War and Genocide: A Concise History of the Holocaust

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2002

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapters 1-2

Chapters 3-4

Chapters 5-6

Chapter 7-Conclusion

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Themes

The Nuances of Atrocity

Bergen is committed to exploring the nuances of the Holocaust and World War II; she interrogates the aims, beliefs, and motivations of persons who committed evil acts while still staunchly condemning them. She invokes Hannah Arendt’s concept of the banality of evil, which posits that atrocities are usually committed and perpetuated by “normal” people, as opposed to single-minded monsters: “Most of the people involved in mass killing—as perpetrators, onlookers, and beneficiaries—were not crazed maniacs but ordinary people with familiar motivations” (123). One example of this principle in action is the social effects of “divide and conquer” strategies in occupied Poland:

There were Polish peasants who deplored German brutality but willingly took the property of Jews forced into ghettos. There were ethnic German families who moved into homes from which the Polish owners had been evicted and eagerly accepted the booty for themselves. Such people did not necessarily initiate destruction, but they profited from it and developed a stake in its continuation (123).

Many of the individuals committing crimes against Jews were not doing so out of bigotry. Some were motivated by greed, while others were motivated by self-preservation.

The firsthand accounts Bergen presents help flesh these complexities out further. By reading testimonials from former Nazis, one can better understand their motivations and justifications for what they did or didn’t do. Likewise, exploring the experiences of the Nazis’ victims reveals the nuanced lives of people who are often whitewashed as feeble martyrs. One powerful example of this is the diversity of the “Jewish Councils” that governed the Jewish ghettos. Bergen writes:

In Warsaw the head of the Jewish police, Jozef Szerynski, was a convert to Christianity who had been trained by the Polish police force. He was indifferent and even hostile to Jewish traditions. Most of the population of the ghetto regarded him and his seventeen hundred policemen as tyrannical […] in Riga, in contrast, the Jewish police […] included some of the best of Jewish society. In the ghetto they were widely respected and viewed as helpers (116).

Often accused of collaborationism, Jewish Councils were prisoners of these ghettos and unable to affect real change outside them. Some attempted to wield their modicum of power selflessly, and others became autocratic in their own rights. Even under dire circumstances, these victims were flawed, complex individuals forced to navigate desperate odds.

The Power of Systemic Oppression

Bergen notes the difference between “true believers” in Nazi ideology and those who merely conformed to it. She identifies Hitler’s antisemitism and exaltation of “the master race” as genuine: “No mere opportunist, he maintained until his death a fanatical antipathy to anything he considered Jewish. Hitler’s antisemitism […] had religious and metaphysical dimensions […] there were cultural elements […] Hitler’s hostility included familiar social and economic resentments” (37). In contrast, Adolf Eichmann claimed that his only motivation as a major organizer of the Holocaust was to carry out orders: “After the war when he would be tried in Israel for his role in the Holocaust, Eichmann would insist that he had never been an antisemite. It does seem that in Eichmann’s case, careerism was a more powerful motivator than antisemitism” (108). Violence and terror rained down upon vulnerable people regardless of what these men carried in their hearts.

Likewise, civilians—even those who disapproved of Hitler’s regime—were encouraged to “develop stakes” in prejudice. The Nazis “learned that members of the general public were more likely to participate in or at least tolerate attacks on minorities if stood to gain rather than to lose from such initiatives” (62). A commitment to hatred was unnecessary to perpetuate mass deaths, and complicity could be curried with both bribery and threat of violence. Many accepted the Nazis’ attacks against their neighbors out of fear that they would be targeted next or out of a desire for the rewards the German government offered to their beneficiaries. The variance in personal justifications for participation and complicity in Nazi activities speaks to the myriad causes of the Holocaust.

The Holocaust is an example of systemic prejudice taken to its most extreme ends. During Hitler’s rise to power, Germany was weary from World War I and international economic instability. Scapegoating groups like Jews and Roma for social ills was common prior to the Nazi revolution; likewise, these groups regularly bore the blame for Germany’s misfortunes. These preexisting prejudices made already vulnerable populations prime targets for escalation. Hitler harnessed conspiracy theories (like the “stab-in-the-back” myth) and preexisting legislation (like the criminalization of gay behavior) to push for much more severe acts of bigotry. Hitler was a true believer in antisemitic dogma, and he also understood the power behind offering his people a familiar, seemingly threatening, and vulnerable enemy against which to mobilize.

Political Duplicity, Lies, and Manipulation

Hitler consistently lied throughout his political career. These lies were told in a variety of contexts and to a variety of people. He established a long string of NAPs with numerous nations and world powers, all of which were “[made] to be broken” (146). These disingenuous treaties allowed German leadership a veneer of peacefulness in the early phase of the four-year plan for war. They also afforded German armed forces the element of surprise when invading and conquering their supposed allies. A particularly famous example of Hitler’s duplicity is the Night of the Long Knives, also known as Operation Hummingbird. On Hitler’s orders, hundreds of his own people were assassinated. Operation Hummingbird’s casualties included Hitler’s personal associates of many years:

In a bloody rampage, SS men fanned out to kill Röhm, other old allies of the führer such as Nazi ideologue Gregor Strasser, and Hitler’s rivals, including former chancellor General Kurt Schleicher and, for some reason, Shleicher’s wife. In general, Hitler and SS leader Himmler used the purge to get rid of people they found problematic. The list of dead even included a Catholic priest who helped write Mein Kampf when Hitler was in prison (71).

Such actions allowed Hitler to preserve his power and more easily prey upon his intended victims. Though he demanded and relied upon the loyalty of those around him, he had no compunction about double-crossing his associates in the name of strategy.

Hitler also spun lies to pacify ethnic German civilians. Bergen asserts that he was very preoccupied with his public image. Deceiving the public enabled him to initiate his plans with the greatest ease possible and ensure complicity from as many Germans as possible. One particularly chilling example of this is the secrecy that surrounded the T-4 Program. Because Hitler was concerned about “possible repercussions for their activity” (127), the SS commandos tasked with the killings carried them out in mobile killing units disguised as “Kaiser’s Coffee” trucks. Hitler signed off on the T-4 Program after it was launched; he signed a backdated note to assuage mounting criticism. Even after publicly declaring the end of the program, Hitler had it continued in secret.

Hitler’s caution around the T-4 Program was similar to his handling of “mischlinge” and the Jewish spouses of Aryans in mixed marriages. Though Nazi thinkers identified these people as suitable targets for extermination, Hitler was concerned about reprisal from their Aryan family members. During one incident in 1943, the gentile wives of captives Jews committed “a spontaneous show of disobedience” (169), successfully compelling Hitler and Goebbels to release their husbands.