Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The effects of the holocaust
The effects of the holocaust
The effects of the holocaust
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
What has been achieved by prosecuting Nazis alleged to have committed crimes against the Jews?
"While fighting for victory the German soldier will observe the rules for chivalrous warfare. Cruelties and senseless destruction are below his standard" , or so the commandment printed in every German Soldiers paybook would have us believe. Yet during the Second World War thousands of Jews were victims of war crimes committed by Nazi's, whose actions subverted the code of conduct they claimed to uphold and contravened legislation outlined in the Geneva Convention. It is this legislature that has paved the way for the Jewish community and political leaders to attempt to redress the Nazi's violation, by prosecuting individuals allegedly responsible. Convicting Nazi criminals is an implicit declaration by post-World War II society that the Nazi regime's extermination of over five million Jews won't go unnoticed.
Many of the alleged Nazi war criminals that were captured had attempted to evade prosecution shortly before the end of the war. Some opted for suicide, rather than risk capture while others used the Austrian and German Underground offers of fake passports and other means of forged identification to assume a new identity . A choice opted for by many, that virtually guaranteed them a new life with remote chance of detection was to travel to the Anglo-American countries after immigration quotas were raised. Over 4000 Nazi criminals sought refuge in Australia . Many lied about their history to gain entry into their new home and proceeded to blend in, unnoticed by our government. They were no longer Nazi criminals but new citizens with a hidden past. Lists of suspected criminals were compiled and alleged perpetrators systematically captured and put to trial.
In 1943, under Soviet leadership the first war crime trials were conducted, however the first trial to involve the Allied powers was the Nuremburg International Military Tribunal in 1945 . The International Military Tribunal (IMT), set out to prosecute 22 defendants comprising largely of the administration arm of the Third Reich . The American's initially wished to indict whole Nazi organisations for their crimes. This focus was soon altered to determine the accountability of particular individuals. The accused were tried under at least two of the following four headings devised for indictment. The first count was the "formulation of a common plan or conspiracy"; two, "crimes against peace (planning and waging a war of aggression
soldiers during the Jewish Holocaust, knew that the Nazi’s actions were inhumane and cruel; hence, he commanded his soldiers to not confiscate property from the Jews. Although the Nazi soldiers did not take valuables away from the Jews, they still dehumanized and exterminated the Jews, rega...
If you have been in a History class you have probably heard of an event that happened after World War Two called the Nuremberg Trials. These trials were conducted by the United States. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson was appointed to lead the trials (Berenbaum). During these trials they charged with Crimes against the Peace, War crimes and Crimes against Humanity (Berenbaum). Many major Nazi leaders committed suicide before officials could hang them or before even being caught. The famous Doctor Goebbels killed his children then him and his wife committed suicide (Berenbaum). Only twelve out of the twenty-two who stood trial were hanged, twelve, while the rest just got prison time. Besides major Nazi officials, Physicians were put on trial, the people who were part of the mobile killing squads, Concentration camp officials, Judges and Executives who sold concentration camps Zyklon B. You can expect that they had many excuses, but m...
Some will say that the Jewish people cannot be held responsible for the crimes committed, because they are the victims. This is not the case, however; the Jewish people could have prevented a great deal of pain and suffering that they experienced. Elie wrote “And thus my elders concerned themselves with all manners of things - strategy, diplomacy,politics, and Zionism - but not with their own fate” (8). The Jewish people had heard of what the Nazis had done to the foreign Jews of Sighet, their town; a Jew had returned and told them, but they refused to listen; they ignored his warnings. Furthermore, the Jewish people had many chances at this time to escape; most notably emigration to another country. The Jewish people ignored the warnings they had received, and their chance to escape; for this reason, they bear a certain degree of responsibility for what
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 ways challenged earlier works like Christopher Browning’s “Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland” which arguably gives a more complex explanation for the motives of the perpetrators placing the emphasis on circumstance and pressure to conform. These differing opinions on why the perpetrators did what they did during the Holocaust have led to them being presented in very different ways by each historian. To contrast this I have chosen to focus on the portrayal of one event both books focus on in detail; the mass shooting of around 1,500 Jews that took place in Jozefow, Poland on July 13th 1942 (Browning:2001:225). This example clearly highlights the way each historian presents the perpetrators in different ways through; the use of language, imagery, stylistic devices and quotations, as a way of backing up their own argument. To do this I will focus on how various aspects of the massacre are portrayed and the way in which this affects the presentation of the per...
Adolf Eichmann was convicted of the mass killing of Jews in 1945. Eichmann murdered almost 11 million Jews, or almost a third of the world’s Jews. Einsatzgruppen was the name of the group that participated in the mass killings of the Je...
Botwinick writes in A History of the Holocaust, “The principle that resistance to evil was a moral duty did not exist for the vast majority of Germans. Not until the end of the war did men like Martin Niemoeller and Elie Wiesel arouse the world’s conscience to the realization that the bystander cannot escape guilt or shame” (pg. 45). In The Man in the High Castle, Philip K. Dick writes of a world where Niemoeller and Wiesel’s voices never would have surfaced and in which Germany not only never would have repented for the Holocaust, but would have prided itself upon it. Dick writes of a world where this detached and guiltless attitude prevails globally, a world where America clung on to its isolationist policies, where the Axis powers obtained world domination and effectively wiped Jews from the surface, forcing all resistance and culture to the underground and allowing for those in the 1960’s Nazi world to live without questioning the hate they were born into.
“The four chief prosecutors of the International Military Tribunal (IMT)—Robert H. Jackson (United States), Francois de Menthon (France), Roman A. Rudenko (Soviet Union), and Sir Hartley Shawcross (Great Britain)—hand down indictments against 24 leading Nazi officials,” (“The Nuremberg Trials”). Alongside the judges stood A prosecutorial staff of over 600 Americans plus additional hundreds from the other three powers assembled and began interviewing potential witnesses and identifying documents from among the 100,000 captured for the prosecution case,” (Doug Linder). This was a time in history that really brought together the great nations and made them what they are
The Rosenberg trial, which ended in a double execution in 1953, was one of the century's most controversial trials. It was sometimes referred to as, "the best publicized spy hunt of all times" as it came to the public eye in the time of atom-spy hysteria. Husband and wife, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, were charged with conspiracy to commit espionage. Most of the controversy surrounding this case came from mass speculation that there were influences being reinforced by behind-the-scenes pressure, mainly from the government, which was detected through much inconsistencies in testimonies and other misconduct in the court. Many shared the belief that Ethel Rosenberg expressed best as she wrote in one of her last letters before being executed, "-knowing my husband and I must be vindicated by history.
After World War II the world began to here accounts of the atrocities and crimes committed by the Nazi’s to the Jews and other enemies of the Nazis. The international community wanted answers and called for the persecution of the criminals that participated in the murder of millions throughout Europe. The SS was responsible for playing a leading role in the Holocaust for the involvement in the death of millions of innocent lives. Throughout, Europe concentration camps were established to detain Jews, political prisoners, POW’s and enemies of the Third Reich. The largest camp during World War II was Auschwitz under the command of SS Lieutenant Colonel Rudolf Hoess; Auschwitz emerged as the site for the largest mass murder in the history of the world. (The, 2005)
Wars have essentially been the backbone of history. A war can make or break a country. As the result of war, a country can lose or gain territory and a war directly impacts a countries’ economy. When we learn about wars in schools we usually are taught about when they start, major events/ battles, and when they end. It would take a year or two to cover one war if we were to learn about everything. One thing that is commonly overlooked and we take for granted, is prisoners of war. Most people think of concentration camps and the millions of Jews that suffered when prisoners and war are mentioned in the same sentence. Yes it is terrible what happened during WWII, but what about our troops that were captured and potentially tortured trying to save the Jews? How did they suffer? Being captured as a prisoner of war is just an on the job hazard. In this paper I will explain what POWs went through and how it has changes between countries, and I will only scratch the surface.
Every year or so, something happens in the media that brings us all back to the atrocities of World War II, and the German persecution of the Jews. It seems that the horrors of that time can only be digested and understood in small bites. How else can we personalize and comprehend a tragedy of that magnitude? Most of what we read and view in the media about the holocaust is a perspective from the Jewish experience. Recently, however, a question has been posed in regards to finding closure with that troubling piece of history from the German conscience. Can one German's experience reflect the tendencies of the entire country with regards to passion, denial, guilt, and finally justice?
In early October 1945, the United States, Great Britain, France, and Russia issued an indictment against 24 men and six organizations.2 The indictment appointed against these men and organizations contained four courts: conspiracy to wage aggressive war, crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The trial at Nuremberg opened on November 20, 1945.3 For judgemen...
Following World War II, war trials convicted the criminals of their crimes. There were hundreds of trials that took place to punish the Nazi criminals. According to UnitedStatesHolocaustMemorialMuseum.org, “On December 17, 1942, the leaders of the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union issued the first joint declaration officially noting the mass murder of European Jews and resolving to prosecute those responsible for crimes against civilian populations.” The United Nations War Crimes Commission would be in charge of the trials. These trials took place all over Europe.Many of them were in Germany and were held by the country that was occupying Germany after the war. According to UnitedStatesHolocaustMemorialMuseum.org, “The IMT defined crimes against humanity as “murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation.” Most of the trials were with lower-level officials, and most of the first information we knew about concentration camps came from evidence and eyewitness accounts from these trials. Some of the specific trials were the Nuremberg trials, the Doctors trials, and the Auschwitz trials.
Judgment at Nuremberg The Nuremberg trials took place between 1945 and 1949 and were used to judge the acts of over a hundred judges accused of committing war crimes. The movie "Trials at Nuremberg" dealt specifically with the justice trials. The justice trials adjudicated the criminal responsibility of judges accused of enforcing immoral, unjust, and inhumane laws set by the Nazi party. =
The Nuremberg Trials was unethically run and violated the rights of the Nazi leaders who were convicted of committing crimes against humanity. Primarily because the Allies sought to use the trials as a way to remind the Germans, who won the war ‘again’. Thus making it similar to the Treaty of Versailles in (19- ), through implying this notion of “Victors’ Justice”. Nevertheless, the Allies did to an extent ‘try’ to make the tribunal as ethical as possible,