A STATISTIC that saddened me this week was that one in 20 people refuse to accept the reality of the Holocaust but it does mean that 95 per cent of people do accept it took place.

Normally, I wouldn’t worry if five per cent of people denied, for example, the reality of evolution, I’d be very pleased. The number who don’t accept evolution is much bigger and it’s not life-threatening. But five per cent of people denying that the biggest-ever atrocity in living human memory took place is very worrying.

Remembering the Holocaust is a vital act of humanity. It should remind us of what can happen when falsehoods, lies, racism and pure hate invades a group of people. As the years go by those who were directly affected by this gross act of inhumanity become fewer. The further we are from a direct connection, the easier it can be to forget.

If you’ve ever heard a survivor of the Holocaust speak, as I have on several occasions, you cannot help but feel moved, sad, angry and ashamed. Moved at the plight they were in, saddened by the actions that ripped families apart, angry at the way they were treated as less than human and ashamed that other human beings could be so callous and downright evil. The mass slaughter of one group of innocent people, for any reason, cannot be excused. When Holocaust deniers spread doubt and ridiculous “theories” they are simply excusing mass murder.

The intentional murder of six million Jewish people is by far the greatest act of genocide we’ve recorded, but it’s not the only one. A UN Convention which came into force in 1951 defines genocide as “the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.” It’s the gravest act against humanity that can be committed.

In 1975 the Cambodian genocide resulted in the deaths of up to 1.8 million people at the hands of the Khmer Rouge regime, led by the now infamous Pol Pot. In 1994, up to one million Tutsi people were slaughtered by Hutu regime soldiers and police in Rwanda during their bloody civil war.

Time and geographic distance can lead to us disassociating ourselves from these extreme acts of violence. But genocide is not something that happens to “other” people in “other” countries. We’ve had acts of genocide committed much closer to home.

In 1649 Oliver Cromwell invaded Ireland. It’s estimated his forces killed between two and six hundred thousand Irish people. Historians argue about the extent of the atrocities and whether it was all the fault of Cromwell, but this colonisation of Ireland had a ripple effect on the relationship between Ireland and England that lasts to this day.

It was once thought that the act of murder or genocide was restricted to humans. Technically and legally, an animal cannot murder another animal or human or, for that matter, commit genocide.

But there have been instances of one animal killing another from the same species, not for food or even for dominance, for example to become the “alpha male” by defeating all other males in a group.

There have been recorded instances of chimpanzees using weapons to kill bush babies for food, using a pointed stick like a spear and a chimp killing another chimp using a rock.

It was thought that chimps killing other chimps, as a random act of violence rather than for a specific survival reason, resulted from human interference and influence on chimp populations.

A major study a few years ago showed that, contrary to many people’s understanding, the killings happened naturally, not because of human influence. In effect chimp “murder” was a real thing.

In the 1970s the primatologist Jane Goodall reported a “war” between two chimp groups in Tanzania. Attacks between groups, acts of violence, killing and kidnapping took place. Initially her findings were dismissed. Scientists didn’t believe animals were capable of “waging war”. Later analysis of her observations and new observations of other chimp groups displaying similar behaviours confirmed that the Gombe chimpanzee war was real. But these animal conflicts are nothing compared to human conflict.

The title of this column is “making sense of it”, but it’s the one thing I can’t do when contemplating what drives people to commit atrocities. People fight for political control, for land, for wealth and for religious reasons.

In themselves, these reasons never seem sufficient or important enough to me to justify the taking of any life.