The roots of evil: The origins of genocide and other group violence

by Ervin Staub

  “For reasons of racial hygiene, it is undesirable to use prisoners of war as blood donors for members of the German folk community, because we cannot be sure that no men of mixed Jewish blood among the prisoners would be used for blood donations.” (p. 56).

  For the improvement of the race, Himmler wanted the SS men to be the breeding bulls: “It must be a matter of course that the most copious breeding should be by this [SS] Order, by this racial elite of the Germanic people. In 20 to 30 years we must really be able to furnish the whole of Europe with its leading class.” And Hitler said: “I am firmly determined to station racially valuable military units, such as formations of the Waffen-SS, in all areas where the present population is [racially] bad, so as to have them take care of a freshening-up of the blood (Auffrischung des Blutes).” (p. 57)

  The killing of Jews and others was highly irrational from any societal perspective, except the ideological one. Even their lesser mistreatment in the 1930s resulted in great losses for Germany in mathematics, in science, and in other realms. The Germans knew this. Hitler said, “If the dismissal of Jewish scientists means the annihilation of contemporary German science then we shall do without science for a few years.”18

  It is an irrelevant question whether Hitler intended to kill the Jews from the beginning. Certainly to get rid to them was an obsession with him. Once the Nazis came to power they considered resettlement; we do not know how seriously. Extermination – implied by the word Ausrottung used in Mein Kampf- may have been considered all along. In a 1922 conversation recorded in the archives of the Institute fur Zeitgeschichte, Munich, Hitler said, “As soon as I shall have power, I shall have gallows erected, for example in Munich – Jews will be hanged until the last Jew in Munich is exterminated.”19 Even if he did not seriously intend to do this in 1922, usually intentions do not fully develop without some possibility of their actualization.20 After Hitler came to power, both the psychological possibility and the machinery of destruction evolved with the progressively greater mistreatment of Jews.

  What was the cause of Hitler’s personal, deep-seated hatred of Jews? Did it arise from the death of his mother while she was being treated by a Jewish doctor? Was it deep hostility and anger caused by his bad relationship to his father, which found an outlet in anti-Semitism? Was it the virulent anti-Semitism in Vienna while he lived there in his early adulthood?c Did anti-Semitism serve him by elevating his self-esteem and giving a feeling of wholeness to a damaged self? Many attempts at understanding the Holocaust have focused on Hitler’s childhood and personal pathology. The predisposition to fanaticism does have roots in childhood and personality, but once a person makes a fanatic commitment to an ideology, knowledge of the ideology, and not his childhood and personality, is the best guide to understanding his behavior. Moreover, as I noted in Part I, we are concerned less with Hitler himself than with the people who came to follow him.

  There will always be wild ideas and extreme ideologies. For us the question is how the German people came to follow a leader and a party with such ideas, and how they came to participate in their fulfillment. To understand this, we must consider German culture and its influence during both phases of the genocide: the Nazi rise to power and the progressively greater mistreatment of Jews.

  Reasons for Hitler’s appeal: a summary

  Hitler’s ideology had three primary components: (1) racial purity and the racial superiority of Germans, with an especially heavy component of anti-Semitism (and the belief that Germans had to be defended against Jews, who were bent on their destruction); (2) nationalism, an extension of German power and influence, which also promised material well-being expressed in the concept of Lebensraum; and (3) the Führerprinzip (leadership principle), which required unquestioning obedience to Hilter.

  By accepting the racial theory, which identified them as the pure, Aryan race, the Germans could feel inherently superior to others, as individuals and as a people. Hitler also promised Germans superiority as a nation, which appealed to the strong nationalism and the remnants of militarism that existed in Germany.

  Hitler’s movement promised to unite two political trends, socialism and nationalism, with the possibility of uniting groups associated with them. Unity was specifically furthered by the notion of Volk. Meinecke wrote that “within the Nordic race [i.e., “Aryans"], our own German nation was further especially hallowed and in appearance romanticized by the German idea of a people distinguished from other peoples by possessing certain common customs, traditions, and historic past, that is, by the idea of a ‘volk’” (a people).21 The communality of the volk was contrasted with the separateness and competition imposed by capitalism. To a people distressed by inflation, depression, joblessness, and political chaos, togetherness and unity had wide appeal.

  The Nazi “people’s community” also incorporated an idealized recollection of life in the trenches – comradeship, mutual support, shared danger, equality in the face of a hostile environment. Contrasted with this were the polluters of the economic and national life, especially Jews, socialists, and communists. To combat this pervasive pollution, Germans had to subordinate themselves to the community and give up their individuality.

  Hitler promised order and tranquility. The strength and discipline of his followers demonstrated his capacity to deliver. The Nazis provided ideals to live by, guidance, and hope. Finally, Hitler was a charismatic leader to whom Germans could resign their fate, absolving themselves of responsibility for the difficulties of their lives. Following a powerful leader in unity and common cause with others, they could throw off despair.

  * * *

  a According to some, the orderliness of the revolution was peculiarly German and perhaps a source of its relative failure. A respect for authority manifested itself all along. “Zuckmayer was elected to the soviet because the ‘mutineers’ felt it essential that they should be led by an officer. The point is characteristic of the whole German revolution. Time and again we shall see revolutionary spirit qualified by an inherent need for order and decorum.”2

  b Much more could be said about the immense problems in Germany and their immense effects on individual lives. For example, the British and French occupation troops after the war enjoyed humiliating Germans; the unemployment compensation was progressively reduced during the depression, and huge numbers of homeless people lived in tent cities; during several periods there were intense battles in Germany between four private political armies. The decorum of the 1918 revolution had disappeared.

  c During his stay in Vienna, while he struggled and failed at various enterprises (e.g., as an artist), Hitler was surrounded by a society soaked in anti-Semitism. It was pervasive in political life and in the atmosphere of the city. It was at this time that he had the “revelation” of the far-reaching destructiveness of Jews. This probably had a number of psychological benefits, including perhaps a feeling of connection to the world around him, not insignificant for a lonely man.

  8 Preconditions for the Holocaust in German culture

  Nazi ideology matched basic aspects of German culture; the fit made the extreme ideology acceptable to many Germans. When the Nazis took power, their propaganda and actions further shaped German culture.

  No single cultural element can explain genocide. A multiplicity of factors have to coalesce. In the context of intense, persistent life problems, the cultural characteristics that I describe in this chapter made the Germans susceptible to Hitler and the Nazi ideology. An evolution toward destruction followed, without reactions by internal and external bystanders that might have inhibited it.

  The devaluation of Jews

  One precondition for genocide was widespread anti-Semitism. Political anti-Semitism appeared in a number of European countries in the second half of the nineteenth century. An anti-Semitic party was represented in the German parliament and continually tried to pass anti-Semitic legislation. In 1881 an Anti-Semites Petition was presented to Bismarck, with 225,000 signatures, demanding the “emancipation
of the German people from a form of alien domination which it cannot endure for any length of time” and proposing legal steps to restrict the rights of Jews, rights granted under Napoleon in the early nineteenth century.1 In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, racial dogmas identifying superior and inferior social groups provided a link to the Nazi belief in the racial superiority of Aryans.2

  Anti-Semitism increased even before Hitler and his party gained national influence. Jews, among others, were blamed for the loss of the war; cultural devaluation led to their selection when a scapegoat was needed. Anti-Semitism was not itself the cause of the Holocaust, but provided an important precondition for it. Devaluation of Jews and discrimination against them had historical sources and acquired a historical continuity.

  An important source of anti-Semitism was Christian dogma. Jews were regarded as killers of Christ and as unbelievers, doomed to eternal damnation. Their stubborn refusal to be converted and saved was seen as an attack on the Christian religion itself. A central reason for intense early Christian anti-Semitism had to be the need to separate from the old roots of Christianity, in order to create an independent identity.

  Girard shows all this in the words of early Christian writers:

  A Jewish sect at first, Christianity, under the influence of St. Paul, separated rapidly from the synagogue and engaged in a merciless war with it. The Gospel of John, the last to have been written, is by far the most hostile to the Jews, who were held collectively responsible for the death of Christ. The fall of the temple and the dispersion that followed were interpreted as a divine punishment. As Origen wrote, “We can therefore say with all confidence that the Jews will not regain their former position, because they have committed the most abominable of sins, by hatching this plot against the savior of mankind... it was therefore necessary, that the city where Jesus suffered so be completely destroyed, that the Jewish people be driven from their land, and that others be called upon as the blessed Elect.”

  .. .According to the Dayacides, the Jews, as long as they did not renounce their error, must live in a state of eternal disgrace and abasement, therefore proving the veracity of Christianity. The writings of the Byzantine Fathers are particularly hard on them. St. John Chrysostom described them in this way: “Brothel and theatre, the synagogue is also a retreat for brigands and a lair for wild beasts... living by their stomach, mouth always gaping, the Jews do not act any better than pigs and goats, in their lewd grossness and extremes of their gluttony. They only know how to do one thing: stuff themselves and get drunk.” As for the no less venerable Gregory of Nysse, he categorized them as “murderers of the Lord, assassins of prophets, rebellious and hateful toward God,.. .confederates of the devil, race of vipers, informers, calumniators, mentally clouded, pharisaic fermentors, sanhedrin of the devil, cursed, execrable, stoners, enemies of all that is beautiful.” These inflamed declarations, fed by popular sentiment, explained the formation of a Byzantine anti-Semitism whose influence made itself felt far and wide in Eastern Europe.3

  Every Christian child received the teachings about the Jews’ profound criminality, inferiority, and sinful nature. This created a constant potential for active hostility.

  As attempts at conversion failed, various European countries took action against Jews. Some expelled them. Others restricted them to certain living areas (ghettos) and certain professions. The combination of restrictions and special opportunities led Jews to practice professions that brought further harm to them. Finance and moneylending were devalued by Christians for religious reasons and forbidden by church law. Jews were encouraged to work in commerce, banking, and finance, However, people who became indebted to them often resented the debt and felt that Jews were exploiting them, which further fueled anger and resentment. Rulers at times relieved themselves of debts by expelling Jews. Persecuting Jews, depriving them of rights, and taking away their property diminished economic competition, provided immediate profit, and served as revenge for presumed wrongdoing.a

  Jews had different habits, customs, clothing, and external appearance. These differences were partly religious, partly cultural, and partly imposed by authorities. Human beings, as I have noted, fear the different, the unusual, especially when it is prejudged as bad or dangerous. Jews were relatively unaffected by the plague, the Black Death that decimated Europe in 1348, probably because of religious habits of personal hygiene. As a consequence the belief arose that they had caused the plague. Other atrocities were also ascribed to them; it was widely believed that they killed children at Passover to drink their blood.

  Finally, Jewish culture encouraged devotion to learning, industriousness, and other characteristics that helped Jews succeed in spite of adverse circumstances. In an atmosphere of prejudice, envy, and resentment, even such positive characteristics as warm, positive family relations and a relatively peaceful life-style were cast in a negative light.

  Research shows that existing prejudices and stereotypes determine how the behavior of a group’s members is interpreted.6 Stereotypes are highly resistant to change.7 Furthermore, they are self-fulfilling prophecies; people who hold stereotypes behave in a way that evokes the stereotyped response.8

  The very same behavior undergoes a complete change of evaluation in its transition from the ingroup... Abe Lincoln to the out-group Abe Cohen or Abe Kurakawa... Did Lincoln work far into the night? This testifies that he was industrious, resolute, perseverant, and eager to realize his capabilities to the full. Do the out-group Jews or Japanese keep these same hours? This only bears witness to their sweatshop mentality, their ruthless undercutting of American standards, their unfair competitive practices. Is the in-group hero frugal, thrifty, and sparing? Then the out-group victim is stingy, miserly, and penny-pinching.9

  Anti-Semitism was further encouraged by the writings of Martin Luther, whose influence on German culture was enormous. He began with a positive attitude toward Jews, but turned against them when they refused to be converted. His image of the Jews resembles the Nazi image:

  Herewith you can readily see how they understand and obey the fifth commandment of God, namely, that they are thirsty bloodhounds and murderers of all Christendom, with full intent, now for more than fourteen hundred years, and indeed they were often burned to death upon the accusation that they had poisoned water and wells, stolen children, and torn and hacked them apart, in order to cool their temper secretly with Christian blood.

  It is more than fourteen hundred years since Jerusalem was destroyed, and at this time it is almost three hundred years since we Christians have been tortured and persecuted by the Jews all over the world (as pointed out above), so that we might well complain that they had now captured us and killed us – which is the open truth. Moreover, we do not know to this day which devil has brought them here into our country; we did not look for them in Jerusalem.

  Yes, they hold us Christians captive in our country. They let us work in the sweat of our noses, to earn money and property for them, while they sit behind the oven, lazy, let off gas, bake pears, eat, drink, live softly and well from our wealth, sweat, and work. They curse our Lord, to reward us and to thank us. Should not the devil laugh and dance, if he can have such paradise among us Christians, that he may devour through the Jews – his holy ones – that which is ours, and stuff our mouths and noses as reward, mocking and cursing God and man for good measure.10

  Some speculate that the relative assimilation of Jews in Germany in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries contributed to modern anti-Semitism.

  Modern antisemitism was born not from the great difference between groups but rather from the threat of the absence of differences, the homogenization of Western society and the abolition of the ancient social and legal barriers between Jews and Christians.

  Racist passions reach a climax precisely when the psychobiological differences on which they depend no longer exist, having been belied by the facts or reduced to what Freud designates by the term unheimlich, the disquieti
ng strangeness, the mysterious unfamiliar. The racist will then rely on a science that has gone astray to justify biologically the charge of “differentness.” As Jacques Hassoun has noted: “The usurer now becomes the banker, the rag man now becomes the manager of the high fashion store, the grandson of the rabbi now becomes a scholar in secular matters, all this will occupy the foreground of the scene for the racist.”11

  For those who had Luther’s opinion of Jews, remaining separate from them would be a psychological necessity. Separation and control would diminish contamination and danger. Images of contamination and threat were exploited by the Nazis. They adopted nineteenth-century racial dogmas, adapted them, and combined them with the most negative components of the existing image of Jews. Even those Germans who were not consciously anti-Semitic probably picked up enough anti-Semitism from their culture to be susceptible to Nazi propaganda and later to the influence of changing group norms.