On Thursday we traveled for over an hour by local
train to get to Sachsenhausen, which was a concentration camp from
approximately 1938 to 1945. It was an experience I will never forget (and not
just because of the crazy rainstorm we were caught up in). I had learned, I
thought, a lot about WWII during my time in school, but actually visiting the
former site of one of the camps really opened my eyes a little bit to the
realities of concentration camps and the horrors of that war.
What matched my expectations
When we arrived at Sachsenhausen there was a lot about
it that surprised me. First of all, this camp was very close to a residential
area; the neighborhood has existed since before the war, and stayed after it.
Most of my mental images of concentration camps have been those of a compound
surrounded by barbed wire in the middle of nowhere, but that was not the case
at all. The ground of the former camp ended just a few hundred feet from where
the neighborhood streets began. I was really surprised by this, but when our
tour guide explained the context of the camp, it made sense. We learned that
the predecessor to Sachsenhausen – the Oranienburg camp - was used to house
political prisoners as a scare tactic to others, to crush the political
opposition. In addition, Sachsenhausen was a place where political allies and
guests were invited to view the camp that was billed as a center for “political
reeducation”, so the Nazis wouldn’t want it to look like a prison. There are
other elements of the camp that connect to this; the triangle design of the
camp that is less functionality and more aesthetic, the former fountain and
swan pond, the places where flowers would have been planted near the offices of
SS officers.
This was one of the most horrifying parts of the camp,
to me, because these beautiful things were so close to the horrifying
mistreatment and torture occurring just on the other side of a gate that reads “Work
Brings Freedom”, which we all know is the opposite of the truth. For some
reason, the thought and care that was taken to create propaganda for the Nazi
party at every turn was something I didn’t really consider when I was initially
learning about WWII. My focus was always on how the war was industrialized, how
the Nazi regime took the elements of human efficiency and advancement and used
those techniques to exploit, torture and murder other humans. Due to hindsight,
I think, we never think about accepted the Nazi why people accepted the Nai
regime, or went along with it, or why people were content to sit back, or just
assumed the persecution of political prisoners, Jews, Roma and all those
considered “less than human” was not as bad as it actually was. I always heard
this very simple narrative of “the Nazis were evil, and everyone who let WWII
happen was stupid”. But now, with this added layer of propaganda and trickery,
even at concentration camps where people were being worked to death, tortured
and murdered, I think the story is much more complex. It’s likely that people
who would have otherwise gotten involved didn’t think that their intervention
was necessary. Or, some people may have used this as a cop-out, going along
with the flimsy narrative of reeducation to avoid persecution themselves.
The visit to Sachsenhausen also gets me thinking about
the German identity, and of the collective guilt that is connected to the war
(if you assume that there is a collective guilt, instead of responsibility).
Both of the lecturers at Humboldt and the information at the places we visited
emphasized that every German was connected to the war in some way; they
themselves fought in the war or they had family in the war, or they opposed the
war and were persecuted. In addition, there is the feeling of the collective
guilt that the people of Germany allowed the Nazi regime to take over, to
create the Holocaust, and the guilt that many participated in the Holocaust. I
wonder if this layer of propaganda and advertisement to mask the true horrors
of concentration camps adds to that guilt or lessens it. Should the German
guilt then be lessened, because there was a distortion of what was occurring in
these camps? Or should this add more weight to the guilt, because the people
were too complicit with a flimsy story of reeducation? How do the German people
wrestle with this layer of the Holocaust? I think this is a topic worth
investigating, and I want to learn more about the nuances and complexities of
the people involved in the Second World War from Germany. For this reason, this
week I will definitely be visiting the Topography of Terror.
No comments:
Post a Comment