American Involvement During The Holocaust

How do the authors characterize the American response to the Holocaust, and what explanation(s) do they give for that conduct?

If a death is preventable and one fails to prevent its occurrence, is he at fault? During and after the Holocaust, citizens of the United States pondered this question in the context of Jewish refugees murdered in Nazi Germany; ultimately, citizens remember this tragic genocide and promise it will not happen again under any circumstances, not only in America, but in other nations as well. Since the Holocaust, leaders and lawmakers in the United States have analyzed the causes that led to this event and designed laws and documents to prevent such an infraction of human rights from happening again. The long-lasting effects of the Holocaust, which expose the dangers of America’s isolation and conservative immigration policies, contribute to the liberalization of American immigration and increased worldwide instances of United States humanitarian intervention.

When one looks through the history of the last century, many great atrocities can come to mind. However, the one that is the most common is that of the Holocaust during World War II. People often wonder how something like this could have been allowed to happen. These same people wonder this without realizing that something similar has happened, right within their own shores. Not only this, but they do not realize how previously close we could become to having this happen again.

The events which have become to be known as The Holocaust have caused much debate and dispute among historians. Central to this varied dispute is the intentions and motives of the perpetrators, with a wide range of theories as to why such horrific events took place. The publication of Jonah Goldhagen’s controversial but bestselling book “Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust” in many ways saw the reigniting of the debate and a flurry of scholarly and public interest. Central to Goldhagen’s disputed argument is the presentation of the perpetrators of the Holocaust as ordinary Germans who largely, willingly took part in the atrocities because of deeply held and violently strong anti-Semitic beliefs. This in many

in this paper i argue the opposing views of Daniel Goldhagen 's book Hitler 's Willing Executioners and Christopher Browning 's book ordinary Men. These books deal with the question of whether or not the average German soldiers and civilians were responsible for the holocaust. My research paper argues in favor of Goldhagen 's book, the average German was responsible for the participation of he holocaust. At the end of world war ll the Jewish community and the the rest of the world were crying for justice because of the devastation of there homes. The crimes committed by the Germans were cruel and someone had to pay. Several Nazi leaders were held accountable for the actions of the Germans. Were the Nazi leaders the ones responsible for

This investigation evaluates why common Germans took part in the Holocaust. In order to assess why common Germans took part in the Holocaust the investigation focuses on the participation and complacency of the German people during the Holocaust, specifically the extermination of the Jewish people, and the reasoning behind it. Different explanations for the German actions developed by a range of historians will be presented. The conventional reasons, like psychological and cultural, and the nonconventional reasons will be studied. There will be an in-depth look at the effect of Nazism and propaganda, human behavior, and anti-Semitism on the common Germans and the extent to which they led to the participation in the Holocaust. The scope will allow for analysis and conclusion to the most valid reason why common Germans took part in the Holocaust.

Through out history there’s a ground breaking event that forces society to reform its beliefs. The Holocaust was one of these events, refugees were persecuted in a number of ways and society had a choice to help, become isolated, or to confirm any persecution as ok or right. In every choice our society has depicted that there's a right and a wrong decision to everything; it was wrong for U.S legislation to not give their best efforts to help refugees of the Holocaust it lead to future prejudices and the suffering of millions.

“Was German ‘Eliminationist Anti-Semitism” Responsible for the Holocaust?” is a fascinating and somewhat discouraging debate that explores the question of whether German anti-Semitism, instilled within citizens outside of the Nazi Party, played a vast role in the extermination of Jews during the Holocaust . Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, author of “The Paradigm Challenged,” believes that it did; and argues quite convincingly that ordinary German citizens were duplicitous either by their actions or inactions due to the deep-seeded nature of anti-Semitic sentiment in the country. On the other hand, Christopher R. Browning, who has extensively researched the Holocaust, argues that the arguments of Goldhagen leaves out significant dynamics which were prevalent throughout most of Western and Eastern Europe during this period of history.

My goal with my research is to look into the resistance of both the Jewish people and the others in European society who assisted in Jewish escapes. The perceived image of the Jews during the Holocaust is of “lambs to the slaughter.” The pictured painted of the rest of European society is one of either knowing accomplices or silent spectators. The Jewish people had many forms of resistance, some small and some large. While many of their neighbors were silent spectators, but many people were actively resisting the tyrannical Nazi government by assisting Jewish escapes. Each of these individuals risked their lives and the lives of their families and friends to aid these hunted individuals. They all deserve to have their stories heard and honored. In a time of complete chaos and destruction many people would not have the ability or fortitude to save the life of another person. The people that I will discuss in this paper were not only able to take that step, but put themselves and their families in real and eminent danger for the life, at times, of a complete stranger.

Antisemitism, the hatred for the Jewish people, has been called the longest hatred in history. This history is deep rooted and has existed for thousands of years, taking different forms throughout its existence, and intensifying up until and through the Holocaust, to then diminish to an extent but still be prevalent in most societies. Antisemitism exists in different forms, religious, ethnic, and political. The presence of Christianity as the predominant religion in Europe can be noted as a driving factor in religious and ethnic antisemitism, as can the Holocaust. Whereas instances such as the Islamic view on Judaism can be

The extermination of Jewish people during World War II was a horrific and merciless event that was effectively stopped by the Allies. Once the Allies became aware of the Holocaust, they immediately took action to end it. There have been countless suggestions of what the Allies could have done to prevent the Holocaust, however those would not have been as effective as the solution the Allies had put in place. Despite arguments that the Allies did not make a strong attempt to saving the Jews, by putting all their resources into the complete defeat of Nazi Germany, they were essentially doing all they could.

On November 25, 1942, approximately three years after Hitler started World War II The New York Times ran their first report that the Nazis had created a policy to eradicate the Jews of Europe. This story, confirmed by the State Department, did not run on the front page. It appeared on page 10 (Ostrow). President Franklin Roosevelt could have made this a major issue, but he said and did nothing. Other popular magazines such as Time, Life, and Newsweek reported virtually nothing on this topic (Ostrow). The people of the United States preferred not to know. If the United States had not practiced an isolationist foreign policy rooted in anti-Semitism, the Holocaust death toll could have been reduced because the killing would have been limited.

In the years of the Second World War, American leaders were aware of the plan of the Germans to exterminate all the Jews in Europe, yet they did not act to save them. The attitude in society and the state of the economy in the years leading up to the war made for conditions that did not make saving them likely.

Examining any issue pertaining to the Holocaust is accompanied with complexity and the possibility of controversy. This is especially true in dealing with the topic of Jewish resistance to the Holocaust. Historians are often divided on this complex issue, debating issues such as how “resistance” is defined and, in accordance with that definition, how much resistance occurred. According to Michael Marrus, “the very term Jewish resistance suggests a point of view.” Many factors, both internal such as differences in opinion on when or what resistance was appropriate, as well as external, such as the lack of arms with which to revolt, contributed to making resistance, particularly armed resistance, extremely difficult. When considering acts

With the liberation of the concentration camps at the end of WWII, the issue at hand was what to do with the Jewish peoples with no place to go.