According to former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, “there is no rationality in ethnic conflicts. It’s gut, it’s hate” (Z). Despite this assertion, many political scientists argue that mass killings are rational and serve a purpose for those who instigate them: two of these theorists, Barry Posen and Benjamin Valentino, present two different philosophies. Posen presents a theory of mass killings that focuses on the realist school of thought, and therefore primarily on the concept of security dilemma and anarchy. Unlike Posen who presents his theory based on the state level of analysis, Valentino presents a theory that encompasses the individual level of analysis and as such can be seen as following the constructivist school of thought. His theory attempts to explain massacres as a strategy used by leaders to achieve their long-term goals. Posner's realist explanation describes a limited range of massacres: it can simply describe and predict the massacres and ethnic conflicts that can arise after the deterioration of a large central authority into small ethnic subgroups, such as what happened to Yugoslavia. Conversely, Valentino's theory not only offers rationalizations for all types of ethnic conflicts and genocides, but also presents an accurate model that can be used to predict the manifestation of such events in the future. Thus, because of Valentino's ability to present explanations for most massacre events in history and his ease in predicting such events occurring in the future, his massacre theory is superior to explanation Posner's limited ability and his even more limited ability to calculate the chances of future massacres proposed in his book...... middle of article...... Valentino offers a justification for a tragedy that is all too common throughout history: the slaughter of people and the incidence of ethnic conflict. conflict. These two political scientists approach the question in different ways. Posen applies realist theory and thus uses anarchy and the security dilemma as an explanation, while Valentino uses the constructivist approach to explain how massacres are a tool implemented by leaders to achieve their goals. However, due to the limited scope of Posen's theory, Valentino's rationalization is superior, because it not only explains what Posen's theory accomplishes, but also adds to the range. Thus, not only does Valentino successfully explain a phenomenon that has been perplexing for centuries, but he also offers the tools necessary to predict and, as personal responsibility is high in his theory, prevent such atrocities from happening again in the future..