Hitler 's Willing Executioners And Christopher Browning 's Book Ordinary Men

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

In the book Ordinary Men, Christopher Browning tackles the question of why German citizens engaged in nefarious behavior that led to the deaths of millions of Jewish and other minorities throughout Europe. The question of what drove Germans to commit acts of genocide has been investigated by numerous historians, but unfortunately, no overarching answer for the crimes has yet been decided upon. However, certain theories are more popular than others. Daniel Goldhagen in his book, Hitler’s Willing Executioners, has expounded that the nature of the German culture before the Second World War was deeply embedded in anti-Semitic fervor, which in turn, acted as the catalyst for the events that would unfold into the Holocaust. It is at this

At the end of WWI in 1918, Germany’s economy was in ruins. There were very few jobs, and bitterness began to take over the country. According to the text, “Hitler, a rising politician, offered Germany a scapegoat: Jewish people. Hitler said that Jewish people were to blame for Germany’s problems. He believed that Jews did not deserve to live.” (7) This was the birth of Antisemitism--prejudice against Jewish people. Europe’s Jewish people have always been persecuted due to their “different customs and beliefs that many viewed with suspicion.”(7) Hitler simply reignited the flames, and a violent hatred was born.

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

German anti-Semitism played the main role in Holocaust and extermination of Jewish population in Europe during World War 2. There are different views on this subject among historians. Some support the fact that German society was anti-Semitic and ordinary

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.

The main argument in “Ordinary Men” is a flexible argument that can be inserted into the gaps of past hypotheses while holding merit. Part of Browning’s effective appeal is his concession to other offered historian’s ideas on the subject while establishing why his ideas with an emphasis on psychology, provide a superior answer for the question at hand. Seeing that there are two majority view points in relation to this discussion with the intentionalists claiming that this was a desired outcome from the inception of war juxtaposed to the functionalists, who declare that “normal” men would subjugate the Jews as the war developed, the refutation to the intentionalist point of view is well addressed by Browning, he points out the flaws in arguments the directly root their idea of the participation of “normal” men to merely being the product of sheer Nazi indoctrination. I agree with the idea that Nazi indoctrination would qualify for an explanation to why higher ranking Nazi SS officials would be able to kill Polish Jewry without troubles considering their high involvement and connection to Nazism, but that hypothesis does not offer enough intellectual reach to explain why men of which belonged to Major Wilhelm Trapp’s battalion, who were described as “mostly middle aged reservists” (Browning) would be converted into mindless machines without the freedom

The main sources for this book consist of archival documents and court records of the Holocaust. The specific testimony, court records, investigation records, and prosecution documents of members of the Reserve Police Battalion 101 members are used as sources. In this book, Christopher Browning shows in minute detail the sequence of events and individual reactions that turn ordinary men into killers. His arguments make sense. He makes no unwarranted assumptions. The cause and effect statements made and arguments presented are logical and well developed. Ordinary Men by Christopher Browning accounts for the actions of the German Order Police (more specifically the actions of Reserve Police Battalion 101 in Poland) and the role they played in the Second World War during the Jewish Holocaust. Police Battalion 101 was composed of veterans from World War One and men too old to be

Goldhagen presents his argument in a manner indicative of a person on the defensive; who seems hard-pressed at convincing the reader that anti-Semitic sentiments throughout Germany plays a key role in the genocide . The tenor of his presentation is quite rushed, yet this is somewhat understandable because his presentation is also quite authoritative and is filled with a remarkable amount of information that begs further consideration of its readers. Goldhagen challenges what he argues as being the prevailing views of historians concerning who is ultimately responsible for the atrocities that happened to German Jews in Nazi Germany. He sees the

Synopsis – Hitler’s Willing Executioners is a work that may change our understanding of the Holocaust and of Germany during the Nazi period. Daniel Goldhagen has revisited a question that history has come to treat as settled, and his researches have led him to the inescapable conclusion that none of the established answers holds true. Drawing on materials either unexplored or neglected by previous scholars, Goldhagen presents new evidence to show that many beliefs about the killers are fallacies. They were not primarily SS men or Nazi Party members, but perfectly ordinary Germans from all walks of life, men who brutalized and murdered Jews both willingly and zealously. “They acted as they did because of

Studies of the Holocaust have provoked passionate debates. Increasingly, they have become a central topic of concern for historians particularly since the early 1970s, as the Holocaust studies were generally limited. However, one of the most intense debates surrounding the role played by Hitler in the ’Final Solution’. That is, whether and when Hitler took a decision to initiate the extermination process. Of course, this issue has caused incredible controversy and naturally such a contentious topic of debate has radically produced large amounts of new data and literature. Conflicting, an interpretation has caused further disparities between historians over Hitler’s role in the Holocaust. For this

Functionalism versus intentionalism is an ongoing historical debate about the origins of the Holocaust. The two questions that the debate centers around on are; was there a master plan by Adolf Hitler for the holocaust? The intentionalist argument is that there was a ‘master plan’, while functionalist’s ague that there was not. The second question is whether the initiative for the Holocaust and the Final Solution come from Adolf Hitler himself, or from lower ranks in the Third Reich. Both side agree that Hitler was the supreme leader, and was responsible for encouraging the anti-Semitism during the Holocaust, but intentionalists believe that the initiative for the final solution came from above, while functionalists argue that it came from the lower ranks within the bureaucracy.

Goldhagen argues that for centuries, nearly every German was possessed of a homicidal animus towards Jews and thus 80 to 90 percent of Germans would have relished in the occasion to eliminate Jews. (Goldhagen dissents from Christopher Browning's estimates that 10-20 percent of the German police battalions refused to kill Jews as 'stretching the evidence ). It is one of Goldhagen's central arguments that the police battalions were prototypical of the murderous German mind-set. Goldhagen's true distinction from Browning is to argue that German anti- Semitism was not only a significant but rather it was the sufficient condition for perpetrating the extermination of the Jews. Goldhagen observes that if it was not for "Hitler's moral authority", the "vast majority of Germans never would have contemplated" the genocide against the Jews. He also argues that by the time Hitler came to power, the model of Jews that was the basis of his anti-Semitism was shared by the vast majority of Germans. To rebuttal his claim I must ask that if anti-Semitism was true to not only the Germans but also the other European countries then why didn't a massive scale

obligated the soldier “not to steal, not to plunder, and not to buy without paying.”

The world today is still uncertain about the major cause of the Holocaust. Many people have a wide range of opinions on this traumatic topic leaving the identity of those responsible unknown. The real question is who had most to do with being responsible for the holocaust out of the Nazis and the German people. The German’s were said to be manipulated by Hitler’s powerful speeches and propaganda which he used to make himself appear powerful, making the German’s feel as though they had no choice but to elect him as their leader. The Germans worshipped Hitler and demonstrated acts of love and support by celebrating and voting for him. The Germans didn’t hesitate to stop their beloved leader from ordering the Nazi party to wipe out the entire