Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Consequences of the Holocaust
Consequences of the Holocaust
The consequences of the holocaust
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Consequences of the Holocaust
Based on religious texts, expert opinions, and contextual evidence, I would’ve stayed silent to Karl because it serves justice for the despicable crimes done by Karl and the Nazis. I, nor Simon, have the right to forgive Karl for all his heinous crimes on behalf of the Jewish community. Karl didn’t truly repent for his crimes, which is essential in order to achieve forgiveness. Although some people believe otherwise, staying silent was the most neutral position between losing morality, by condemning Karl, and dishonoring the victims, by forgiving Karl. Karl did not truly forgive and sincerely repent for the crimes he committed. According to the Quran, repentance is important to gain forgiveness (Surah 5:39). Karl, a former Catholic, participated in the mass execution of Jews in Dnepropetrovsk, breaking the sixth commandment of Christianity, which states,“You shall not murder,” (Bible NIV, Exodus 20:13). To achieve forgiveness, Karl needed to pray to God and repent, defined as, “to feel or show that you are sorry for something bad or wrong that you did and that you want to do what is right,”(Merriam-Webster). Karl asked for forgiveness on his deathbed, implying that he wasn’t truly remorseful. There were other times when he could’ve attempted to gain forgiveness, but …show more content…
Forgiving Karl would’ve been a dishonor to all the victims, because he would be acting without their consent. If I was a Jew like Simon, I would face additional criticism by other Jews because I would’ve forgave a Nazi. Karl should have moral responsibility for doing such unspeakable acts of violence. However, that does not mean we should lambaste Karl. One must show compassion instead of hatred to those who’ve sinned. The Bible (NIV) states, “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned.” (Luke 6:37). Berating Karl would only place more burden and create more physiological pain in the
Analysis and explanation of Wiesenthal’s actions When Simon was asked to forgive the SS officer, he blankly looked at the man, stood up, and left. One of the main problems that he faced is he definitely was not able to absolve the man of the crimes considering he could not speak for his entire people. Wiesenthal did not have authority to absolve the actions of those who were responsible for the holocaust nor did he want to in the first place. Different people have different ideologies about the way that one can accept forgiveness. Literature from the Jewish culture has a lot to say about this and understandably so.
Simon Wiesenthal’s book The Sunflower: On the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness spoke to me about the question of forgiveness and repentance. Simon Wiesenthal was a Holocaust prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp during World War II. He experienced many brutal and uneasy experiences that no human being should experience in their lifetime and bear to live with it. Death, suffering, and despair were common to Simon Wiesenthal that he questioned his own religious faith because he asks why would his God allow the Holocaust happen to his people to be slaughter and not do anything to save them. During Simon Wiesenthal time as a Jewish Holocaust, Simon was invited to a military hospital where a dying Nazi SS officer wanted to have a conversation. The Nazi SS officer told Simon his story of his life and confesses to Simon of his horrific war crimes. Ultimately, the SS officer wanted forgiveness for what he done to Simon’s Jewish people. Simon Wiesenthal could not respond to his request, because he did not know what to do with a war criminal that participate in mass genocide to Simon’s people. Simon Wiesenthal lives throughout his life on asking the same crucial question, “What would I have done?” (Wiesenthal 98). If the readers would be on the exact situation as Simon was
Forgiveness is not an action that should be taken for granted. Nor should it be easily accepted without a second thought. It was strong of Simon to refuse to give Karl an answer to his request. “Possibly, there are circumstances in which forgiving is a temptation, a promise of relief that might be morally dubious. Indeed, the refusal to forgive may represent the more demanding moral accomplishment” (Brudholm 2). Simon did not give into the temptation to give a dying man the easy answer he sought and say that he forgave him without thinking it over. Karl assumed that he would be forgiven, even though he did not express much remorse about what he had done. Because he did not automatically tell Karl that he forgave him, Simon never had ...
I think he felt that if he got your forgiveness then he could die in peace for all the bad he had done. A lot of Jewish people had died due to what Hitler ordered everyone in Germany army to do. Albert Speer was a high-ranking Nazi member and he was also Hitler’s minister and even though he knew he was going to jail no matter what was said at the Nuremberg trials he had confessed to all the things he had done. According to Speer “My moral guilt is not subject to the statute of limitations, it cannot be erased in my lifetime” (245). In making this comment, Speer knew that even though he was punished with twenty years of imprisonment that they only punished his legal guilt. Speer was haunted by the things he had done and he knew that he did not deserve anyone’s forgiveness. Even Speer, Hitler’s minister, knew that no one in the German army deserved anyone’s sympathy or
There are many heroic individuals in history that have shown greatness during a time of suffering ,as well as remorse when greatness is needed, but one individual stood out to me above them all. He served as a hero among all he knew and all who knew him. This individual, Simon Wiesenthal, deserves praise for his dedication to his heroic work tracking and prosecuting Nazi war criminals that caused thousands of Jews, Gypsies, Poles and other victims of the Holocaust to suffer and perish.
Personally, I make mistakes every single day. For example, over this past winter break, my Mom bought our entire family tickets to the Seattle Boys Choir for the night I got home. Instead of going to the concert with my family I ditched them to go to a party at my high school friends house. My Mom was really hurt by my lack of recognition of her hard work to create a special memory for my family and I. All she wanted to do was spend time with me and I blew her off for something pointless. When I do something I regret, I hope that whoever afflicted would find it in their heart to see that I was sorry, and that they see that given the chance to re-do the situation, I would choose to change my actions. To be clear, I am not in the slightest defending or validating the actions of the Nazi regime during the time of the Holocaust. But as a person who has regretted certain actions or decisions I’ve made, I can understand the root of his need for forgiveness. The Nazi’s plea for forgiveness points toward his recognition of fault. Many Nazi’s were operating on the mindset that the atrocities they were committing were actually in the right. This Nazi, seeing the error in his actions, shows that he realizes what he did was wrong. For some people, the request for forgiveness isn’t enough to justify the act of giving it. In my opinion, if the person who is requesting the forgiveness is genuine in their motives, then they deserve
In Simon Wiesenthal’s The Sunflower on the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness the author is asked to fulfill a dying solider last wish to forgive him because of the crimes he has committed against the Jewish people of the Holocaust. When Wiesenthal is asked for forgiveness, he simply leaves the room. Wiesenthal states that the encounter with the dying man left “a heavy burden” (Wiesenthal 55) on him. The confessions in which he admitted to have “profoundly disturbed [him]” (Wiesenthal 55). As Wiesenthal tries to make sense of what he has encountered he begins to make excuses for why the man might have done what he did. He say...
He told of being on a balcony, seeing people pass by, and wanting to have a machine gun to release his anger. His hatred for the Germans and what they had done to him and his family was very evident. On a personal level Thomas Buergenthal learned to forgive, because it benefited him more than staying bitter. He sums this up when talking about himself and his mother by saying, “ I doubt that we would have been able to preserve our sanity had we remained consumed by hatred for the rest of our lives.” The process of forgiving took a lot of time. He eventually realized “that one cannot hope to protect mankind from crimes such as those that were visited upon us unless one struggles to break the cycle of hatred and violence that invariably leads to more suffering by innocent human beings.” This realization lead Buergenthal to go to law school and work in multiple human rights organizations and courts. He felt fit to serve in such a place as he was a victim of the greatest infringement on human rights in
World War II was no doubt a very dark time, but there were people who vowed revenge on the Nazis for what they had done. According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum up to 6 million Jews were killed during the Holocaust. Simon Wiesenthal was a devoted Nazi hunter after he was placed in several concentration camps during World War II and survived through all five of them (“Simon Wiesenthal”). When people think of all the lives the Nazis took, the thought of Nazis killed in revenge normally does not come to mind. Simon Wiesenthal was no doubt one of the strongest Jews to survive the Holocaust and contain the bravery to bring justice upon the Nazis.
He should have asked for forgiveness from a minister or a priest, but he felt the need to confess to a Jew because his confession would mean more to himself and also Simon or any other Jew. Karl was a young Nazi Soldier who was in his early twenties. I think many people can agree that everybody wants to die with a clean sleight. No one wants to die a sinner so Karl had every right to ask for forgiveness, because if it was one of us, we would be doing the same thing and I guarantee none of us can say we wouldn 't. As a boy who is very young and in the military, how is he supposed to say no to his commanding officer? One could not simply deny his commanding officers orders. Still to this day, you do not deny your commanding officers
Must one forget before one can forgive? Forgiveness involves not holding a sin against a person any longer, but forgiveness is a decision of the will. Since we cannot selectively remove events from our memory, it is impossible to truly forget sins that have been committed against us. Simon Wiesenthal, a Holocaust survivor, in his book The Sunflower, writes of an experience that occurred when he was a prisoner in a concentration camp during the Holocaust. He recounts a day when he was taken from work and lead to the bedside of a dying man. The dying man Karl, a member of the SS, confessed to Simon about his dreadful act for he sought absolution from a Jew. As Karl begs for Wiesenthal to forgive him, Wiesenthal remained silent and walked away. Wiesenthal’s purpose is to argue whether the inhumane acts of the SS should be forgiven. Because
During World War II there was event that lead to deaths of millions of innocent people. This even is known as the holocaust, millions of innocent people were killed violently, there was mass murders, rapes and horrific tortures. The question I will attempt to answer in the course of this paper is if the holocaust was a unique event in history. In my opinion there were other mass murders that people committed justified by the feeling of being threatened. But I don 't believe that any were as horrific and inhumane as Germany’s genocide of the Jewish people.
Even if a suspected Nazi were to be found alive and tried, it would be difficult to come to a conviction. After seventy years, virtually all eyewitnesses have passed away, and most of the documentation destroyed or lost. Additionally, proving that an individual was guilty of a greater crime would be nearly impossible. It is safe to assume that those still alive would have been in their early 20’s during the war and had only been simple guards and low ranking officers, likely guilty of no greater crime. Considering all of these facts, it can be concluded that of the 4,000 names available, a fraction of them can be located, a fraction of those are still alive, and an even smaller fraction deserves to be tried. However, there are some who believe that those affiliated with the third reich in any way should continue to be hunted down. Those who desire most for the Nazi’s to face justice are the survivors of the holocaust. Martin Greenfield describes how he vowed to, “return and kill the [Nazi’s] wife”, after he escaped. This evidence of hatred, among the countless other cases, show the rightful feelings the
The Holocaust, a Greek word meaning sacrifice by fire, was the systematic, genocidal killing of over six million Jews and five million non-jews that was carried by the Nazi regime in its attempt to take complete control of Europe. During this time, Jews and other groups such as Roma, Slovaks, Russians, etc. were deemed as racially inferior and, therefore, needed to be exterminated in order to purify German society and protect the Aryan race. Ultimately, the Nazi regime took the lives of eleven million innocent people on these grounds, and, now, decades later, the world still demands justice for those who where murdered as part of this horrific plot. On these grounds, Oskar Gröning, a former SS member at Auschwitz extermination camp, is being
Due to the fact, that for me it's really hard to answer Wiesenthal's question, because I believe that the answer to this question is a case of religion and morality where some people may argue in a religious way as Edward H. Flannery "Jesus answer to the question of how many times one must forgive. Should it be "seven times"? Speaking out of his Jewish traditions, his answer was "seventy times seven times", a metaphorical way of saying "always'"(Flannery 137). in making this comment, Flannery argues in a Christianity way, that absolution is required when ask on deathbed, that's mean that anyone has to forgive anyone even if he doesn't want to do it. I could agree with Flannery, if Karl knew the religion of Christianity and if he believed in Jesus he deserved was forgiven. However, we don't know the intensions of Karl, because Wiesenthal didn't say anything to Karl, which leads to reflect