I was disturbed when I read the phrase “retaliation quota of 200” (101). To them, killing seemed like something to do. It was a task they had to do, kill two hundred people. The shooting of the Jews seemed so meaningless when viewed like this. They were not dead because they did something wrong but because someone needed to fulfill a quota. It was truly random too because it said they grabbed anyone regardless of race or sex. It was as if they did this so much that it no longer bothered them that they were bringing people to get killed just because.
It was slightly comforting to see that some people drew a line. They did not lose all their morality like Major Trapp who tried to justify his actions to himself. The fact that he felt the need should have been a warning sign that what he was doing was wrong and should stop. After this event, Lieutenant Buchmann asked to be removed from Jewish action. It shows that at least some people can draw the boundary line. Another officer said that he disapproved of the Jewish action and did not bring Jews to where they would be shot. This was a bit mind blowing to me because never once before I read this account did I think that some of these officers would be against Jewish action. I figured that if they were there, they must have been crazy SS fanatics who wanted the Jews dead. As Browning brings up, even though they evaded participation, it does not mean that did not impede this task. I am glad that Buchmann made it known to people that he was against what was happening to the Jews. He was the catalyst for others to say that they were not willing to continue this anymore. Yet, it is discouraging to note that they relieved these men from this duty because they know there was “no shortage of men willing to do the murderous job at hand” (103). That sentence is so much the more disturbing because it seems as though people can resist but it was okay since there are more people willing to do the deed. They make it sound like they have an endless supply of murderers. How can a society that was once democratic turn into a society where there is an endless supply of citizens willing to commit meaningless murder?
All of the men in the battalion had the potential to act as murderers or not, and Browning makes it clear that the majority did. There was not one single characteristic or motivation that greatly separated killers from those who evaded personally firing a gun at a Jew. And those who did avoid participating blatant murder did nothing to stop the killings, despite their knowledge of what was happening. They still upheld a system of mass killing. What enabled ordinary men to act in such atrocious ways lies largely, though not entirely, in the "traditions of racism" and "the siege mentality of war" that Germany was steeped in at this time (189). During such times, there is a greater polarization between enemy and friend, between safe and unsafe, and there is a greater potential to capitalize on fear in order to manipulate populations. What is unnerving about such a claim is that many societies today still exist under such conditions. The mass killings carried out by the Reserve Police Battalion 101 are not historically isolated. We must still face the ugly parts of human nature that allow such things to happen.
ReplyDelete