• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Oskar Groening, a book keeper at Auschwitz, age 96 declared fit for prison

Wvrs

Member
Ahh yes that's the problem.. people are too mean to actual nazis, who actually partook in the Holocaust, that's what;s disgusting and not you reducing a man who worked in Auschwitz to a "poor old man"

He's not a poor old man, he's an active participant in genocide who lived a free life far far far far longer than he deserved.

Again, he was 12 when Hitler came to power. If you can't appreciate how that might fuck up someone's moral compass growing up, perhaps you aren't too aware of what society in Nazi Germany was like. That's not to detract from the fucking merciless scumbags the majority of them were, but people like this guy? He knew no other life, probably had no other influences: it was his world, and from I read about the case he seems to have taken steps to make genuine amends, even if someone tainted like this can never be truly redeemed.

Problem is though that it's very difficult to discuss issues like this without being branded as a Nazi apologist, etc, which is just fucking ridiculous, but that's the end result of the extent to which we've dehumanised the Nazis and made them seem like incarnations of pure evil. They're not, they were human, they were repugnant, but painting them as some sort of mirthless demons is far more dangerous than discussing the ethics of incarcarating this guy now, and risks something similar happening again. How can anyone now be a Nazi when they were just pure evil and not human?
 

iPaul93

Member
I would agree with you if this was regular criminal or a murderer that killed a person in the 40s, but this man partook in genocide.... not sentencing him because of age is a horrible message. The man will be able to "die in peace" in a german prison too.

I get that,but he's 96 years old.He can die anytime now and him being in jail won't change anything.

Like all those he helped wipe out from existence in excruciating and inhumane fashion?

He deserves no right to die in peace

See above.
 

Tigress

Member
Seems like the world is much better served with him calling neo-Nazis out on their BS than being sent to die in a prison cell out of the public eye

You know my first inclination is if he is a decent person now then why jail him? Except some one else on another forum pointed this out. He never served time and the reason why is sadly because we don't want to set an example. If people see they can get away with it for long enough they may just get away with it, it weakens the law and compunction to follow the law. (the person said it a lot better than I could and I'm totally paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it).
 

Cocaloch

Member
If there is no justification for the state to exist or to wield political power (which obviously there is no one-size-fits-all descriptive explanation for why states exist, so that's fine), then is your argument that the criminal justice system cannot inherently be motivated by anything?

That would only make sense if I believed that the intention behind the original creation of something should always be the intention behind maintaining it. I don't think that, and I'm actually quite okay with changing things to make them better. I do agree that nothing about justice systems means that all of them must have the same motivation if that's what you're getting at.

Aren't you arguing that society has no relationship to the criminal justice systems by which they are governed?

No? I don't even know where you got this from. If I believed that I wouldn't be advocating for another way to think of the justice system would I?
 
Again, he was 12 when Hitler came to power. If you can't appreciate how that might fuck up someone's moral compass growing up, perhaps you aren't too aware of what society in Nazi Germany was like. That's not to detract from the fucking merciless scumbags the majority of them were, but people like this guy? He knew no other life, probably had no other influences: it was his world.

Problem is though that it's very difficult to discuss issues like this without being branded as a Nazi apologist, etc, which is just fucking ridiculous, but that's the end result of the extent to which we've dehumanised the Nazis and made them seem like incarnations of pure evil. They're not, they were human, they were repugnant, but painting them as some sort of mirthless demons is far more dangerous than discussing the ethics of incarcarating this guy now, and risks something similar happening again. How can anyone now be a Nazi when they were just pure evil and not human?

You're taking out all his agency to argue he should be let go free (something he isn't even fighting for) because he's a poor old man and was 12 when Hitler came to power...

You talk about dehumanizing and rail against people being disgusting towards a literal Nazi who literally worked at Auschwitz but then you infantlize him to such a degree that you basically make excuses for what he did.

He joined up voluntarily, he saw what happened and did nothing, he got caught and lied about it.
 
Seems like the world is much better served with him calling neo-Nazis out on their BS than being sent to die in a prison cell out of the public eye

Agreed, I understand that he was an accessory to some of the most horrible acts in human history, but I think statute of limitations has elapsed here.
 

Occam

Member
You implied people voting shit in an election are as complicit as a literal voluntary SS member.

He was 19 when he joined, after having been brainwashed by the NS education system and propaganda for 6 years. Which incidentally was before his coming of age, which was 21 at the time.
Those people who voted for Hitler in 1932 weren't brainwashed, and they were older than Groening when he joined the SS.
 
Agreed, I understand that he was an accessory to some of the most horrible acts in human history, but I think statute of limitations has elapsed here.

Assuming this isn't sarcasm... there is no statue of limitations for genocide.


I get that,but he's 96 years old.He can die anytime now and him being in jail won't change anything.



See above.

It makes a statement, he doesn't get the guarantee to die a free man
 

erpg

GAF parliamentarian
The man's actions prove he's been rehabilitated as a functional member of society.

Slippery slope but if you want justice so badly, just kill him.
 

jtb

Banned
That would only make sense if I believed that the intention behind the original creation of something should always be the intention behind maintaining it. I don't think that, and I'm actually quite okay with changing things to make them better. I do agree that nothing about justice systems means that all of them must have the same motivation if that's what you're getting at.



No? I don't even know where you got this from.

Because they have power and people go along with it because people feel like they are powerless to resist or that the power being wielded is legitimate for any number of reasons.

?

Admittedly the word "or" is doing a lot of work in this sentence.

If I believed that I wouldn't be advocating for another way to think of the justice system would I?

Hence my confusion.
 

Dryk

Member
see my above for how I feel about what should happen to this guy, but don't imagine yourself above it. If dumbass trump somehow fixed healthcare, united everyone and made america 'great again' and then when the population was riding high took a dark swerve, there'd be more people around you than you think that would turn a blind eye until it was far far too late.
Yeah. When you watch an interview with of these people and they calmly talk about how the Holocaust was wrong, but they did nothing wrong it's like staring into the abyss. The environment they were in for most of their lives moulded them into incredibly efficient deflecting machines and that environment would do the same to most of us.
 

Wvrs

Member
You're taking out all his agency to argue he should be let go free (something he isn't even fighting for) because he's a poor old man and was 12 when Hitler came to power...

You talk about dehumanizing and rail against people being disgusting towards a literal Nazi who literally worked at Auschwitz but then you infantlize him to such a degree that you basically make excuses for what he did.

He joined up voluntarily, he saw what happened and did nothing, he got caught and lied about it.

Depends on how you see human nature, I guess. I think any one of us has the potential to be a monster when we're raised in certain surroundings. I've been to Auschwitz myself and cried when I saw first hand what happened there, it was absolutely harrowing and will stay with me forever, but I also know enough about history, sociology and psychology to understand how such a thing happened.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, as I mentioned this is a topic that in my experience is almost impossible to broach without namecalling and accusations being thrown around.
 
Well, there's the yet another purpose of criminal punishment beyond the retribution, deterrence and rehabilitation that have already been covered in this thread. That's the protection of society, which is probably sufficient reason to keep killers - or at least non-crime-passionel killers - off the streets.

I've always had my doubts about this for lesser crimes though. Pretty sure there's a stable proportion of burglars that a society can sustain, and if you lock up all the burglars more burglars will emerge - but if you let them all go at least you know who the burglars are.

But that's taken us way off-topic for this thread. I don't think there's any suggestion at all that Groening is likely to do it again.

It's not that off topic in that the discussion has shifted to the message or point of such a sentence. I'd argue that the idea is that good works don't absolve one of a sentence. If sentencing was all about benefits to society, then works would be enough. Since they aren't, punishment is a part of it.

Note that I don't think punishment has to be inhumane. The guy is going to be perfectly cared for, not tortured. But the idea is that there are consequences.
 
He was 19 when he joined, after having been brainwashed by the NS education system and propaganda for 6 years. Which incidentally was before his coming of age, which was 21 at the time.
Those people who voted for Hitler in 1932 weren't brainwashed, and they were older than Groening when he joined the SS.

That doesn't completely take away his judgement ability in the matter.

And people voting for Hitler might have done so for various reasons. The economic pressure Germany was at the time after years of reparations isn't something to disregard.

And unlike them, he didn't have to be able to see into the future to know what would happen to the Jews. He was there when it happened and cooperated.
 
Depends on how you see human nature, I guess. I think any one of us has the potential to be a monster when we're raised in certain surroundings. I've been to Auschwitz myself and cried when I saw first hand what happened there, it was absolutely harrowing and will stay with me forever, but I also know enough about history, sociology and psychology to understand how such a thing happened.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, as I mentioned this is a topic that in my experience is almost impossible to broach without namecalling and accusations being thrown around.

Again you are infantalizing people in the name of opposing dehumanization of a man who actively worked to help the Holocaust happen... Your tears are meaningless when you're instinct is to borderline excuse some of the most barbaric behaviour in modern history. I'd ask that you consider your priorities

I refuse to agree to disagree on this.

Your mindset is inherently what will allow history to repeat itself.
 

Moff

Member
I am not one who believes in a judicial system based on punishment. I guess it depends on what we want the few living Nazis to do. The message here is clear: stay in hiding, do not let others learn from the horrible actions you committed and die in peace.

But I am not someone to judge Germany on how to deal with Nazis, they did a great job with that in the past 70 years.
 

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
You're taking out all his agency to argue he should be let go free (something he isn't even fighting for) because he's a poor old man and was 12 when Hitler came to power...

You talk about dehumanizing and rail against people being disgusting towards a literal Nazi who literally worked at Auschwitz but then you infantlize him to such a degree that you basically make excuses for what he did.

He joined up voluntarily, he saw what happened and did nothing, he got caught and lied about it.

I don't think wolvers is 'taking out all his agency', rather he's looking at what this actually meant at the time. After all, we are seeing this with 20/20 hindsight of what naziism turn out to be. For Groening at the time he joined up at the age of 19 in 1940 it's a good job with an elite government service, and I really do have some sympathy with the guy in that his entire life is now being judged as a result of a dumb decision he took in his late teens.

That's not to downplay what happened, just to try and put it in some contemporary context. To us, now, Nazi equates to evil. To him, then, maybe it didn't.

I've met a few actual Nazis in my time, and a couple of actual murderers. None of them were evil incarnate the way we can all too easily imagine them.
 

Occam

Member
That doesn't completely take away his judgement ability in the matter.

And people voting for Hitler might have done so for various reasons. The economic pressure Germany was at the time after years of reparations isn't something to disregard.

And unlike them, he didn't have to be able to see into the future to know what would happen to the Jews. He was there when it happened and cooperated.

But he didn't choose to go to Auschwitz on his own free will, he was ordered there, and when he saw what was happening he requested to be sent to another post, which was denied.
So his only way out would have been desertion, which would have landed him in front of a firing squad.
 
It's not too late , it's never too late for paying for this atrocity. This is justice being served.

Not for paying, no. But prison sentences in modern judicial and penal systems aren't about the criminal paying for what he's done. I practice law and in law school we were taught that a prison sentence, any sentence really, is meant to a) rehabilitate the criminal, b) protect society from dangerous individuals and c) deter others from commiting the same crime. The theory behind european judicial systems isn't focused on the criminal 'paying his debt to society' as the american system seems to be (although I haven't studied it in depth.) This man seems to have been rehabilitated, he is of no danger to society and too much time has passed for his incarceration to have the effect of deterring others from commiting similar crimes. His incarceration serves no purpose other than revenge.

The nazis destroyed my country during the war. My late grandfather fought them and their allies and was part of the resistance when the germans occupied Greece. My late grandmother had seven brothers and sisters, everyone but her died during the nazi occupation from famine and disease. I grew up listening to real-life horror stories about the wars against the turks and the germans but all of that was 70 years ago. Putting a very old man in prison until he dies there isn't going to bring back the dead.
 

Wvrs

Member
Again you are infantalizing people in the name of opposing dehumanization of a man who actively worked to help the Holocaust happen... Your tears are meaningless when you're instinct is to borderline excuse some of the most barbaric behaviour in modern history. I'd ask that you consider your priorities

I refuse to agree to disagree on this.

Your mindset is inherently what will allow history to repeat itself.

Dehumanising the people who allowed the holocaust to happen, those who furthered it, and even the ones who set it in motion, is what will allow history to repeat itself; if something is so horrific that we can't envision humans doing it, then how can we guard about humans doing something it in the future? There is no such thing as pure evil, that's biblical nonsense: there is only human nature. I'm not infantalising anybody (you're reducing the issue once again), my priorities are well in order, and I would appreciate it if you got down off the pedestal. I don't want to argue because I understand where you're coming from and know it's the normal attitude to have towards anything to do with Nazism, but I'm just saying that the entire movement was entirely typical of what human nature can be at its worst, and didn't arise in isolation; its accession was inevitable when you consider the sociohistoric background in Germany at the time, and to deny its humanity is to deny its potential to accede again.

I will leave it there.
 
Don't project your cowardice onto others
If by cowardice, you mean the natural motivation every human has to keep living, sure.

Either way, you're probably not in the position to call anyone a coward in this situation. You're some dude talking tough on the internet behind a keyboard who probably hasn't and probably never will be in this situation.
 

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
I practice law and in law school we were taught that a prison sentence, any sentence really, is meant to a) rehabilitate the criminal, b) protect society from dangerous individuals and c) deter others from commiting the same crime. The theory behind european judicial systems isn't focused on the criminal 'paying his debt to society' as the american system seems to be (although I haven't studied it in depth.) This man seems to have been rehabilitated, he is of no danger to society and too much time has passed for his incarceration to have the effect of deterring others from commiting similar crimes. His incarceration serves no purpose other than revenge.

I was taught that in law school too, but I'm not convinced it is wholly true. There is a retributive element to criminal punishment whether we like it or not (and it comes out mostly in sentencing guidelines and precedents rather than in black-letter law). It's not as great an element in modern European law as it is in, say, the US - but it is there nonetheless.
 
But he didn't choose to go to Auschwitz on his own free will, he was ordered there, and when he saw what was happening he requested to be sent to another post, which was denied.
So his only way out would have been desertion, which would have landed him in front of a firing squad.

Yeah, I'm really sure you would have taken the bullet given the option.

"Following orders" isn't an excuse. At least not on it's own. It hasn't been one in the Nuremburg trials.

And voluntary joining the SS in the forties he knew what he was in for.
 

Xando

Member
People aren't forced into becoming SS officers. It isn't a draft. It isn't your regular German army unit.
Yup.

Joining the SS was pretty hard actually since you needed to pass some test to proof you’re aryan (They measured your head, hair color, ancestry etc.).
 

XOMTOR

Member
Yeah, how I feel. I respect what he did afterwards but, fuck him, he worked at a death camp. I'd be okay with shooting the guy to be perfectly honest.

Wow! That's straight up murder. Revenge is disgusting and vile and makes you no better than them.

you don't get to buy back your soul. He should be executed but we don't do that any more so prison it is.

Humans don't have souls except on the bottom their feet BTW so I don't know what you're on about. What is it about religions that always advocate such extreme punishments? If there really is a god and an afterlife, lets let him dole out the appropriate pinishment. Sorry God but I'm not killing anyone, even on your behalf.

Our penal system should be for keeping those that would harm others away from society and for rehabilitating those that can possibly be rehabilitated, not for exacting petty revenge.
 
"Following orders" isn't an excuse. At least not on it's own. It hasn't been one in the Nuremburg trials.
I didn't say that he dont deserve some kind of punishment. Just that belittling people as following orders is really easy when you're not in their position and probably never will be.

It's especially shitty when the person openly admits and talks about how horrible the situation was and how much they regret it and uses it to educate others.
 
I was taught that in law school too, but I'm not convinced it is wholly true. There is a retributive element to criminal punishment whether we like it or not (and it comes out mostly in sentencing guidelines and precedents rather than in black-letter law). It's not as great an element in modern European law as it is in, say, the US - but it is there nonetheless.

Agreed, mostly as a side effect of the sentence's function as a deterrent.
 

Opto

Banned
If by cowardice, you mean the natural motivation every human has to keep living, sure.

Either way, you're probably not in the position to call anyone a coward in this situation. You're some dude talking tough on the internet behind a keyboard who probably hasn't and probably never will be in this situation.
Yeah, humans are cowards. Doesn't make their actions right
 

Lifeline

Member
Could have lived a normal life, but decided to fight Holocaust deniers and this is what he gets for it. Justice system should be about rehabilitation and not revenge, and he has clearly shown through his actions that he regrets his part and he now fights modern day Nazis/Deniers.


If it had to be done, should've put him in for a couple months and called it a day. Prison till he most likely dies is a cruel fate
 

jtb

Banned
Dehumanising the people who allowed the holocaust to happen, and even the ones who set it in motion, is what will allow history to repeat itself; if something is so horrific that we can't envision humans doing it, then how can we guard about humans doing something it in the future? There is no such thing as pure evil, that's biblical nonsense: there is only human nature. I'm not infantalising anybody, my priorities are well in order, and I would appreciate it if you got down off the pedestal. I don't want to argue because I understand where you're coming from and know it's the normal attitude to have towards anything to do with Nazism, but I'm just saying that the entire movement was entirely typical of what human nature can be at its worst, and didn't arise in isolation; its accession was inevitable when you consider the sociohistoric background in Germany at the time, and to deny its humanity is to deny its potential to accede again.

I will leave it there.

Well, the flip side of this is that recognizing Groening's agency is humanizing him - and we need to acknowledge that the Holocaust and other genocides like it are the result of conscious human choices and that tacitly allowing (arguably enabling) a crime against humanity to occur is unacceptable.
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
Not for paying, no. But prison sentences in modern judicial and penal systems aren't about the criminal paying for what he's done. I practice law and in law school we were taught that a prison sentence, any sentence really, is meant to a) rehabilitate the criminal, b) protect society from dangerous individuals and c) deter others from commiting the same crime. The theory behind european judicial systems isn't focused on the criminal 'paying his debt to society' as the american system seems to be (although I haven't studied it in depth.) This man seems to have been rehabilitated, he is of no danger to society and too much time has passed for his incarceration to have the effect of deterring others from commiting similar crimes. His incarceration serves no purpose other than revenge.

The nazis destroyed my country during the war. My late grandfather fought them and their allies and was part of the resistance when the germans occupied Greece. My late grandmother had seven brothers and sisters, everyone but her died during the nazi occupation from famine and disease. I grew up listening to real-life horror stories about the wars against the turks and the germans but all of that was 70 years ago. Putting a very old man in prison until he dies there isn't going to bring back the dead.

Good post. That said, I'm OK with some form of revenge when it comes to justice (I just don't agree that it should be the primary reason, let alone the sole reason). I think completely disregarding or demonizing revenge might be very, say, noble, but not necessarily inherently more just. So I certainly understand why people think he should pay by spending the rest of his life in prison, though personally I don't think it's particularly productive.
 
Hmm not sure about this. Seems like they should just give him house arrest or maybe just probation. I'm all about punishment, but I can't really see the justification in this case.
 
I don't think wolvers is 'taking out all his agency', rather he's looking at what this actually meant at the time. After all, we are seeing this with 20/20 hindsight of what naziism turn out to be. For Groening at the time he joined up at the age of 19 in 1940 it's a good job with an elite government service, and I really do have some sympathy with the guy in that his entire life is now being judged as a result of a dumb decision he took in his late teens.

That's not to downplay what happened, just to try and put it in some contemporary context. To us, now, Nazi equates to evil. To him, then, maybe it didn't.

I've met a few actual Nazis in my time, and a couple of actual murderers. None of them were evil incarnate the way we can all too easily imagine them.

He absolutely removes his agency when he uses he was 12 when Hitler came to power to explain why he willingly joined the SS. He absolutely does when he uses he was 12 when Hitler came to power as a reason why he shouldn't be punished now.

The entire post was infantalizing an active participant in the Holocaust.
 
So this goes for all crimes right? Serial killers, rapists, robbers? You get away, live a full life, rehabilitate and you're totally good. Any other cases like this?
 
Not for paying, no. But prison sentences in modern judicial and penal systems aren't about the criminal paying for what he's done. I practice law and in law school we were taught that a prison sentence, any sentence really, is meant to a) rehabilitate the criminal, b) protect society from dangerous individuals and c) deter others from commiting the same crime. The theory behind european judicial systems isn't focused on the criminal 'paying his debt to society' as the american system seems to be (although I haven't studied it in depth.) This man seems to have been rehabilitated, he is of no danger to society and too much time has passed for his incarceration to have the effect of deterring others from commiting similar crimes. His incarceration serves no purpose other than revenge.

The nazis destroyed my country during the war. My late grandfather fought them and their allies and was part of the resistance when the germans occupied Greece. My late grandmother had seven brothers and sisters, everyone but her died during the nazi occupation from famine and disease. I grew up listening to real-life horror stories about the wars against the turks and the germans but all of that was 70 years ago. Putting a very old man in prison until he dies there isn't going to bring back the dead.

He serves as warning... You will never be forgiven legally for committing genocide. That's the purpose putting him in jail serves.
 

zashga

Member
I don't think wolvers is 'taking out all his agency', rather he's looking at what this actually meant at the time. After all, we are seeing this with 20/20 hindsight of what naziism turn out to be. For Groening at the time he joined up at the age of 19 in 1940 it's a good job with an elite government service, and I really do have some sympathy with the guy in that his entire life is now being judged as a result of a dumb decision he took in his late teens.

That's not to downplay what happened, just to try and put it in some contemporary context. To us, now, Nazi equates to evil. To him, then, maybe it didn't.

I've met a few actual Nazis in my time, and a couple of actual murderers. None of them were evil incarnate the way we can all too easily imagine them.

That's ridiculous. Actively participating in the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent people is not some youthful indiscretion. This man had a front row seat to exactly what Nazism became. He can't be excused or rehabilitated by the fact that he signed on before that happened, because he stayed on even after things took an unimaginably evil turn.

And just because someone doesn't mug and sneer like a movie villain doesn't mean they aren't evil. The true evil is whatever allowed these monsters to exterminate millions of human beings, then go on to lead lives of their own as if nothing had happened. The fact that nazis can seem "normal" decades later, in spite of what they did, is more horrifying than if they behaved like cartoon villains proud of what they had done.
 
Snarky❤;245237950 said:
So this goes for all crimes right? Serial killers, rapists, robbers? You get away, live a full life, rehabilitate and you're totally good. Any other cases like this?

There are usually statute of limitations on these types of crimes so those are not good examples.
 
Top Bottom