Let's explore the interpersonal dynamics at play in this reenactment. Clearly many of the attendees of the Wannsee Conference disagreed or were uncomfortable with some of the proceedings; why then do they not stand up to Heydrich at the end? How do you assess their legal or moral responsibility? Feel free to focus on one or two of the specific characters you followed in your notes. It has been observed that the conclusions of the meeting seem predetermined. Why (or why not)? Why have the meeting if the question has already been answered?
Don't try to comment on everything, but focus on something interesting to you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I found the dynamics of the characters in the movie to be very interesting; there was a very clear cut hierarchy of command in the room. Even the two men that strongly opposed the idea of exterminating all the Jews from Europe gave in when the man dictating the meeting threatened them. Also there were quite a few other officers in the room that were very quick on their compliments to the high general and were set out to please him. Though some people in the room remained neutral most seemed to fall within those two categories. Really the only man that had power in the room was the facilitator, and though the man to his right that hosted the meeting seemed to have a great deal of power, I believe it only seemed that way because he was the biggest of the brownnosers.
ReplyDeleteIt’s not a very fair system, none of them really had a say in the matter. Some of them were willing to “suck up” to the higher officers by instantly giving their support, while others who opposed were easily swayed. The decision was made before the meeting even occurred, they only needed the men to agree to the proposal and make them come up with the idea on their own. It seemed that legal decisions were not made democratically at all, or even decided by delegates because people lower down were in fear of opposing their superiors, which gives them too much power.
-Sam
As Sam noted, the hierarchy in the movie was obvious, and Heydrich’s opinion was the only one that mattered. Although he had the same official rank as men from different departments, he was unmistakably in charge. Those who might offer opposition were taken aside during breaks and won over by Heydrich, by whatever means he deemed best. In the case of Lange, Heydrich approached the young soldier and appealed to his sense of duty. Before speaking to Heydrich alone, Lange had shown some discomfort, noting that the “evacuations” were actually executions, and saying that he “just [thought] it [would be] helpful to know what words mean.” After his talk with the general, Lange said that he would not question orders. A more obvious opponent of Heydrich’s solution, Kritzinger was not won over by conversation. In his case, Heydrich resorted to threats. Here addressing Kritzinger away from the group meant that he would have no protection when Heydrich extracted a promise of cooperation.
ReplyDeleteBy isolating individuals from the group and picking away the opposition one person at a time, Heydrich ensured that the meeting would go exactly as planned. Alone, his opponents had no chance. Kritzinger questioned why he was at the meeting (more than once), and Heydrich replied that he did not underestimate Kritzinger’s influence. Still, the general added that “You [Kritzinger] would be a hard man to bring down, but not impossible.” The general did not need the support of any one man in the room. It was just more convenient for him to have it.
As Carolyn noted above Heydrich did not necessarily require the support of any man in the room, the gas chambers were already under construction with the SS in total control. However, it seemed that the conference had been called as more of a power play on the part of the SS, in an attempt to make all divisions of the Nazi government aware that the SS was in fact in control and to be making the final decisions. The members of the conference seemed to be aware the SS was a major power, but had underestimated the extent of the SS’s influence. In the case of Kritzinger, he was initially appalled at the beginning of the conference and continually voiced that he had “received assurances from the Fuhrer” and the Jews were to be given hospitable living conditions. When Heydrich finally came out and told him that the Fuhrer “would continue to deny” the fact the Jews were to be “annihilated,” Kritzinger falls into a grudging acceptance that he cannot do anything more. I found Stuckart’s reasons against the SS’s proposed final solution to be rather chilling, in that he did not oppose the plan because of the deaths involved, but for the legal difficulties it would present to the courts. As he explained when rebuking Klopfer sterilization “acknowledges them as part of our species, but does not allow them to be part of our race,” and allows the courts to be free from having to process papers in relation to death certificates and inheritances.
ReplyDeleteAs Stephanie said, the decision of the meeting was confirmed before the meeting took place, and it was more of a chance to show the members that the SS was in control. From the very beginning Heydrich had the most control. Before he arrived, the mood in the room was much more friendly and casual. However, as soon as he come, the meeting revolved completely around him. From there, the tension between all of the colleagues was much thicker. It was as though many of them were trying not to step on each others feet, while others went out of their way to stir trouble. To me, Stuckhart had the most interesting role in terms of his journey throughout the meeting. He was the one who was most notably struggling through the meeting. At times he was pained by the things being said, and at others he could not contain his disagreement with what was being said. Though Heydrich was constantly in power, Stuckhart definitely did a job in causing an uncomfortable feeling throughout the room. His principles of law always seemed to make their way back to the surface of issues and let the other members of the meeting to consider all options. It is his potency that causes some of the other members of the government to question his “like” for the Jews, thinking he was disagreeing because he wanted to protect the Jews. Kritzinger was the other member of the meeting most like Struckhart. He had very different ideas than Heydrich but could not add his opinion without being attacked.
ReplyDeleteHannah P
As stated above, Heydrich was in complete control, and as Carolyn noted, “The general did not need the support of any one man in the room. It was just more convenient for him to have it.” I would also like to add, and possibly disagree by saying, that Nazis are commonly considered to be highly efficient, so this meeting would not have happened were it not vital to the plan. This meeting was vital because while the general did not need the support of the individuals in the meeting, Germany and the Nazis needed the unity of all factions. Heydrich needed the officers to feel that they were openly agreeing and that it was just as much their solution as it was Heydrich’s. Heydrich and the SS have absolute power at the end of the meeting because he was able to convince each officer of the plan. The meeting happened because the SS needed absolute power, and any dissent could lead to disaster. Also, while this is likely not an outcome the SS considered, holding this meeting deflects blame to the officers in the meeting. Many were punished, some were executed, all in official courts. Without this meeting, whoever truly planned the ‘Final Solution’ would be more liable. The more people involved in making the decision, the less liable the individuals are. The result of the meeting was that, although guided by Heydrich toward a predetermined solution, each of the officers reached the same conclusion, making them all equally liable, and thus deserving of equal punishment.
ReplyDeleteLike everyone here who has posted we all agree that there were many uncomfortable situations between all the men who attended the Wannsee Conference. This meeting was held by Heydrich who, as Carolyn says “[a]lthough he had the same official rank as men from different departments, he was unmistakably in charge.” By the end of the meeting some the men “agreed” with the final solution even though deep down they really did not. We wonder why they did not just stand up to Heydrich, knowing that he had similar rank to them. I think the answer to that question is the same answer as to the question that is commonly asked; why didn’t the Jews stand up to the Nazi’s? Clearly the Jews out numbered the Nazi’s, but they just could not stand up against them. This is also similar to our discussion to the men’s actions in Ordinary Men. We wondered why the men did not stand up against Hitler if they really felt that murder was morally wrong. I think these men at the meeting were in the same situation, they could not gather enough courage to stand up to Heydrich. They were pressured to go along with what the others thought. Even though Kritzinger and Stuckart made arguments to what Heydrich thought they were just not strong enough. However if they grouped together it might have worked. Just as if one Jew stood up to a Nazi he/she would have been shot down but if all the Jews grouped together they could have made a difference.
ReplyDelete-Britt
I agree with many of the comments above that the degree of authority truly played a huge role in the discussion. While reading many of the comments I kept referring back to the obidience to authority theory. It seems as though even the highest ranking officials were afraid to speak their mind in fear of being rejected by Heydrich. This is much like the book Ordinary Men, where many of the troops were afraid to speak their minds or back out of a task simply because they were afraid of being hurt or rejected. I agree with what Britt said; that many of the men agreed with the final solution however deep down they really did not agree but they were just too afraid to speak up. Sadly some men were notciably upset by some of the desicions, like the man in the bathroom who seemed very anxious and unpleased with Heydrich's desicions. I also agree with Britt that if they all stood up and said how they actually felt than the outcome would have been different.
ReplyDelete-cherelle
some of my post got cut when I copied and pasted so here is the rest...
ReplyDeleteFor example, one man who continuosly proposed his ideas of the "four-year plan" was shot down and ignored time and time again; not one person would listen to his ideas. Even during the meeting, the man proposed the idea once again and Heydrich simply ignored his comments and talked louder as to belittle him. I feel that some ideas were simply not said because of the fear they would feel stupid in front of the higher ranking officers.
-Cherelle
I saw this meeting as a bit of a formality; clearly Heydrich knew exactly how he wanted the “Final Solution” to go and had even started executing parts of the plan before the meeting took place. I agree with everyone that he had no intention of seriously considering any of the other officer’s ideas unless they coincided with his strict plans to systematically and efficiently execute all of the Jews in Europe. However, I think that Heydrich was rather lucky with the results of this meeting. I have to respectfully disagree with Andy that this meeting was “vital to the [Nazi’s] plan.” No changes were made at this meeting; Heydrich was not open to new ideas and responded to a lack of support for his plan by select members of the committee by subtly threatening them and making his power over them clear. The place where these men were called together seemed almost more like a social gathering of powers rather than a “vital” meeting to be held. Of course the various powers and departments in Germany’s government had to be informed of the plan, but it was not crucial that an informative meeting be held with the façade of one that was open to debate. It seems that the Nazi party held this meeting and probably many others to keep up their act of being civilized, concerned with the thoughts of all in the party and there to do good for all of the true German people. In reality, though, this meeting was just another one of the sly moves that they pulled among the many secrets and lies that they told throughout the course of their reign over Germany and other countries in Europe.
ReplyDelete--Deirdre
I found that Heydrich seemed to be the clear leader of the group. It seemed that everyone else had the task of no getting him angry. He had a comment for everyone and a quick-witted comeback for anyone who opposed his ideas. Also, I found it strange that people opposed some plans for extermination. I never actually knew that Nazi leaders had a conversation about how they planned on murdering thousands of Jews. However, Heydrich’s ideas were the ones that were actually going to take place, the meetings, as Hannah said, were there for show. Struckhart and Kritzinger were ridiculed and they received tongue-lashings not only from Heydrich but also from other members of the convention.
ReplyDeleteMy question is why did the members feel so threatened by Heydrich and the SS? They all had similar ideas and thoughts about killing Jews but they seemed to ask to take a different route (ie sterilization, shootings). After they had received the answer of why they could not take that route, the men felt threatened and hardly commented on anything thereafter.
I agree with Deirdre that nothing that happened in this meeting changed the plans of the Nazis. They knew exactly what they were going to do long before the meeting. The meeting may have been a way of telling everyone what they intended to do as a small warning to the leaders though.
-Matt
ReplyDeleteJust as everyone has noticed, I as well noticed how it was easy to see who was in charge. I thought it was interesting how even though Heydrich had claimed everyone was there as an equal, clearly that was not the case. To answer Matt's question, I think the reason why they were all afraid of him was because of the words he was using. He would say things like "evacuation", when he meant mass murder, and I think it frightened the men to know that what they had all been talking about for such a long time, will actually be happening. Also, the men probably thought they were going to evacuate the Jews, or put them into good use and not mix with the general population, rather than full on murdering them. I feel that the majority of the men became more threatened when Heydrich was blatantly threatening their jobs if they did not cooperate.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Deirdre and Matt have both said. I think that the men thought they had more of a say, however, during the discussion than they did. Heydrich was the one who led the discussion and practically demanded that everything that he came up with be followed through.
-Rachel G
Since was absent for the movie, I am responsible for summarizing the discussion. Ultimately, it seems that the dynamic of the group is dictated by power. I definitely agree that the conclusion of the meeting was decided of and that it was just a matter of getting all the officers to agree to it. At the beginning of the movie the person organizing the meeting says that it will not take more than an hour. This is clearly not enough time to decide what the Final Solution would be. This demonstrates that the meeting was just a power play. Heydrich was asserting his power over the rest of the members to make them agree with him. The meeting was also asserting power over the rest of the Nazi Party by making the decision official. I was very interested by Rachel’s comment that Heydrich said that they were all equal. This reflects the pretense of the meeting. The meeting is just for appearances, as is Heydrich’s attitude during the meeting. The fact that he convinces people during breaks in the meeting represents that the meeting must appear to be real, and not just a pretense. From what I have learned from the blog discussion, the men are also aware of this. When their ideas are shot down they realize that there is a specific answer that Heydrich is looking for. They stop participating because they realize that Heydrich will get the people to agree only on the solution he wants them to agree on.
ReplyDelete~Amanda