Bystanders are just as much to blame for the Holocaust. Some people may say that bystanders are not guilty because they were looking out for themselves, but that's exactly why they are guilty. We need to address the fact that innocent people are dying. If people weren't so selfish in letting people into their homes, then maybe a good percent of people wouldn’t be dead. This situation is really life or death and we need to start thinking about others and not just ourselves. I will be using source: Bystanders, supporting question three source I, and supporting question two sources E-G. Bystanders are guilty, we are all brothers so there should be no questioning of whether we should be saving innocent lives or not. “ “Bystanders” as used to refer …show more content…
Being a bystander means that you are a witness to something, but you decide not to take any part in helping the situation. In the Holocaust, helping a Jew who was endangered would most likely get you and their family killed. The whole point was to get rid of Jews. But most people had sympathy for helping Jews out and bringing them into their homes.“The “indifference” of “bystanders” to the plight of Jews is often attributed to people's daily preoccupations, from surmounting the hardships of the economic depression of the 1930s to focusing on the survival of their families in the face of wartime deprivations and suffering”(Source:Bystanders). This source gives us a better insight as to how these people had no concern as to what was going on because they feared their own safety. But I completely disagree that their fear was valid because what about the Jews, I mean they were sent off to die and the worst part of it is that most of them didn’t even know they were going to …show more content…
Others agree that bystanders are not guilty because there really is nothing wrong with looking out for yourself and your family. For example, we have the Blankenstein family. This family was a part of an organization that provided shelter for Jews. This family also decided to keep the Bernstein family in their home for safety, thinking it was a good idea. “The police arrested the Bernsteins and plundered the entire house”(Supporting question to source F). Eventually, the police had found out that this family was in hiding and they were sent to a camp and the Blankenstein's home was completely burned down and ruined. And all this was because they wanted to help. People who say that they are not guilty are full of it because they are basically stating facts of how it's better to be selfish and look out for yourself, but no we should all love and help one another
In Miles Lehrman's documentary, Witness to the Holocaust, he argues, “A perpetrator is not the most dangerous enemy. The most dangerous part is the bystander because neutrality always helps the killer”, This is not a logical claim because bystanders merely witness it; however, they are not committing any crimes against laws or humanity. They may want to help the victim, but they may not do so because being a bystander is simply not illegal. Since forcing someone to be an upstander is illegal, people choose to not be an upstander because it puts them in an undesirable position. After all, standing up for the victim may put the upstander in danger along with the victim. Additionally, becoming an upstander does not guarantee that the victim will be safe and sound afterwards; the perpetrator may continue, perhaps with the upstander as another victim.
Do Bystanders have a responsibility to intervene in crimes? This is a question we tend to ask ourselves very often. In the texts To Kill a Mockingbird and “Stand Up”, one can see the dangers of intervening in crimes. Bystanders are innocent and shouldn't risk their own lives for someone they don't even know. Being a bystander doesn't make you guilty, because it's your choice weather to help and stick up for someone or not.
"Who's Worse?" In the documentary "Witness to the Holocaust," Miles Lehrman suggests that perpetrators are not as dangerous as they are thought to be. In fact, he argues that bystanders are more dangerous than the perpetrators themselves. This is a logical claim. First, to support Lehrman’s claim, Kristallnacht serves as a prime example of the impact bystanders have on events and how they can be more dangerous than the perpetrators themselves.
The bystander effect is a the phenomenon in which the more people are are around the less likely someone will step-in or help in a given situation. THe most prominent example of this is the tragic death of Kitty Genovese. In march of 1964 Kitty genovese was murdered in the alley outside of her apartment. That night numerous people reported hearing the desperate cries for help made by Kitty Genovese who was stabbed to death. Her screams ripped through the night and yet people walked idly by her murder. No one intervened and not even a measly phone call to the police was made.
Approximately 6 million Jews and 5 million other people starting from the year 1933 were killed. They were put to death. There was one main person responsible for all of this.
at the end of your roads, or telling an SS officer about a Jew in your
Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people.” We are All Bystanders by Jason Marsh and Dacher Keltner is an article that reflects on the psychological and social phenomenon that refers to cases in which people do not offer any assistance or help to a victim. Studies say that a person's personality can determine how they react to a bystander situation. In a book called, The Heart of Altruism, author Kristen Monroe writes the altruistic perspective. Altruistic people are strongly connected to other humans and have a concern for the well-being of others. Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief exemplifies the bystander theory through Liesel and
The Jewish Holocaust has to be one of the most famous and tragic genocides reported. We are taught that the reason we learn all about it is so tragic historical events like this won’t repeat in the future, but they do and they are. What many people don’t realize is that bystanders play a huge role in the events of the holocaust. Yes, the Germans played an obviously enormous part, and it wouldn’t have happened if it weren’t for them, but there were many other situations where others could have helped stop the tragedy and the deaths of millions of people.
The Holocaust ended 70 years ago, it involved over 11 million deaths. Hitler blamed all Jews for everything wrong with Germany. The Holocaust was the mass murder of six million Jews and millions of others by the Nazis. They were taken to concentration camps where they were treated like animals. Before the concentration camps, their human rights were taken, and also making them wear gold stars to identify the Jews better and faster. The Jews were taken from camp to camp until they finally arrived to the deadliest camp of them all, Auschwitz. The Holocaust also lasted 12 years from January of 1933 to May 8 of 1945. It all started when Adolf Hitler came into power. The Holocaust should never be forgotten because first of all, there were too many deaths. Second, because they were innocent people who
At what point does personal interest become more important than the safety of others? During the Holocaust, the Nazis were not the only group that advanced the Holocaust, and then the Final Solution. Bystanders, witnesses, passersby, and many other groups indirectly affected the victims of the Holocaust. The silence of these groups held the Jews in more jeopardy than their Nazi captors.
The bystander effect plays a key role in society today. More and more people ignore a person in distress.
When individuals think about the Holocaust, most place the responsibility of the terrible events on the perpetrators. However, bystanders played one of the largest roles in the Holocaust (Evans, Carrell) simply by staying safe for way too long (Florida Center) and the world wants to make sure it never happens again (Shriver Jr., Donald W).
One of the strengths is providing a new insight into bystander effect. The study argued that researchers have previously neglected the potential benefit of bystanders and thus, the study provided a new horizon by proving reversed bystander effect through experiment. This allows us to be aware of the fact that someone may be providing help merely due to impression management. This arouses a doubt on whether the one who provides help is genuinely concerned about the needs of the victims, or one is just motivated by upholding his/her reputation when surrounded by a crowd. Besides, carrying out a manipulation check right after this experiment is beneficial to this study as well....
The bystander effect is a social phenomenon, whereby individuals are less likely to help when others are present. This emerged following the murder of Kitty Genovese, 1964. Manning, Levine and Collins (2007) state, ‘this iconic event focused research attention on the psychology of helping and how groups act as impediments to helping.’ (pp. 555). Theorists argue the more bystanders, the less likely people help. Arguably, one cause of the bystander effect is diffusion of responsibility, this is the idea that when a task is presented before a larger group,
However, that opposing argument can be found as hypocritical. If a person was getting robbed in an ally and they saw many witnesses taking no action they would likely be upset by the fact of no one is offering any assistance to them. Bystanders should put themselves into the shoes of the person in need and ask themselves how they would expect others to respond if they were the one in need. Often time’s bystanders take no intervention because of the diffusion of responsibility. “When there are four or more people who are bystanders to an emergency situation, the likelihood that at least one of them will help is just 31%” (Gaille). Another statistic shows that 85% of people who were bystanders would intervene if they knew or at least though they were the only person present in the situation. Often the only thing keeping people from intervening in bystander situations are other people. It is important for bystanders to understand the statistics of the people around them in order to create action because often times they do not realize that if they were to intervene other people would likely support them in the situation. Bystanders need to make it a personal responsibility to intervene in situations for the good of other. If people were to always take action the amount of bullying, sexual harassment, crime, and many other significant issues within a society would drastically