrets].
[x] Rowling & Scamander, supra note 3, at 200.
[xi] Joseph & Wolfe, supra note 5, at 200.
[xii] J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows 439 (Pottermore Press)[hereinafter Deathly Hallows].
[xiii] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 574.
[xiv] Sorcerer’s Stone, supra note 7, at 78.
[xv] Chamber of Secrets, supra note 10, at 115.
[xvi] J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire 1584 (Pottermore Press).
[xvii] Chamber of Secrets, supra note 10, at 149.
[xviii] Id., at 150.
[xix] Id., at 314
[xx] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 11.
[xxi] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 208.
[xxii] Id., at 209.
[xxiv] Id., at 210.
[xxv] David Livingstone Smith, Less Than Human 4 (Macmillan 2011).
[xxvi] Id., at 2.
[xxvii] Nick Haslam, Dehumanization: An Integrative Review, Personality & Soc. Psychol. Rev. No. 3, 255 (2006).
[xxviii] Livingstone, supra note 26, at 31.
[xxix] Aristotle, The Politics 27-39 (Start Publ’g 2013).
[xxx] Immanuel Kant, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of VIEW 9, 428 (Cambridge Univ. Press 2006).
[xxxi] Unpublished speech, quoted in R.J. Lifton and N. Humphrey, In a Dark Time 10 (Harvard Press. 1984)
[xxxii] Livingstone, supra note 26, at 142.
[xxxiii] Id., at 147.
[xxxiv] Id., at 152.
[xxxv] The word that shall not be named 237, 240.
[xxxvi] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 574.
[xxxvii] Omer Bartov, Hitler’s Army 116, 127 (Oxford Univ. Press 1992).
[xxxviii] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 249.
[xxxix] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 574.
[xl] Livingstone, supra note 26, at 139.
[xli] Ben Kiernan, Blood and Soil 549-550 (Melbourne Univ. Publ’g 2008).
[xlii] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 10.
[xliii] Joseph Goebbels, The Goebbels Diaries 1939-1941 at 57 (1982).
[xliv] H. Himmler, Speech By Himmler in Poznan, Poland, October 4, 1943, in Israel W. Charny, Simon Wiesenthal & Desmond Tutu, Encyclopedia of Genocide 241 (ABC-CLIO 1999).
[xlv] Livingstone, supra note 26, at 150
[xlvi] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 209.
[xlvii] Livingstone, supra note 26, at 160
[xlviii] Id., at 182
[l] Deathly Hallows, supra note 12, at 440.