The Holocaust ' Holocaust

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

“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.

While Hitler was the leader of the Third Reich, the functionalists believed that the ‘road to Auschwitz’ was characterized by an indirect unplanned path that was defined by cumulative radicalization of the Nazis due to the prevalence of chaotic decision-making processes that were a major feature of the polycratic system of governance. Additionally, this system was characterized by the elimination of individuals considered as destructive to the Nazi movement, leading to the creation of a movement that was ready to do anything to achieve a ‘final solution’ to the ‘Jew problem’. Karl Schleunes falls in this school of thought. Karl Schleunes argument, like that of other functionalists, was cemented on institutions and structure of the Third Reich. With the intentionalists arguing that the Holocaust was the fulfillment of Hitler’s plan hatched in the 1920s, their argument was summer up as the ‘straight road to Auschwitz.’ For functionalists, however, the path to the Holocaust was not straight, a reason why Karl Schleunes labeled his book The Twisted Road to

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

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.

Of the four historians, it is Kershaw, Goldhagen, and Peukert who propose the idea that the holocaust was a long-term plan and Berghahn who argues that it was a reaction to the circumstances brought about by expansion during world war two. All of the historians agree to a certain degree that the extermination of the Jewish people from Germany was a long term idea of Hitler’s, but it is at the point where ‘idea’ becomes ‘plan’ that they differ.

The Holocaust was perhaps one of the most gruesome and horrific time period that the world has ever seen. The Holocaust was the time period when the Jews were being horrible treated and were being executed by German forces in World War Two. In several books about the dark and horrible time period, the authors used many different techniques to convey the central idea and the theme. However, the authors uses different techniques in different genres to get shoe the reader the central idea and theme. For instance, there are different techniques in historical fiction and nonfiction, but they both develop the same theme and central idea.

Jewish people were tortured, abused, and subjected through horrific unfathomable situations by Nazi Germany during the Holocaust. Despite all of the unpragmatic hardships Jews all over Europe faced, many stayed true to their faith and religion. There are numerous stories in which Jewish people tried to keep the roots of their religion well knowing the risk of torture and death. The never ending fear of Jewish people living in the Ghettos and trying to survive concentration camps was difficult, but not impossible for the Jews to keep religion.

Horror struck on January 30, 1933, when Germany assigned Adolf Hitler as their chancellor. Once Hitler had finally reached power he set out to complete one goal, create a Greater Germany free from the Jews (“The reasons for the Holocaust,” 2009). This tragedy is known today as, “The Holocaust,” that explains the terrors of our histories past. The face of the Holocaust, master of death, and leader of Germany; Adolf Hitler the most deceitful, powerful, well spoken, and intelligent person that acted as the key to this mass murder. According to a research study at the University of South Florida, nearly eleven million people were targeted and killed. This disaster is a genocide that was meant to ethnically cleanse Germany of the Jews. Although Jewish people were the main target they were not the only ones targeted; gypsies, African Americans, homosexuals, socialists, political enemies, communists, and the mentally disabled were killed (Simpson, 2012, p. 113). The word to describe this hatred for Jewish people is known as antisemitism. It was brought about when German philosophers denounced that “Jewish spirit is alien to Germandom” (“Antisemitism”) which states that a Jew is non-German. Many people notice the horrible things the Germans did, but most don’t truly understand why the Holocaust occurred. To truly understand the Holocaust, you must first know the Nazis motivations. Their motivations fell into two categories including cultural explanations that focused on ideology and

The Holocaust was a system established by the Nazis in World War II as a means to exterminate all of the people which they considered undesirable or subhuman. This included gypsies,minorities,cripples, the mentally ill, homosexuals,communists,and anyone who opposed the Nazi regime. The main target of the Holocaust was however the Jewish people. They were the main target because the leader of Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler, believed that they were the reason for Germany losing World War 1 and thus was the reason that the German economy was in a bad state. Vladek Spiegelman and Elie Weisel were to people who were both survived their experiences in the Holocaust and both told their story in books. These books are Night by Elie Wiesel and Maus by Vladek Spiegelman.The Holocaust shaped these two different men's lives in the same way. Through their losses and experiences in this horrific point in time they learned what it meant to truly struggle and this ultimately turned them into better people.

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.

The Holocaust of 1933-1945, was the systematic killing of millions of European Jews by the National Socialist German Worker’s Party (Nazis) (Webster, 430). This project showed the treacherous treatment towards all Jews of that era. Though many fought against this horrific genocide, the officials had already determined in their minds to exterminate the Jews. Thus, the Holocaust was a malicious movement that broke up many homes, brought immense despair, and congregated great discrimination. The Holocaust was an act of Hell on earth.

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

When it comes to interpreting the Final Solution, there are two main schools of thought that provide different explanations for how and why National Socialist Germany killed millions of Jews. The first interpretation is the functionalist view, which explains the Final Solution as something that came about by the chaotic and anarchical nature of the Nazi state. It places much importance on improvisation and radicalization. While acknowledging that Hitler played a key role, this view sees Hitler’s role as “a mobilizing and integrating agent”. The second interpretation is the intentionalist view, which explains the Final Solution as something that was planned and organized by Hitler. Placing emphasis on the “coherent and consistent ideology implemented through an all-powerful totalitarian dictatorship” is vital to this view. Of the two different interpretations, it seems that the intentionalist interpretation of the Final Solution provides a more convincing explanation for how and why National Socialist Germany killed millions of Jews. The combination of Hitler’s racial ideologies and the Second World War provided the motivation and the means to execute his plan to murder millions of Jewish people.

From today’s perspective, the Holocaust is generally viewed as an atrocity, violating a long list of human rights, including the right to freedom and the right of life, as well as the right to protection from discrimination. It likewise viewed as emotionally repulsive, and thus strictly condemned. For many people, the logic behind the Holocaust, seems beyond comprehension. Embracing this ideology, i.e. that human rights as they are recognized by the U.N. today are of absolute value, it is easy to declare that the Holocaust was a completely immoral and unethical event in history, leaving no room for identifying advantages or any other sort of pro arguments. However, when evaluating the Holocaust from this philosophical point of view, one cannot