The ‘Cambodian Genocide’ is the general phrase used to describe the crimes against humanity (including acts of legally defined genocide against certain ethnic and religious minorities) that occurred between 1975 and 1979 in Cambodia, although the country had been renamed ‘Democratic Kampuchea’ by the communist group known as the Khmer Rouge once they took power.

For a more detailed answer about using the phrase ‘genocide’ in association with the crimes of the Khmer Rouge you could check my answers here.

The Khmer Rouge revolution in Cambodia occurred following 5 years of civil war between the communist group, (which had grown out of the communist movement in neighbouring Vietnam) and the Cambodian Republic (a government sponsored by the US and formed after the coup of former king, Norodom Sihanouk).

The crimes against humanity that occurred during the 3 years, 8 months and 21 days that the regime held power in Cambodia are mostly related to what could be thought of as a kind of enslavement of the entire population. One historian, Philip Short, claims that Democratic Kampuchea was ‘the first modern slave state’, as the entire population was ‘collectivised’ and directed toward the goals of the state. These goals included ‘self-mastery’, ‘a super-great leap forward’, and creating a pure revolutionary society, which was primarily done using forced labour communes and forcing people into agricultural work in the countryside.

The Khmer Rouge viewed many groups from the old society with suspicion, presuming that they would be innately incapable of assuming the ‘proletarian consciousness’ that their revolution required for the nation to prosper. These groups first and foremost included members of the previous government, and republican army. But generally the ‘new people’, or those that were forcibly expelled from the urban areas in the early stages of the revolution, formed a second tier in the society below the ‘old people’ or ‘base people’ – those from rural areas – that were seen as closer to the regime’s view of an idealised person.

Other groups that fell into this category included ethnic minorities like the Vietnamese and Cham, former Buddhist monks, and members of the intellectual classes.

Using the phrase ‘Cambodian Genocide’, i.e. referring to the mass death that occurred in this period, generally refers to the state sponsored mass killings that took place. Perhaps up to one half of the total death toll (which sits somewhere around 1.75-2 million) was the result of direct execution, the rest of the excess deaths resulting from starvation, overwork or disease which could also be seen as a result of Khmer Rouge policies.

The one or so million direct executions were mostly carried out against ‘enemies of the regime’, or being suspected of counter-revolutionary activity. Significant amounts of the regime’s own forces were also purged in this period, many sent to the apex of the Khmer Rouge security network Sentabal 21 (S-21).

Eventually the regime collapsed, and while a remaining Khmer Rouge force remained active on the Thai border for more than a decade, the crimes of the party were exposed to the world.

Which brings me to your second question.

As someone who has been fascinated by this history for about 15 years (while I was still in highschool) it is hard for me to say from personal experience that it is not that well known in western culture. Perhaps I have a kind of bias where any mention of it naturally gets my attention.

I would probably, generally, disagree with your statement.

I think it is relatively well known in western culture, and this is reflected by the success of films like ‘The Killing Fields’, or ‘First they Killed My Father’, references on programs such as The Simpsons or The Life and Times of Tim. It is a ‘niche’ reference, and it is certainly not as well known as some other periods of mass death that had a more direct impact on the west (like The Holocaust), but mention of Pol Pot will generally get a nod from a person who also knows who Stalin, Mao or Hitler were. Naturally a phrase like ‘the killing fields’ has become fairly ingrained, as have the images associated with the regime… piles of skulls or the photos which adorn the Tuol Sleng museum.

To give the counter to that, I guess one could say that issues relating to Cambodia probably reached their height in the 1990’s when a lot of the world’s attention did turn to the small Southeast Asian country during the massive ‘UNTAC’ operation, involving the UN sponsored voting. Likewise, the end of the Cold War and changes in perspective about the Vietnam War – as well as a substantial amount of research into Cambodian history – probably led to the ‘peak’ of Cambodia in the western culture.

From the 2000’s onwards, once the country started opening up properly again to tourism, most people might think of the splendour of Angkor Wat when Cambodia is mentioned, rather than the tragic thirty years of war the country endured. But most, if not all, western visitors will never forget the dark side of the history that is on show in the country as well.