Two existing theories, one based on goal attainment and the other based on ideology, are first examined as plausible approaches to the explanation of genocide. Respectively, they are rational choice theory and utopianism.

Rational choice theory is virtually ubiquitous in many fields of social science, especially in economics and political science, and therefore is a prime candidate for consideration. Utopianism has emerged in one major work as an exemplar of ideologically driven behavior leading to genocide. Since genocide has been claimed to be ideologically motivated at bottom, utopianism appears to be an appropriate point of theoretical departure. Later, two cases of genocidal behavior will be examined as bases for theory development.

Rational choice

Why not use rational choice theory as the primary basis on which to build theory about the onset and implementation of genocide? After presenting basic elements of the theory, I will state the blatant, somewhat coarse version of the argument against its usage, followed by a nuanced version that I believe to be more accurate. In the end, I conclude that rational choice theory has broad applicability in the everyday discourse of normal politics, but outside the domain of losses where genocides typically occur.

Two fundamental bases of rational choice theory are the existence of preferences and utility maximization. These requirements are intimately connected. Rational choice theory demands that utility be maximized or, in other words, that a clear preference exists that is to be achieved in the most efficacious manner.