Holocaust Flashcards
Zimbardo (2007), Milgram experiment - how it worked
The task is straightforward: one of you will be the “teacher” who gives the “learner” a set of word pairings to memorize. During the test, the teacher will give each key word, and the learner must respond with the correct association. When the learner is right, the teacher gives a verbal reward, such as “Good” or “That’s right.” When the learner is wrong, the teacher is to press a lever on an impressive-looking apparatus that delivers an immediate shock to punish the error
The tenth level (150 volts) is “Strong Shock”; the 17th level (255 volts) is “Intense Shock”; the 25th level (375 volts) is “Danger, Severe Shock.” At the 29th and 30th levels (435 and 450 volts) the control panel is marked simply with an ominous XXX: the pornography of ultimate pain and power.
As the shock levels increase in intensity, so do the learner’s screams, saying he does not think he wants to continue.
As you continue up to even more dangerous shock levels, there is no sound coming from your pupil’s shock chamber
Most participants dissented from time to time and said they did not want to go on, but the researcher would prod them to continue.
the situation was what mattered.
Zimbardo (2007), Milgram experiment - results
two of every three (65 percent) of the volunteers went all the way up to the maximum shock level of 450 volts
Over the course of a year, Milgram carried out 19 different experiments - e.g. transplanted his laboratory to a run-down office building in downtown Bridgeport, Connecticut, and repeated the experiment as a project ostensibly of a private research firm with no connection to Yale.
made hardly any difference
Milgram’s large sample—a thousand ordinary citizens from varied backgrounds—makes the results of his obedience studies among the most generalizable in all the social sciences
Zimbardo (2007), Milgram experiment - maximum obedience
Make the subject a member of a “teaching team,” in which the job of pulling the shock lever to punish the victim is given to another person (a confederate), while the subject assists with other parts of the procedure.
more likely to shock when the learner was remote than in proximity.
Zimbardo (2007), Milgram experiment - resistance to authority
Provide social models—peers who rebel.
Participants also refused to deliver the shocks if the learner said he wanted to be shocked; that’s masochistic, and they are not sadists.
Zimbardo (2007), Thomas Blass
analyzed the rates of obedience in eight studies conducted in the United States and nine replications in European, African, and Asian countries. He found comparably high levels of compliance in all. The 61 percent mean obedience rate found in the U.S. was matched by the 66 percent rate found across all the other national samples. The degree of obedience was not affected by the timing of the studies, which ranged from 1963 to 1985.
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963)
half a dozen psychiatrists had certified him as “normal.”
“The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal.”
Zimbardo (2007), Interviews of several dozen torturers, Zimbardo, Huggins, Haritos-Fatouros
sadists are selected out of the training process by trainers because they are not controllable.
torturers were not unusual or deviant in any way prior to practicing their new roles, nor were there any persisting deviant tendencies or pathologies among any of them in the years following their work as torturers and executioners. Their transformation was entirely explainable as being the consequence of a number of situational and systemic factors, such as the training they were given to play this new role; their group camaraderie; acceptance of the national security ideology; and their learned belief in socialists and Communists as enemies of their state.
Zimbardo (2007), Mark Sageman, al-Qaeda
normalcy of 400 al-Qaeda members. Three-quarters came from the upper or middle class. Ninety percent came from caring, intact families.
Zimbardo (2007), the most dramatic instances of directed behaviour change…
occur w the the systematic manipulation of the most mundane aspects of human nature over time in confining settings.
This is why evil is so pervasive. Its temptation is just a small turn away
Zimbardo, Stamford Prison Experiment 1971
Subjects were randomly assigned to play the role of “prisoner” or “guard”. Those assigned to play the role of guard were given sticks and sunglasses; those assigned to play the prisoner role were arrested by the Palo Alto police department, deloused, forced to wear chains and prison garments, and transported to the basement of the Stanford psychology department, which had been converted into a makeshift jail.
Several of the guards became progressively more sadistic - particularly at night when they thought the cameras were off, despite being picked by chance out of the same pool as the prisoners.
The experiment very quickly got out of hand. A riot broke out on day two. One prisoner developed a psychosomatic rash all over his body upon finding out that his “parole” had been turned down. After only 6 days (of a planned two weeks), the experiment was shut down, for fear that one of the prisoners would be seriously hurt.
Although the intent of the experiment was to examine captivity, its result has been used to demonstrate the impressionability and obedience of people when provided with a legitimizing ideology and social and institutional support.
Lifton (talk, 1996), mystical component of genocide
- Non-rational
- World perfected by destroying ppl
Lifton (talk, 1996), Holocaust as template for genocidal mentality?
Nazis = best model for genocidal mentality, which applies to all other genocides, consisting of:
- Support for genocide/ acquiescence in
- Participation in/ support for actions/ policy which if carried out would lead to genocide
Lifton (talk, 1996), sequence of events leading to genocide (Holocaust template which applies to other genocides)
- Extreme historical trauma. Near destruction of ppl - defeat in WW1
- Post-ww1, revitalising ideologies - promising to make strong again
- Revitalising ideology becomes genocidal. Group must be destroyed
- Genocidal institutions built
- Intellectionals/ professionals essential - rationale, organisation, technology, lead in carrying out genocide
- Professional killers
- Crossing of genocidal threshold
- Over this, bureaucratic momentum, can’t turn back
- Nazis - decision 1941 - middle echilons trying to figure out what fuhrer wanted but influencing genocide w their cruel behaviour, ensuring some completed before order given
Lifton (talk, 1996), reason why we study genocide
prevent recurrence
Israeli dentist in Haifa - spent three yrs in Auschwitz
Painful interview w Lifton. This world is not this world. Meant that whatever comfort in immediate surrounding, if you’ve known Auschwitz, know genocide which lies beneath surface
Lifton (talk, 1996), evil
anyone can become evil:
- Mengele not so diff from rest of us
- Satan = human creation
- Must recognise universal human potential for evil
Lifton (talk, 1996), modification of Arendt’s banality of evil thesis
Would modify - evil not banal. When evil perpetrated over time, they were no longer banal, they themselves took on evil
Lifton (talk, 1996), antisemitic view of Jews and culture
Hitler - Nordic only culture-creating race.
Jewish race only destroys culture
Nordic race infected by Jewish race, something must be done to remove infection
Lifton (talk, 1996), Nazi doctors and biomedical vision
One Nazi doc interviewed:
- Joined after Nazi rally when said national Socialism nothing but applied biology
Process seen as biological:
- Biocracy
- Run in the name of biological principles
- Example of dangers of claiming scientific truth for genocidal project
- • Nazis told docs not selfish 1-on-1 docs. Docs to the folk. Biological soldiers, cultivators of the genes. Contributing to revitalisation of own people
Lifton (talk, 1996), 5 steps leading Nazi docs to genocide
- Coercive sterilisation. Leading Swiss German, Ansrew Dean, more fanatical geneticist than Nazi, but Nazis offered op to remove bad genes
- Euthanasia - medicalised killing of children. Created by leading German psychiatrist before Germans. Former Nazi doc said easy to kill v young children. Sedatives - seemed like putting to sleep more than killing
- ‘Euthanasia’ - systematic medicalised killing of adults. Gas chambers. Mechanism and practices and personnel for concentration camps. Head = Karl Brandt. ‘decent’ Nazi - well spoken. Saw mission as getting rid of thuggish Nazi elements. Did most of the work among Nazis bc most able. Only programme protested/ discontinued in Germany bc fam mems of many disappearing. Unofficially continued.
- Euthanasia brought into camps, becoming death camps
- Auschwitz and other camps, genocide
Lifton (talk, 1996), medicalization of murder
Gas cock seen as syringe, medicalised
Syringe belongs in hand of physician
Doctors performed selections at the ramp
Lifton (talk, 1996), How could the Nazis do what they did?
Doubling.
- Killers undergo pattern of doubling - form of second self in extreme environment
- Nazis back to Germany on leave from Ausch then be normal husband/ father
- Auschwitz self - normal functions = killing
- This self seems to function as if separate element
- Holistic function - enables adaptation to killing, to vulgar environment, whole style of existence
- Takes away dirty work - can consid other self not responsible
- Can function at unconscious level
- Wanted to adapt bc tho nightmares over 1st days didn’t want to be transferred to eastern front, where death more likely
- Part of adaptation - socialisation process. More experiences Ausch docs wld go with to selection and show how it’s done. We save few lives by allowing into camp
- Splitting of portion of self from rest
- e.g. Schindler - stayed a Nazi - drunk w compatriots. But rescuer self existed alongside, got stronger towards the end
- Doubling could be life-saving - e.g. Ausch survivors
- In doubling, disavowal of what one does. So what they experienced wasn’t killing - knew what doing but didn’t take on the meaning of killing. Pattern by which one can adapt to evil
- Nazi docs still completely responsible, however
- Arrival in Ausch dimension of evil shocking even to cruel Nazis. Needed some socialisation
Lifton (talk, 1996), How could the Nazis do what they did?
Doubling of victims
• Doubling could be life-saving
Lifton (talk, 1996), doubling and evil
• Doubling - psychological means by which one calls forth evil potential or self
Lifton (talk, 1996), numbing
Extreme psychic numbing - diminished capacity to feel, which Nazis underwent
Auschwitz like distant planet - didn’t count
Lifton (talk, 1996), importance of continuation of normal behaviours
Profess identity to maintain - psychologically significant. Wanted to feel like scientists not just killers
- Nazi docs went to work, tease secretaries etc
- Normal behaviours of life-saving organisation but killing
Lifton (talk, 1996), docs more prone to doubling?
- Corpse, dissecting it
- Ritual, telling you moving into shamanistic world, world of death, not flinch before death
- Considerable numbing expected
- Many docs into med out of own struggles to cope w fear of death
- Docs only more prone to a degree, but show what everyone else can be capable of
Lifton (talk, 1996), doubling as German cultural tendency?
- Otto Ranke - examples from Ger romantic lit
- Niesche - torn condition of German sole
- Goethe - faust - two souls, each repels other
- First poet to take up Faust theme = Christopher Marlowe. But doubling in all cultures, just Germans seized upon, strong expression in Ger culture
Lifton (talk, 1996), more positive manner in which humans can adapt -
protean self
- In all of us - product of modern world
- Dimension of flexibility, fluidity, many-sidedness
- We require this in our v protean world
- Hopeful - protean self can become a species self. Can take on sense of self built from recognition we are part of human kind
- Can be part of one identity e.g. Jew, American - but subsumed to sense of being a human being. At our better moments we have that. Requires sense of empathy
- Genocidal process pushes us towards species consciousness
Bartov’s account of Bloxham - Holocaust as obstacle to research
- Author to correct perceived historiographical imbalance, whereby Jewish victims of Holocaust have displaced all other victims of genocide
- Study of Holocaust presents obstacle to larger understanding of genocide, blocks moral vision and obstructs ethical sensibilities vis-à-vis all other victims of human criminality
- Clearly shown by assertion of Holocaust’s uniqueness
- Annoyed by surprise registered in so much of the scholarship - Europe not only witnessed other genocides, had inflicted on colonial peripheries
- Holocaust simply more shocking, bc killing of Jews perpetrated in Europe by a ‘civilised’ European state in modern, bureaucratic, industrial manner
- Claim to uniqueness of Holocaust = another instance of Western-centrism
- Part of long tradition of West’s attempts to universalise own values
Bartov (2014), Holocaust and uniqueness
Notion of Holocaust as entirely unique extracts it from its historical context, and converts it into a metaphysical and metahistorical event, sacrificing status as concrete episode in annals of human hist
Bartov (2014), built-in contradiction in Bloxham’s book
• Attempt at contextualising Holocaust w/in broader patterns of human devel, even as it is still, paradoxically, de facto attributed a special position
genocide, Holocaust and colonialism in arguments of Bloxham and Moses (Bartov’s account)
- Genocide inherent to colonialism
- Holocaust itself = largely part of a Greater European colonial undertaking and logic from which it cannot be isolated
implicit assumption that Functionalism can be extended form Ger and Eur context to imperial-colonial framework
Moses on Holocaust and colonialism (Bartov’s account)
Holocaust not colonial genocide in common understanding of the phrase - Germans also believed themselves to be colonised by Jews and that Judeo-Bolshevism was existential threat to the Reich
Moses vs Benny Moris (Bartov’s account)
Moses - blames Israeli hist Benny Morris for defending ethnic cleansing and genocide as integral to the formation of (some) nation states and march of human progress
Bartov (2014), genocide and the Holocaust - critique of other scholars’ comments
These scholars have their history backward. Holocaust facilitates study of genocide, not obstacle:
- Scholarship on genocide greatly benefited from research on H
- Other genocides into public and scholarly view thanks to emergence of Holocaust as major historical event, not despite it
- Holocaust = event that crystallised most complete definition of genocide and motivated its legal adoption
- Debates over uniqueness of Holocaust evidently almost purely political today. H scholarship has largely stayed awa from political rhetoric
- Statements by hists about genocide w/in context of Zionist ideology and Israeli policies are mostly rhetorical expressions of opinion, not scholarly analyses of the politics and practices of nation building and ethnic displacement
Bartov (2014), Holocaust’s discovery by historians and wide public
- Public 1st learned about the camps through reporters and photographers attached to Allied armies
- Early documentaries rarely mentioned Jews, so horrors of Nazism and fate of Jews not clearly linked
- 1st two historical studies of Holocaust, by Poliakov and Reitlinger (1951 and 1953 respectively) focused on perception of Jews by others rather than on Jewish experiences
- (11) Ger authorities numerous trials in occupied Western zone then Federal Republic, esp following creation of Central Office for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes in Ludwigsburg in 1958
- Also the case for 1961 Eichmann trial in Jerusalem - 1st major public judicial event devoted exclusively to the Holocaust - largest public airing of witness accounts of the Jewish experience
- 1948 UN Genocide Convention played lesser role than trials in public perceptions and early historiography
- Historical scholarship was determined largely by judicial proceedings concerned w the specific historical event of the Holocaust
- Genocide receded into background - reemerged only several decades later
- Establishing Holocaust scholarship took long time
- 50s - general hists of WWII generally ignored Holocaust as irrelevant to military operations
- Gradual shift of Holocaust scholarship to centre stage can be gauged through growing recongition of Hilberg’s work - new editions and translations coming out for three decades after original publication
Only around such media events as the 1978 minseries Holocaust that the genocide of the Jews gradually entered the mainstream of public historical discourse in the US and Europe
Bartov (2014), two interpretative schools of perpetrator research
- Intentionalists - focusing on ideology and direction from above
- Functionalists - stressed role of institutional competition and bureaucratic structures
• Dichotomies still hunting scholarship, e.g. between perps and victims, centre and periphery, etc
Aly on genocide and self-interest (Bartov’s account)
- Genocide was profitable
- Massive plunder of assets and properties
- Genocide of Jews not irrational, ideologically driven
- Helped to sustain morale of pop as expendable slave workers kept economy running
- W failure of the Generalplan Ost - subjugation, deportation, mass murder of indigenous pops - all that cld be accomplished was eradication of Jews, who could no longer be ‘resettled’ in areas the Wehrmacht had failed to conquer
- Such interps link the Holocaust w other cases of population policies and ethnic cleansing that culminated in genocide
Bartov (2014), Why did demographic restructuring of Eastern Europe include murder of Jews of Salonika, Corfu, Crete?
Genocide of Jews = focal point of regime’s thinking and retained high priority under all circumstances
Bartov (2014), local studies of Eastern European towns show
- Massive participation in Holocaust by non-Jew pops
* Communal violence
Bartov (2014), growth of genocide studies
- Many q’s raised about other genocides guided by existing scholarship on Final Solution
- Growth in genocide studies due to polit devels - fall of communism and mass murders in Rwanda and Bosnia
- Expansion of EU to Eastern Eur facild confrontation w past of ethnic cleansing and genocide
- Disappearance of Soviet Union made is poss for 1st time to invoke Genocide Convention and begin estab of internationally recognised legal institutions to confront it
Kuper, Genocide, 1981 - genocide, culture, colonialism
Bartov’s account
- tendency to equate colonisation w genocide - 1970s, argument assoc partic w Jean-Paul Sartre, who saw colonisation by its v nature as act of cultural genocide
- Kuper rejects - Cultural change does not constitute cultural genocide - e.g. borrowing of items of culture
- Cultural genocide should be reserved for delib policy to eliminate a culture
- Not a universal feature of colonisation
- Overstated to equate colonisation w physical genocide - if this had been the case, issue of decolonisation could not arise
- Distinction between colonisation-fuelled genocides and those generated by totalitarian polit ideologies
Kuper, Genocide, 1981 - plural/ divided societies
Bartov’s account
- Many genocidal conflicts = phenomenon of the plural or divided soc
- Colonisation = major culprit in its role as great creator of plural socs
Kuper, Genocide, 1981 - criminalisation of genocide
Bartov’s account
- devastation of Nazis prov impetus for formal recognit of genocide as crime in internat law
- Western liberal worldview at root of criminalising genocide
Kuper, Genocide, 1981 - ideology, dehumanisation
Bartov’s account
- Ideological legitimisation is necessary precondition for genocide
- Such ideologies act by shaping dehumanised image of victims in minds of persecutors
- Danger signal of approaching genocide = where there is official sanction for talking about a minority group in non-human terms
- context for exterminatory anti-semitism in the demonisation of Jews
- Denial of human individuality and significance
- Carried out not in blind hatred but in pursuance of some further purpose, w victims being cast in purely instrumental role
- Complete expression of reduct to object = in death camps w stripping of social identity and reduction of victims to numbers
- Metaphors of disease and degeneration
- Repeatedly analogising European Jewry to syphilis and a cancer which must be excised
Kuper, Genocide, 1981 - role of threat to perpetrators
Bartov’s account
fundamental distinction - between situations in which some threat to interests of perps, and situations devoid of such threat
• Massacres in course of conflict in which some realistic threat is case in many conflicts over national liberation, regional autonomy, secession, etc - political struggles
- conversely, under Nazism, ideologies of dehumanisation reached most systematic formulations as theory of soc and blueprint for polit reconstruction and military expansion
- Persecution of Jews brought several advantages: source for support in other countries; unifying factor w/in Ger
- Contradictory elements in stereotype of Jews helped increase its appeal - capitalists and communists, demonic powers yet weak, diseases, degenerate
- No threat but their genocide advantageous
Kuper, Genocide, 1981 - practical advantages of antisemitism
Bartov’s account
source for support in other countries
unifying factor w/in Ger
Bartov (2014), critique of cross-genocide comparisons
Writing about many genocides instead of just one precludes empathy
Putting Poland 1939-44 and German Southwest Africa in 1904 in same explanatory framework of genocidal colonialism does not appear partic useful
Studies of H should not divert hists from fulfilling task of historically reconstructing specific event of mass murder of Eur Jews
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963)
Eichmann - background
- Otto Adolf Eichmann
- Trial in District Court in Jerusalem on April 11, 1961
- Accused on 15 counts
- Crimes against Jewish people, humanity and war crimes during whole period of Nazi regime especially WW2
- Tried under Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law of 1950
- 6 psychiatrists had certified him as normal
- E’s office organised the means of transportation of Jews in Holocaust
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963)
Eichmann - defence
- What he was accused of were not crimes but acts of state over which no other state has jurisdiction
- His duty to obey
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963)
E’s attitude
- Indictment wrong
- Never killed any human being
- Never order to kill Jew or non-Jew
- Repeated over and over could only be accused of aiding and abetting annihilation of Jews, which he declared to have been one of greatest crimes in history of humanity
- Didn’t change position even under considerable pressure from lawyer
- His was obvs no case of insane hatred of Jews, fanatical indoctrination
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963)
banality of evil
Complicated organisational work - e.g. ensuring enough Jews on hand at proper time so no trains ‘wasted’ - became a routine
- Except for diligence in looking out for his personal advancement, E had no motives at all
- Never realised what he was doing
- Sheer thoughtlessness that predisposed him to become one of the greatest criminals of that period
- Strange interdependence of thoughtlessness and evil
Fearsome, word-and-thought-defying banality of evil
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963)
what kind of crime actually involved here?
- Concept of genocide not fully adequate - massacres of whole peoples not unprecedented
- Expression administrative massacres better fits the bill
- Phrase has virtue of dispelling prejudice that such monstrous acts can be committed only vs foreign nation or diff race
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963),
judges in post-Holocaust trials
judges in all these trials really passed judgement solely on basis of the monstrous deeds
Did not really lean on standards and legal precedents w which they sought to justify their decisions
Fundamental problem in all postwar trials:
- Have demanded humans capable of telling right from wrong even when all they have to guide them is own judgement, which happens to be completely at odds w unanimous opinion of all those around them
- Moral maxims which determine social behaviour and religious commandments which guide conscience had virtually vanished
Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963),
criticism of abstract theory
- Zeitgeist
- Oedipus complex
- So general they explain and justify every event and deed
- No alternative to what happened considered and no person could have acted differently
- Ghetto mentality
- collective guilt of Ger people
- Assertion of collective innocence of Jewish ppl
- Make judgement superflous
Many ppl wld agree no such thing as collective guilt/ innocent. If there were, no one person could every be guilty or innocent
Only in metaphorical sense can one say feels guilty for what he but his father or his ppl have done
Question of individ guilt and innocence are only things at stake in criminal court
E trial no exception
Gellately (2003)
Massive kiling and war unforseeable by Ger people or even radical Nazis when Hit appointd chancellor Jan 30, 1933
- Vaguely defined agenda
- Solutions to antisemitism not settled
- Hitler wanted to be authoritarian but popular, so bound to avoid issues likely to upset nation as a whole
- Believed popularity crucial to authority
- Hitler wanted consensus on which to build
- Hence negative selection process - persecuted those on own hate list also regarded by many Germans as social outsiders or polit enemies
Hitler’s hybrid regime - consensus dictatorship
Gellately (2003),
Early Persecutions in a Consensus Dictatorship
H spoke of destroying democ and of Lebensraum to leading milit men less than week after appointment
began to call for moral purification of the body politic and racially pure community of the people
1933 on:
- selective coercion and terror - eliminated comunists and others already hated, feared, envied by many Germans
- Set out to mobilise nation around relatively modest missions at first
- E.g. eliminating recognisable social types who disturbed the peace - recidivist criminals, chronic welfare cases, others who would not conform to well-tried German values
- Police, judges, civil servants quick to take initiative and sought to outdo each other in pursuit of Nazi cause
Gellately (2003), status of Jews in Germany 1933
- Many authorities e.g. in med, welfare, justice, showed they were pleased Hitler allowed them flexibility and freedom to implement measures many only dared to contemplate in earlier years
- Ger Jews not rly social outsiders - increasingly well integrated after full legal emancipation in 1871
- some frictions in rural areas where Jews lived apart from neighbours
- Antisemitism not nearly as pop in Ger as a whole as in Nazi mvmnt
Gellately (2003), beginning of campaign against Jews
- Beginning in 1933, moves against Jews but retreat slightly if and when the people appeared to respond negatively to acts of antisemitism
- E.g. when Nazis attempted boycott of all Jewish businesses in April 1933
- By end of prewar era many came to accept there was a Jewish question, tho most didn’t want to see violence
- Aryanisation offered many opp to gain at Jews’ expense