Oh yeah sure. Maybe because until now we are of the idea that "I was following orders" excuses us.
-
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.
Up: 94 year old former SS-Guard convicted for Auschwitz
- Thread starter Chariot
- Start date
- Status
Oh yeah sure. Maybe because until now we are of the idea that "I was following orders" excuses us.
Corronchilejano
Member
That has literally never worked for anyone.
It did too. Notably for war crimes in germany during WWI.
Which may have created the world view in this Oskar guy that asking for a transfer was good enough.
People adapt to almost any environment or situation, look at the Stanford Prison experiment. As much as people imagine they would go Rambo, it's very different doing that when you know your life and potentially your family's life is on the line. I feel like some of this is 'Internet Courage'.
It also should be noted that the only reason he's being charged is due to a change in policy from 2011.
Jag
Member
I think it is. Trot this guy out to tell the deniers to shut the fuck up, then send him back to jail. Maybe some good will come out of his actions.
The guy should have been in prison for life. He got lucky that he lived as long as he did out of jail.
Agent Gibbs
Member
Again lots of people are claiming he's guilty of the crime of being a Nazi, whilst ignoring that at the time the Germans were indoctrinated and believed the cause was either true and correct or akin to a different political ideology (Democrats to Republicans, Conservative to Labour, hard left to Hard right), being a member of the Nazi party or the nazi army alone should not be a crime?
I suggest again imagine a massive regime change in America and being an American is in that society considered akin to being a Nazi, would that be fair to persecute all American's based on the beliefs they had at the time by a society that had a different moral outlook on life?
You simply cannot make following an ideology illegal (based on your own alternate views), that is utterly contrary to the ideals of freedom of speech and democracy and would lead to totalitarian societies
You can only judge (in a court) him and by extension any soldier (regardless of their initial reason for conscription) by the actions they take, not the beliefs they hold - and his actions were to catalogue personal possessions, write reports and send off items to Berlin for reprocessing - the only thing he did was nothing
Feel free to personally judge them on their beliefs but the law cannot and should never persecute in such a way that it targets those who held a political belief - thats one hell of a dark road to go down
I suggest again imagine a massive regime change in America and being an American is in that society considered akin to being a Nazi, would that be fair to persecute all American's based on the beliefs they had at the time by a society that had a different moral outlook on life?
You simply cannot make following an ideology illegal (based on your own alternate views), that is utterly contrary to the ideals of freedom of speech and democracy and would lead to totalitarian societies
You can only judge (in a court) him and by extension any soldier (regardless of their initial reason for conscription) by the actions they take, not the beliefs they hold - and his actions were to catalogue personal possessions, write reports and send off items to Berlin for reprocessing - the only thing he did was nothing
Feel free to personally judge them on their beliefs but the law cannot and should never persecute in such a way that it targets those who held a political belief - thats one hell of a dark road to go down
hobblygobbly
Member
The Nazi party had control over people that has never been seen before or since. From the indoctrination to the spies, you could barely think about sabotage, assassination, resistance, etc without being found out very quickly, you had no idea who to trust, people couldn't even trust family due to ratting out/indoctrination. There's a reason why so much of it failed that we know about and why the Nazi party didn't fail within itself for so long, the control they had over every single thing and peoples lives were unprecedented. The Nazi party wasn't incompetent, it managed to do what it did and fight a war like that because of its control.
Lots of sabotage and resistance took place during Nazi controlled, almost all of it always failed.
The part of sabotage, resistance, etc from civilians to soldiers is a huge part in the study and research of WW2 because of how it was prevented by the Nazi party itself and its ideology/indoctrination and a system driven by utter fear.
Box of Bunnies
Banned
People still saying "he asked to be transferred away" in these last couple pages as if it was some kind of mitigating factor really need to go back and see that it was because he didn't like the exact method with which they were murdering people that he requested it, not because of the mass murder itself. Like, a minute's reading there will tell you that.
Does locking a 94 year old up really achieve much? I dunno, not really, apart from symbolically. But the whole "he asked to be transferred away" like it absolves him somehow is completely missing the point of why he wanted that and how he viewed things at the time.
Does locking a 94 year old up really achieve much? I dunno, not really, apart from symbolically. But the whole "he asked to be transferred away" like it absolves him somehow is completely missing the point of why he wanted that and how he viewed things at the time.
Did you learn nothing from the standford experiment?
This attitude is just wasting the results of this experiment or the milgram experiment, and well, the holocaust.
What good does us to know that the average human will commit attrocities under -even slight- pressure, if we don't educate ourselves to stop it from happening again.
Sure, some of it is "internet courage". But just blandly going "ooh people will just adapt", just bringing up the standford prison experiment and then going "shrug, there's nothing we can do, humans will adapt" is learning nothing. This attitude is just begging for it to happen again.
Amentallica
Unconfirmed Member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology_of_the_SS#cite_note-FOOTNOTEBuchheim1968372.E2.80.93373-49
Also read the book Auschwitz: A New History, where author Laurence Rees further reinforces the ideas of the aforementioned excerpt. It's a fascinating read (haven't finished it yet but plan to soon).
Also read the book Auschwitz: A New History, where author Laurence Rees further reinforces the ideas of the aforementioned excerpt. It's a fascinating read (haven't finished it yet but plan to soon).
Moff
Member
that's an incredible naive standard and it also belittles the courage of the very few who dared oppose the regime, if you think everyone should be capable to do this that you want to make it law.
Octavianus
Banned
The nationalism excuse is such a fucking cop out. Can't believe people still use it.
No disagreement there, keep up the good work. My personal worry is actually that we learned the wrong lesson from the Holocaust - that we've put the Nazis on a piedestal as a special kind of evil that couldn't have been us. I know myself well enough at this point to put myself in Gröning's shoes as a thought experiment and I don't like the results. If I had been born in the 1920s in Germany I could also have been swept away by the allure of the SS as this elite unit and not realised the truth before it was too late, just like him. And I'm not confident enough to say that I would have done anything differently either once the transfer was denied. I'm not that kind of hero. I think that's part of the horror of the Holocaust; that it didn't require monsters to keep going except for at the very top.
I have no objections to the trial or the verdict in general but I hope that they find that there are enough extenuating circumstances in Gröning's case that the sentence can be suspended in some way. I understand the need for justice but there should be room for mercy too.
OriginofHysteria
Banned
How exactly is it a cop-out?
Agent Gibbs
Member
I fear a lot of people just cannot comprehend this and come from a place where they think being a Nazi was akin to joining a student union, a book club or political activist group! They say this man volunteered to join the SS like that, when in reality he was so indoctrinated it was no choice of his own - he'll have truly believed the propaganda that it was the best job he could get to make a better world
I'd liken it to how the Special forces say the SAS, Navy Seals etc are viewed, thats how it would have seemed to the average German living in Nazi Germany - we can't look back and judged based on our heinsight, they didn't know of these things, and the whispers they heard were dismissed as enemy propaganda
The point is that it's more effective to highlight the social issues and circumstances so as to prevent some large scale atrocities from happening.
Should the janitor in Abu Ghraib have a moral obligation to try and physically free the prisoners?
I also agree with this post too in that people like Schindler are looked up to because it took insane amounts of courage.
Amentallica
Unconfirmed Member
I also recommend this book which discusses the many attempts at Hitler's life. Truly interesting stuff.
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Hitler-Assassins-Dictator-Cheated/dp/0553382551
Edit: Well, seems like I'm derailing the thread a bit, but I'm just trying to provide tools to inform people.
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Hitler-Assassins-Dictator-Cheated/dp/0553382551
Edit: Well, seems like I'm derailing the thread a bit, but I'm just trying to provide tools to inform people.
It is not belittling. The ones who opposed the regime are the ones who did the right thing.
So what is your standard.
While this is a good point in gral, it does not apply to Oskar Groening in particular. The guy saw the atrocities first hand, did nothing. Sure, he was a victim of propagada at first, but soon he was faced with the reality of what he was doing.
I don't think either attitude means that we should not punish Oskar.
-If indoctrination is not an excuse, if we hold that he should have known better, well, obvs he should be in jail.
-If indoctrination is an excuse, then we still have to punish him -maybe not as harshly-. A civilized society owes to itself to show that this kind of indoctrination should not happen again, that it has learned from its past, that people should be mentally aware when nazi-like thought arises.
Now whether he was capable of realizing that he should be doing something. Well, that's the point. Future people should look back at what Oskar did and be able to say "I hope, I want to do better than that".
Amentallica
Unconfirmed Member
When you say those who opposed the regime did the right thing (which I certainly agree with), what actions are you referring to? Excusing themselves from Nazism entirely, actively attempting to murder Nazis,, freeing captives, etc.? I ask out of curiosity.
Moff
Member
It is belittling because apparently you expect everyone to behave like them, to rise up against the regime even if it costs your own life. apparently you would even do that yourself? I think that is extremely naive and very belittling. only very few dared to do that, most paid with their lives. that is not something I expect everyone to do, certainly not by law, or that they should be punished by law if they didn't.
Corronchilejano
Member
The Nuremberg defense has literally never worked to give innocence to anyone outside the United States, rather to reduce the harshness of a sentence.
Deified Data
Banned
Yes it is - vengeance is a cornerstone of criminal punishment. It's the literal definition.
It worked. For acquital, not just reduction of sentence. Before Nuremberg. In a country that preceded Nazi Germany.
You are factually wrong.
In the face of the holocaust? Which this guy in particular knew in exact detail? At least quitting, refusal to work, treason. If you fear for your life, see how to get just jailed. I am not demanding everyone be a Schindler, but you just cannot knowingly cooperate.
I am not asking this of every german involved. But surely of members of the SS.
Refusing to follow orders that go against human rights is a law in some places. I don't know why you are so focused on pretending that this is a crazy standard, particularly after WW2.
Octavianus
Banned
How is it not? People use it like it somehow reduces the responsibility of individuals because 'nationalism lol'.
My 2 cents:
I agree that he probably should be guilty for what he did (which in itself is NOT a serious crime; we cannot charge people purely for their thoughts, even if they are utterly reprehensible). Maybe then they can arrange a good solution for him to serve his jail time (house arrest? I have no idea)
Some replies seem to imply that since he joined SS he must be utterly evil. It could be the case this time, but not every case is like that.
People living in free countries have a difficult time comprehending how a totalitarian country is like (well they hate it and they are right about that) and how hard it is to act against such regime. But at least, if you have read 1984, you will remember the difference between inner/outer party members. I think we should differentiate between the two when looking at such matters.
From my perspective, I lived in a communist country, or at least it pretends to be one. All my classmates, including myself, joined the Youth league, some of them joined the Party. It will give you better school or job opportunities so even if you don't believe a word you will join. But they are like the Outer Party members who did the grudge work and does not have a lot of privileges.
Willing to work in the hierarchy in a totalitarian regime and not acting against is in itself not a crime. Well, unless you are in a position that directly does evil. Maybe you should just steer clear from these positions in the first place.
I agree that he probably should be guilty for what he did (which in itself is NOT a serious crime; we cannot charge people purely for their thoughts, even if they are utterly reprehensible). Maybe then they can arrange a good solution for him to serve his jail time (house arrest? I have no idea)
Some replies seem to imply that since he joined SS he must be utterly evil. It could be the case this time, but not every case is like that.
People living in free countries have a difficult time comprehending how a totalitarian country is like (well they hate it and they are right about that) and how hard it is to act against such regime. But at least, if you have read 1984, you will remember the difference between inner/outer party members. I think we should differentiate between the two when looking at such matters.
From my perspective, I lived in a communist country, or at least it pretends to be one. All my classmates, including myself, joined the Youth league, some of them joined the Party. It will give you better school or job opportunities so even if you don't believe a word you will join. But they are like the Outer Party members who did the grudge work and does not have a lot of privileges.
Willing to work in the hierarchy in a totalitarian regime and not acting against is in itself not a crime. Well, unless you are in a position that directly does evil. Maybe you should just steer clear from these positions in the first place.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Actually Hitler was almost killed in a coup the only reason was survived was sheer luck (a table leg protected him from most of the shrapnel of the blast). It was from bomb planted by his officers when it became apparent they were losing the war.
It was indoctrination and it was the governments success and slow systemic nature of it all. Hitler didn't simply start doing this heinous shit when got into power it was all very gradual that took place over a number of years. While it was all happening things where going well in Germany better than they did under the previous government. the laws slowly became more an harsh to certain minority groups and people largely didn't care because it didn't effect them. Look at the police oppression of blacks and other minorities in America for instance, it's that kinda shit. He just got worse and worse and worse and completely tightened the net of police state.
By the time people started to realise or care about what was going on it was much too late. The net was already around their throat and strangling them, and large numbers of population actually believed his bull crap (actually many did from the). It was either submit or face almost certain death
It's reason why this poem exists.
"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for meand there was no one left to speak for me."
In what society? Certainly not any democratic and progressive society around today. I know that there are some less than democratic and progressive societies still around that allows the victim or their family to both decide and perform the sentence that could qualify, but I doubt you're thinking about those.
Modern justice is based on deterrence and reform, not vengeance. That's why it makes sure that judges and juries are impartial and why things like cruel and unusual punishments are outlawed. It was in fact created to get away from vengeance as a form om justice.
Corronchilejano
Member
Source, please.
Agent Gibbs
Member
I agree almost entirely with that, i'd argue that him applying to leave was the most he could muster as a resistance, so he did something - but you are correct it doesn't necessarily stop the need for a trial and questioning.
That bolded part is a perhaps better point to make than i've been making, due to the totalitarian society, the propaganda, the indoctrination, were people living in it truly capable of realising it was wrong and they should act?
The baying for blood from some people who just are of the view that being a nazi alone was punishable by death just scares me, thats the same sort of logic used by the likes of ISIS that anyone who's not them should die, and equally the same logic used by those who claim we should bomb them out of existence
We claim these trials are to educate us so we don't sleep walk (as a race/the worlds populace) into a similar situation and yet people are too blinkered (perhaps indoctrinated) to see they are already there - hilariously (in an awful ironic way) in the case of isis where Holocaust denial is high they are themselves commuting the same level of genocide
Humanity hasn't learnt a damn thing
Maybe if he was the one releasing the gas on, or injecting lethal diseases into people. They probably considered checking bags to not have any mental adverse effects which wouldn't surprise me. They didn't even fully understand PTSD at that stage.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33533264
Are these jews who survived Auschwitz also on the Nazi Defense Force with me, NYR? Get some perspective.
Actually, it's very far from the literal definition.
They're two words and two concepts for a reason.
They're frequently conflated, but one is to gain satisfaction from doing harm to one that is perceived to do wrong to you.
The other is to do harm to one that has been perceived to do wrong.
The latter leaves out for the purpose of satisfaction. In fact, it ascribes no purpose - and thus as a society we must decide why if at all we punish criminals.
Vengeance is a reason indeed. But in an enlightened society, we recognize that vengeance is a poor reason - and is a fleeting desctructive reason for wanting the harm of others, even if they've been perceived to have done wrong.
Rather, it's more effective to use criminal punishment simply as a tool to reinforce the motivational forces of dissuading rational criminals from causing harm. Irrational criminals are likely to cause harm irrespective of whether or not motivating forces are in place against it. It's more effective then to exercise other methodologies of harm reduction than to try to persuade irrational people with attempts at rational motivations.
Of course, as a society, we could flip the bird to the idea of harm reduction and embrace our baser instincts... but that's a shit show society and you know it.
Moff
Member
well it wasn't law back then in germany. it wasn't law either that you had freedom of speech, something you have in most civilized countries today. people died because they said what they thought.
of course it's very comfortable to say today from the comfort of our couch that these people should have done something back then, but that's just naive really, they either didn't know or were simply cowards. and I cant outlaw being a coward.
and again very few stood up to that regime, and if you say more or even most should have stood up (because it is a standard today) you really are belittling the actions of the few who did. becuase it took and extreme amount of not only courage but self sacrifice to do that.
of course, if a soldier did something today in a society where he is protected and actually can refuse orders because they violate human rights, he would and should be judged differently than the people in the nazi regime. that goes without saying.
Corronchilejano
Member
This was for a war crime, which is handled differently than regular justice. The Nuremberg defense is for regular justice.
Oh suddenly we are precise about when and for whom it works. Whatever.
Whether you or me are right is not important. The nice and important part is that you internalized that the Nuremberg defense is not an option. This is the kind of attitude that can prevent the holocaust again, the knowledge, the culture, that sometimes you are right in refusing orders. That there is personal responsibility in being "accessory" to the holocaust. Somehow we have learned something.
Not sure what your point here is. The belittling one is meaningless. Whether "these people should have done something back then" is irrelevant. This thread is about Oskar. He should have done more, period. In general, I believe that moving the moral standard to "In the face of the holocaust, you are obligated to do something" should help prevent from it happening again. Maybe my earlier post of "just arrange to get jailed" is still below this, dunno. It is not an easy question, sure.
But just asking for redeployment, and just keep doing your job when denied. Any moral framework that reasons this is permissible is a failure. Nazi regime or not.
These are attenuating circumstances, sure, but you cannot end up concluding the guy should go free.
Corronchilejano
Member
Dude, again, regular justice is different from war-time justice. Just because the US decides to wipe its ass with what a POW is doesn't mean we can't do it. Claiming "superiors orders" doesn't work in the context of regular justice because we place more weight in an individuals desition. It makes sense when judging soldiers because we recognize they're bound by both law and honor to follow orders.
It's funny you mention that in a world where Israel has been wiping palestinians off the map and where the US can invade Iraq for nonexistent reasons and not even get a slap on the wrist.
I think we can demand from people to not be monsters. But we can't demand from them to be heroes.
Coffee Dog
Banned
What a waste of time and money. As long as everyone feels good about putting away the big bad nazi, I suppose.
Something was brought up in this thread that keeps me thinking:
Honest question, because I don't know:
Is there evidence of people that tried to get transferred to another position and explicitly said it's because they couldn't handle the killing and that they didn't think that was right?
How did Nazi Germany proceed with these people? Did they survive? Did they vanish?
IF (huge if) you were transferred to a camp to work a small job, not knowing what it was and realized what was going on while you were there...
How would you try to get out once you realized the regime's disregard for human life? Wouldn't you try to protect yourself by not giving your true reasons for a transfer request? Especially with many true monsters in a position of power and their ability to straight up kill you right around the corner?
I'm not making any statement on the case itself, I don't have nearly enough input on the case or the person to say something either way. This is more of a theoretical construct and not specifically about what may or may not have happened with this man.
Honest question, because I don't know:
Is there evidence of people that tried to get transferred to another position and explicitly said it's because they couldn't handle the killing and that they didn't think that was right?
How did Nazi Germany proceed with these people? Did they survive? Did they vanish?
IF (huge if) you were transferred to a camp to work a small job, not knowing what it was and realized what was going on while you were there...
How would you try to get out once you realized the regime's disregard for human life? Wouldn't you try to protect yourself by not giving your true reasons for a transfer request? Especially with many true monsters in a position of power and their ability to straight up kill you right around the corner?
I'm not making any statement on the case itself, I don't have nearly enough input on the case or the person to say something either way. This is more of a theoretical construct and not specifically about what may or may not have happened with this man.
PeskyToaster
Member
I could not disagree more. I believe the indoctrination idea is a convenient excuse just like the "special path theory" and it allows us to put the Holocaust in a special box and pretend it can never happen again. To me, it washes away personal responsibility and hides the failures in humanity that allowed such a thing to happen. The most powerful lessons come when you realize it was just regular humans acting in ways every one of us would. That realization is the first step to stopping something like the Holocaust from happening again.
Easy to say when you're comfortably sitting in your climate controlled house with 60+ years of retrospect and societal progress.
ding ding.
New information from the process trickled in and I think the argumentation of the ruling is relevant for this discussion. Translation is by me, so if there is anything rough, weird or even wrong, please tell me. I apologize for my limited english, I tried my best, but reading translated hentai only gets me so far. All the quotes are from the judge and taken from this Spiegel-article.
The Staatsanwaltschaft has now a week to decide whether Oskar Gröning actually has to take his punishment.
- I don't know how to properly translate this statement, but I feel that it is an important one. It basically means that Auschwitz was something nobody should've taken part in.
The Staatsanwaltschaft has now a week to decide whether Oskar Gröning actually has to take his punishment.
SenorArdilla
Member
Good that he got convicted but I am disappointed by the jail sentence.
PeskyToaster
Member
The killing squads were explicitly offered reassignment before an 'action' as they called them. I think the number was about 12 out of 500 took this option in a certain battalion but similar percentages were found in other groups. I have Ordinary Men next to me now which is my go-to for this kind of stuff. I can dig up the exact wording if you want. The repercussions I saw was when an officer tried to reprimand men for requesting a transfer or shirking the killing duties and he was punished for doing this. I don't know the specifics of this man's position but I suspect he didn't leave because he didn't really want to. He didn't have a moral issue with what he was doing or what he was a part of.
One of the more insidious things the Nazis did was using groups of male Jewish prisoners, known as Sonderkommandos, to operate the crematorium, shoveling the dead bodies and stuff like that. These were the real victims and they or their families would most certainly be killed if they refused. They were usually killed anyway however but groups of them were famous for disrupting operations through sabotage.
In terms of the general public, the Gestapo relied on denunciations from the general public to carry out their work. They were a small force that covered a wide area and they rarely sought out 'dissidents' on their own volition. I watched a documentary where they dug up some Gestapo files (many were destroyed) and found one where the person who was denounced died in a concentration camp. The filmmakers went and found the person who made the denunciation and interviewed her. It was fascinating and heartbreaking since her reasoning for the report was essentially her neighbor was different and weird. I don't remember the name of the documentary and I only watched bits of it but I think it was one of the more famous ones. Unless you were caught blowing up a building, the only trouble you would get into is if your friends, neighbors, or family made a choice to report you.
What about this guy?
"The father of NASA whose name to this day adorns not only high schools and streets in Germany but also the Civic Center and a Research Hall at the University of Alabama in Huntsville."
"Wernher von Braun is too often romanticized and his past co-operation with the Nazi regime and the use of concentration camp prisoners to build the V-2 rockets is not as well-known as it should be. I too am appalled that the memories of those who suffered and those who died building the V-2 rockets too often go unheard."
I guess he was a "good" nazi... or is it double standards?
"The father of NASA whose name to this day adorns not only high schools and streets in Germany but also the Civic Center and a Research Hall at the University of Alabama in Huntsville."
"Wernher von Braun is too often romanticized and his past co-operation with the Nazi regime and the use of concentration camp prisoners to build the V-2 rockets is not as well-known as it should be. I too am appalled that the memories of those who suffered and those who died building the V-2 rockets too often go unheard."
I guess he was a "good" nazi... or is it double standards?
Moff
Member
well thats exactly the same reasoning that was used against Demjanjuk in 2011 and was not enough to push charges in the 80s against Gröning.
basically they have no evidence that he commit any crimes but they think no matter what you do at a concentration camp you are part of the evil
now I am not saying that this is wrong and they are probably right in this case, but personally, that's just not how I want legal justice to work. I think they should need to produce evidence. I also think that's even more important since this is more of a symbolic punishment.
basically they have no evidence that he commit any crimes but they think no matter what you do at a concentration camp you are part of the evil
now I am not saying that this is wrong and they are probably right in this case, but personally, that's just not how I want legal justice to work. I think they should need to produce evidence. I also think that's even more important since this is more of a symbolic punishment.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked