Examples Of The Ordinary Man By George Dahl

This summary paper on Christopher Browning's Ordinary Men will provide a summary and an overview of the main ideas of the text while attempting to focus on Browning's overall central argument which revolves around these seemingly “normal” and “ordinary men” and how they were transformed into murderers due to various elements. The summary paper will also be dedicated to the overall significance of the book and its significance in relation to the history of the Holocaust as a whole. Browning's novel is significant in generating a greater awareness towards the Holocaust but more specifically providing awareness towards who the perpetrators were as Browning provides an in depth examination into the ordinary men which were transformed into these mass murderers, while centering his argument on how and why did these normal and seemingly ordinary men transform into the mass murderers in which they became. The novel also takes the reader into an in depth, detailed account of the horrific actions of the German battalion towards the innocent Jewish population, as Browning details the

Chaos is not a light subject, in fact it is the exact opposite.Chaos has occurred many times in history, and they happened all around the world. Many of these events involved a large number of deaths. In both Night and “An Ordinary Man” readers can see that in to survive you may need to lie, to convince others, and to be selfish, in times of chaos and mass tragedies with a plethora of innocent people dying for an unreasonable cause.

The Holocaust can be seen as one of the most devastating genocide that occurred in history and that is well known in many places worldwide. One may assume that those who played a part in the acts done by the Nazis in Germany may have been mentally disturbed and/or sick, evil people. However, the novel Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland by Christopher R. Browning provides another alternative to this statement. Browning provides the reader with the idea that anyone is capable of becoming a murderer, especially when the opportunity presents itself. In his book he attempts to prove this statement through multiple ideas and theories and also provides events which took place to analyze some of those ideas.

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

The men of Reserve Police Battalion 101 were just ordinary men, from a variety of backgrounds, education, and age. It would appear that they were not selected by any force other than random chance. Their backgrounds and upbringing, however, did little to prepare these men for the horrors they were to witness and participate in.

Christopher R. Browning’s “Ordinary Men” chronicles the rise and fall of the Reserve Police Battalion 101. The battalion was one of several units that took part in the Final Solution to the Jewish Question while in Poland. The men of Reserve Police Battalion 101, and other units were comprised of ordinary men, from ordinary backgrounds living under the Third Reich. Browning’s premise for the book is very unique, instead of focusing on number of victims, it examines the mindset of how ordinary men, became cold-hearted killers under Nazi Germany during World War II. Christopher Browning’s “Ordinary Men” presents a very strong case that the men who made up the Reserve Police Battalion 101 were indeed ordinary men from ordinary background, and

Both Paul Rusesabagina’s An Ordinary Man and Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail use appeals to pathos and ethos to instill their ideas of racial equality. Rusesabagina and King strengthen their works through use of emotion and integrity as a means of literary persuasion. “The central concern of rhetoric has always been method and manner: how to discover the most effective way to express a thought in a given situation, and how to alter its expression to suit different situations.” (McQuarrie and Mick 424) King’s letter discusses his approach in dealing with the racial segregation experienced by African Americans in the United States. Misplaced hatred and prejudice fuel King’s desire to rationally present his personal experiences, religious service, and logic arguments for desegregation. In contrast, Rusesabagina focuses on simplifying and clarifying his involvement in the 1994 Rwandan genocide. Past experiences, desires to protect human lives, and ethics drove Rusesabagina to tell his account of the genocide. King and Rusesabagina’s choice to confront racial adversary through their words and actions undoubtedly introduced change to the lives of many oppressed people.

In the book “Ordinary Men” by Christopher R. Browning, he shows a different side of the Germans during the Final Solution, and how not every last one was a terrible person, by explaining how some men would hide from killing, opt out altogether, or say they were just following orders. Though there were still some who embraced their newly found jobs, this book argues there was still a sense of morality, but does not excuse the acts that took place. However, as much as the perpetrators were emotionally scarred, and this book does show us that, there are still some flaws in the content used to write this book.

It should be noted, however that some have suggested that Mill have overstates the threat and tyranny of the majority and understated the threat posed by the government. An important distinction that Mill does not address; the different ways the freedoms are destroyed by the government versus tyranny of the majority. Government’s who maintain a monopoly of legitimized force within a certain area coarse individuals with force and any individual that dictates other government faces imprisonment or even death, however, the tyranny of the majority must use criticism and ostracism to impose their way of living on others, as much is easier for someone to ignore the tyranny of the majority then it is for them to ignore the tyranny of a government. However, had Mill lived to see the atrocities committed by utilitarian government in the 20th century; his opinion on the relative threats of the government versus tyranny of the majority may have been different. Mill did not think individual should be completely free to do exactly what they want without any restraint.

An example that applies Mill’s principle happened recently here on campus. We had to vote if we should have the open carry law here at school. The school gave the student body the opportunity to exercise our voice or concerns by taking a survey to determine whether we should have it. This made us grow as a community, and it allows tyranny of the majority take place. I personally don’t want to have to open carry law here at school, mainly I will feel uncomfortable knowing that there are people walking around campus with guns. I understand that there is a requirement that people have to have in order to have a concerned weapon, but that still doesn’t make me feel safe. On the other hand, I also understand the other side’s point of view, that

First off, the morals and standards and how the higher class looks at itself in a society will most likely have most influence of morality in that society. Then, citizens of that society are more inclined to follow the rules of their religion and this also included in the rules of conduct for society. The basic interests of any society influence moral sentiments as a single piece. ¬ Mill also shows that it isn't the actual interests in someone that influence, but rather the good interests and bad interests that come from experience. Mill also says that there is really no full religious freedom. Mill believes that the most a society can impose influence on someone is to protect others. If someone places themselves in a position that is only dangerous to them, society has no right to according to Mill.

Because Mill thinks that the education will set anyone from ignorance, he would suggest that the best element of life is education. It is to be noticed that he does not specify any class in his literature; rather, he wishes anyone and everyone to be educated, and contribute to the society they reside in. Only through education, he asserts, one can become useful to the society, which shows that the education is the great equalizer of the society. Since he values the educated quality of the people, and wishes to see them sacrificing for the utility, the best governmental or political system he would argue for is a representative democracy. Even if the educated individuals may be ready to self-sacrifice, the discussion needs to come first; through the mass

In order for the insistence that equity and impartiality to hold true to Mill's Utility, we must find a foundation from

     In the final two chapters of the essay “On Liberty”, J.S. Mill discusses a few different subjects concerning individual civilization. The one example I believe is important begins on page 92. Here he discusses how he feels about society trying to help or change a way that someone has decided to live their life. The decisions they make and the actions that they do are completely up to the individual themselves. I will try to further examine the role society plays in a person’s civilization and what arguments Mill made to explain the situation.

In John Stewart Mill’s words On Liberty is “about the importance, to man and society, of a large variety in types of character, and of giving full freedom to human nature to expand itself in innumerable and conflicting directions.” The writing as a whole is a celebration of individuality and a total rejection of all conformity. Mill rejects all attempts, e.g. legal or social, to coerce or force people’s hands when it comes to opinions or actions. The only time that any form of coercion is acceptable to is when an individual’s actions are harming other people or their ability to practice individuality. Aside from such instances, all forms of diversity should be respected, accepted, and embraced. Mill speaks for the usefulness of a utilitarian approach towards liberty’s value. His essay attempts to show the positive effects of liberty on all people and society as a whole. The liberty of both opinion and action are valuable in order for their ability to avoid stagnation and promote progress within individual’s and society alike. Freedom of opinion is vital because of the chance that the unpopular opinion is actually correct, and the better grasp of one’s own opinion that occurs when ideas are refuted. In action’s case, a nonconformist may be correct or have a unique way of living that suits his life best. Not only should how said nonconformist lives be of no concern to others in the first place, these individuals are actually essential to society for the complacency that they