The History Book Club discussion

These chapters are definitely very disturbing. I had heard of some of the heinous acts that occured before, but never really so completely spelled out as they are in this book. And I never really considered who was doing the "work" of this evil or how they would have coped. So thoroughly evil and dark that the Sonderkommados would be "cycled" and killed after they were the tools of such hideous acts. So ruthless and machine-like Rudolf has become from his beginnings desring a simple, earthy life on the farm for himself and his family. How does one stray so afar?

Lewis wrote: "Incredible to imagine, though perhaps there is some of this in all of us, that Rudolf, at the same time as he is extinguishing hundreds, is concerned that he is perceived as being a good example of..."

Yes Lewis he was a complicated and complex person - "splitting" of his personality is all that I can think of.

Lewis wrote: "The handling of new arrivals described on pages 134-5 is a scene right out of hell. Whether Rudolf & Co. believed they were justified or not, if there is any morality or ethics in the universe, the..."

They absolutely not only took away the past and present and future of those who they killed - they also obliterated the past, present and the future of those who survived or those whose families were caught up in the Nazis net. Everybody was changed forever and their family as they knew it.

Lewis wrote: "If anything brings me close to vomiting, it might be Rudolf's comment on page 139, where he said that he couldn't complain that life was boring at Auschwitz. Tearing families limb from limb, driven..."

He was guilty of running the camp which killed millions of innocent people - the only question that you might ponder is whether you believe in capital punishment or not - certainly not that he should be punished. These folks had nothing to do with the war effort or with the enemy - these folks for the most part were either from Germany or innocent non military people from countries that the Nazis had taken.

There are two statements that for me really show the differences of the character of Hanns & Rudolf:

(p. 121) Hanns, "Although we are told not to hate, I think we are allowed to have some grudge against the people who only want to live, but would not 'let live.'"

(p. 139) Rudolf, "I really could not complain that life at Auschwitz was boring."

Hanns' statement shows how much he thought of others, not to hate is a very complex emotion I imagine at this time. Rudolf shows how selfish he truly was.

Yes, it does.

But I do think that Hanns as we get to know him is not "guileless" nor does he not have a dark side. But that particular quote is an interesting one. The commandments do say that thou shalt not kill.

But Leviticus also states: (even in the Hebrew Bible)

Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart; thou shalt surely not rebuke thy neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.

יח לֹא-תִקֹּם וְלֹא-תִטֹּר אֶת-בְּנֵי עַמֶּךָ, וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ: אֲנִי, יְהוָה. 18 Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the LORD.

I do question Hann's statement on page 21 - because Hanns is developing a rationale for being able to hate. And hate is hate. You are right - it had to be extremely difficult for any displaced person who had lost even their citizenship who may have lost family or even just escaped themselves to feel nothing but loathing. Having said that - was he psychologically (because of these factors) the right person or persons to be selected for this work and to be sent out on these missions. Obviously they would want to extract "personal or collective revenge".

So we ask ourselves at this point in our reading - what road is Hanns starting down?

Rudolf on the other hand is completely detached and devoid of any emotion whatsoever - he is at the very least a sociopath and may be clearly emotionally unbalanced. Does that excuse Rudolf - absolutey not - he is as guilty as sin. It appeared to me that a lot of the Nazi leaders had grandiose impressions of themselves and were quite narcissistic and devoid of emotion or empathy. They had become cruel and hard.

Bentley wrote: "Vince - remember the Patti Hearst case where the hostage started to identify with her captors - (Stockholm Syndrome). I wonder if there is such a thing that happens to a large group of people who ..."

It doesn't seem possible that good people can do such unspeakable acts. I just finished another book which helped to explain the hold that Hitler had on the people.....it helps to explain that conundrum.

by Laurence Rees

Libby wrote: "Brian wrote: "It really is difficult to fathom the dichotomy of Rudolf. A family man who enjoyed horse riding juxtaposed with the creation of a facility to kill over 4,000 people in a day. Baffling..."

You raise a good point Libby - an entire nation cannot be sociopathic - but I do think that a nation (through "ism brainwashing") can actually act as if they were sociopathic and appear to be the most evil versions of themselves. And fear can paralyze the best of the human race.

I am sure that fear, depravation, starvation, and everything else that they endured during and after World War I contributed to their feeling undervalued and starved.

The blockades and World War I left the German people in desperate straits and then there was the treaty of Versailles while they were virtually starving.

However Rudolf I believe had childhood problems and I believe he was unbalanced and became sociopathic. The SS seemed to attract and seek out individuals with certain personality disorders and psychotic tendencies who knew no boundaries in terms of right from wrong and had little empathy.

Rudolf was their type.

Jill wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Vince - remember the Patti Hearst case where the hostage started to identify with her captors - (Stockholm Syndrome). I wonder if there is such a thing that happens to a large grow..."


Yes, and he held out some hope for the people in terms of gaining back some self respect and acquiring the basic necessities so that they could live and have something to eat. Gradually the bad guys looked good to these folks because they probably had it a bit better. When you do not have the basics something to eat and at the very least some clean pure water to drink - there is not much in life that is worth caring about until you get these. I think the German people were at that point. But having said that genocide and mass murder of religious personnel and any opposition is never OK and if they knew then they are guilty of doing nothing. I am not sure how you punish folks for doing nothing even if they knew what was going on and had nothing to do with the acts themselves. I guess it is like seeing gang members kill themselves on the city streets and all you do is take cover and stay out of the line of fire.

Vince - I am going to have to reread my note because I think it was misinterpreted. Let me do that and I will update things here.

Yes as I thought - you misspoke or my note was not carefully read in response:

------------------------

My Response:

I have nothing really further to add. But the Germans had been left starving during World War I by the British blockade so I am sure that they remembered that. Also, I know that you have had problems with the goodreads features so I deleted the notes that you posted about not seeing certain notes before you posted for the first time so as not to derail the discussion as it is.

This was my response earlier:

You raise a good point Libby - an entire nation cannot be sociopathic - but I do think that a nation (through "ism brainwashing") can actually act as if they were sociopathic and appear to be the most evil versions of themselves. And fear can paralyze the best of the human race.

I am sure that fear, depravation, starvation, and everything else that they endured during and after World War I contributed to their feeling undervalued and starved.

The blockades and World War I left the German people in desperate straits and then there was the treaty of Versailles while they were virtually starving.

However Rudolf I believe had childhood problems and I believe he was unbalanced and became sociopathic. The SS seemed to attract and seek out individuals with certain personality disorders and psychotic tendencies who knew no boundaries in terms of right from wrong and had little empathy.

Rudolf was their type.

Now about the blockade and the Treaty:

Blockade of Germany (Source: Cited Below)

Through the period from the armistice on 11 November 1918 until the signing of the peace treaty with Germany on 28 June 1919, the Allies maintained the naval blockade of Germany that had begun during the war. As Germany was dependent on imports, it is estimated that 523,000 civilians had lost their lives.

N. P. Howard, of the University of Sheffield, claims that a further quarter of a million more died from disease or starvation in the eight-month period following the conclusion of the conflict.

The continuation of the blockade after the fighting ended, as author Robert Leckie wrote in Delivered From Evil, did much to "torment the Germans ... driving them with the fury of despair into the arms of the devil."

The terms of the Armistice did allow food to be shipped into Germany, but the Allies required that Germany provide the means (the shipping) to do so. The German government was required to use its gold reserves, being unable to secure a loan from the United States.

Historian Sally Marks claims that while "Allied warships remained in place against a possible resumption of hostilities, the Allies offered food and medicine after the armistice, but Germany refused to allow its ships to carry supplies".

Further, Marks states that despite the problems facing the Allies, from the German government, "Allied food shipments arrived in Allied ships before the charge made at Versailles".

This position is also supported by Elisabeth Gläser who notes that an Allied task force, to help feed the German population, was established in early 1919 and that by May 1919 " Germany [had] became the chief recipient of American and Allied food shipments".

Gläser further claims that during the early months of 1919, while the main relief effort was being planned, France provided food shipments to Bavaria and the Rhineland. She further claims that the German government delayed the relief effort by refusing to surrender their merchant fleet to the Allies.

Finally, she concludes that "the very success of the relief effort had in effect deprived the [Allies] of a credible threat to induce Germany to sign the Treaty of Versailles.

However, it is also the case that for eight months following the end of hostilities, the blockade was continually in place, with some estimates that a further 100,000 casualties among German civilians to starvation were caused, on top of the hundreds of thousands which already had occurred. Food shipments, furthermore, had been entirely dependent on Allied goodwill, causing at least in part the post-hostilities irregularity.

Rest of article:

Aftermath of World War I - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermat...

==================================================

Vince as you stated in another note of yours (possibly on another thread) - the Nazis took over the populace"s "thought style". And that is what I meant above. Normally very decent folks got caught up in the frenzy. And that really is one of the points of Harding's book - that ordinary and normal people can think this way and were caught up in genocide like Rudolf Hess and others like him. Chilling.

by Manfred F. Boemeke (he was the editor) and Elizabeth Glaser (not even in Goodreads) (no photos and no link in the case of Elizabeth Glaser)

by Sally Marks (no photo)

by Sally Marks (no photo)

by Gordon Martel (no photo)

The National Archives - UK: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pa...

by Margaret MacMillan (no photo)

by Harold Nicolson

by Joseph E. Persico - although about World II which is pertinent - also discussed some of the other topics above

by Hew Strachan

by Robert Leckie

Note: This complete note was placed in the Bibliography as all such posts that list books should be placed. Since it also has direct relevance to this thread it is placed on both threads.

Rudolf's last name for our purposes in this discussion should be spelled Hoess. We were spelling it a variety of ways. But Hoess it is.

Harding's juxtaposition of Rudolf's work life with family life in chapter 9 is particularly effective and haunting. Descriptions of the gas chambers, burnings and "cleanup cycles" followed by Rudolf's respite through his beloved horses, Hedwig's view of the villa as "paradise," Christmas nativity plays, hot cocoa for the kids, an abundance of food warmth and comfort. The absurdity of the camp orchestra for the entertainment of "management" was particularly astonishing.

These details make Harding's narrative sadly riveting. So far this book accomplishes quite a lot in the space of concise, well-paced chapters.

Kristen - the book does capture the juxtaposition of these two lives and the camp orchestra was beyond absurd - it reminded me of the orchestra on the Titanic that played as the folks were placed into the life boats or not.

I was surprised that Rudolph claimed Hedwig didn't seem to know or at least not know the extent of what was happening at the camp until she overheard a local party administrator talking about the extermination program(p 142). It seems unlikely to me that an adult would not at least have a suspicion about what was happening when living as close to it as she did. Perhaps it is what people have suggested in earlier comments that people choose to ignore what is happening to be able to cope and survive.

I also didn't realize that the camp orchestra was formed based off of Rudolph's own experiences in prison(p138). It is interesting to discover where some of his ideas came from.

Sometimes people can be in total denial. I agree Whitney about the orchestra.