The book is organized in two parts. Part 1 is related to theory. Part two examplifies part 1. Part 1Theory: In chapter 1 The systemic perspective is discussed, not to be confused with the systems perspective. The contribution is related to a research method for doing research in history based on systemic thinking. In chapter two the question studied is: What constitutes a systemic approach to the philosophy of history? In this study I first develop the systemic hypothesis and the relationship between history and the past. Then I develop a systemic perspective on ontology and epistemology. In the end the materialism, idealism debate will be discussed. In the conclusion I answer the question why study history from a systemic perspective? In chapter three I examine the following problem: genealogy is often a 'grey box', meaning it is often difficult to come to grips with the specific genealogical method. The question examined is the following: how can genealogy be used as a methodology in history? Part II Application In chapter 4 I examine the broad forces behind acts of genocide, because it may teach us something about the patterns and conditions that lead to such acts. If we know something about the patterns and conditions of genocide, we may perhaps at an early point be able to diagnose and identify developments that lead to these acts. If such developments can be diagnosed, it will be easier for the international community to intervene and stop developments that can lead to a human catastrophe. Consequently, the only reason to examine the patterns and conditions for genocide is to contribute to efforts that will ensure that such crimes against humanity do not happen again. In chapter 5 I discuss silence as an ethical crime. To do so the following questions will be examined: What constitutes denial of the Armenian genocide? Knowledge of which elements constitute a historical denial will provide us with a better understanding of it, and enable us to explain its possible consequences. In chapter 6 I discuss forgetting as a struggle against power. The example used is the Armenian genocide. Armenians have never received an apology from the Turkish nation for the genocide they carried out against them. It seems as if Turkey is attempting to let the act of genocide slip into the oblivion of history. Even today there is a risk of imprisonment in Turkey, if one writes and speaks about the genocide committed by the Turks in 1915-1917. However, the Turks have not forgotten - they prefer to remember what happened in a particular way, so they are not held accountable for the act of genocide. This chapter asks the question: Why is it important that the Armenian genocide should not be forgotten? The aim of the chapter is to reflect upon the ethical consequenses of historical amnesia.