Editing Mass killing (section)

== Analysis ==
[[Benjamin Valentino]] does not consider ideology or regime-type as an important factor that explains mass killings, and outlines [[Communist mass killing]] as a subtype of dispossessive mass killing, which is considered as a complication of original theory his book is based on.{{sfn|Tago|Wayman|2010}} About why it occurs,{{sfn|Valentino|2004|p=60|ps=: "I content mass killing occurs when powerful groups come to believe it is the best available means to accomplish certain radical goals, counter specific types of threats, or solve difficult military problem." See also p. 70 to read Valentino outlining his proposed two major categories of mass killing.}} Valentino states that ideology, paranoia, and racism can shape leaders' beliefs for why genocide and mass killing may be justified.{{sfn|Straus|2007|pp=484–485|ps=: "Valentino makes a quite different argument. The pivot of his cogent and parsimonious analysis is that genocide and mass killing emerge from the strategic calculations of leaders—that genocide and mass killing are calculated, instrumental, and deliberate policies that leaders choose to accomplish certain goals. ... A key question for Valentino is why leaders would choose the strategy of genocide and mass killing. Valentino argues that ideology, racism, and paranoia can shape why leaders believe that genocide and mass killing is the right course of action."<!-- He also points to the size of targeted populations (small populations are less susceptible to mass killing because they can be relocated), the policies of neighboring countries (if other states absorb targeted populations, then mass killing is less likely), the level of threat posed (the greater the threat to vital interests, the more likely is mass killing), the physical capacities of perpetrators (mass killing is more likely when perpetrators have the capacity to inflict it), and other factors. -->}} Unlike [[Rudolph Rummel]] and first-generation studies, Valentino does not see [[authoritarianism]] or [[totalitarianism]] as explaining mass killing;{{sfn|Tago|Wayman|2010|p=5|ps=: "Disagreeing with Rummel's finding that authoritarian and totalitarian government explains mass murder, Valentino (2004) argues that regime type does not matter; to Valentino the crucial thing is the motive for mass killing (Valentino, 2004: 70). He divides motive into the two categories of dispossessive mass killing (as in ethnic cleansing, colonial enlargement, or collectivization of agriculture) and coercive mass killing (as in counter-guerrilla, terrorist, and Axis imperialist conquests)."}} it is not ideology or regime-type but the leader's motive that matters and can explain it,{{sfn|Straus|2007}} which is in line with second-generation scholarship.{{sfn|Straus|2007}}

Manus Midlarsky also focuses on leaders' decision making but his case selection and general conclusions are different from Valentino's. Midlarsky has a narrower definition of the dependent variable and only analyzes three case studies (the [[Armenian genocide]], [[the Holocaust]], and the [[Rwanda genocide]]). Midlarsky tries to explain why individuals may comply with the culprits, why [[politicide]] rather than [[genocide]] happened in Cambodia ([[Cambodian genocide]]), and why ethnic minorities, such as Greeks in the [[Ottoman Empire]] and Jews in the [[Second Polish Republic]], were not targeted for genocide. Like [[Michael Mann (sociologist)|Michael Mann]] and Valentino to a lesser extent, Midlarsky mainly addresses genocides that did not take place. Both Midlarsky and Valentino mainly focus on proximate conditions, while Mann considers genocide within the broad context of ideologies and nation-states development.{{sfn|Straus|2007|pp=485–486}}