REMEMBERING AND FORGETTING
TEACHING LESSON 10

Handout 10A:   German Officers State Their Case, Part I

Handout 10B: Himmler Speaks to the SS Leaders

Handout 10C: Julius Remembers Eichmann

Handout 10D: German Officers State Their Case, Part II

Vocabulary: Nuremberg Trials, Einsatzgruppen, crimes against humanity, kapo, SS

Either the teacher or a student should summarize Overview 7 for students, emphasizing the Nuremberg Trials. Point out that although these trials were unique in having an international panel of judges and prosecutors, they were conducted like other criminal trials. The defendants were charged in written indictments, were represented by counsel of their own choosing, had the right to argue their own cases, and could provide defense witnesses. The accused in the Nuremberg Trials were charged with three types of crimes. One category was “crimes against peace” which included planning and waging wars of aggression and conspiring to commit war crimes. A second category was war crimes. A third category, “crimes against humanity.” included crimes against civilians and groups for which the laws of war offered no protection. Guilt or innocence was determined by a panel of judges from the major Allied powers: the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, and France.

Tell students that they are about to read explanations by two German officers who gave testimony at trials about their reasons for participating in the Holocaust. Before distributing the handouts, the class can speculate briefly on what explanations the men will offer for their behavior. Heinrich Himmler, referred to in Handouts 10A and 10C, was the SS chief with the responsibility for the Final Solution.

Divide the class into pairs. Give each pair a copy of Handout 10A. Assign students Part I of the Handout, the testimony of Otto Ohlendorf. Have one student make a list of the arguments Ohlendorf used to explain his behavior. Have the other student provide a list of counterarguments for each argument stated. Repeat this process with Part II of Handout 10A, the writings of Rudolf Hess. This time, however, have students in each pair switch roles, asking the student who identified arguments to find counterarguments and the student who found counterarguments identify Hess’s explanation for his behavior.

When all pairs have completed the assignment, one member of each pair can share their list of arguments or explanations with the class. (Among the explanations suggested by the readings are the argument that the officers were just following orders, that to disobey would have been unpatriotic, that it was not the responsibility of subordinates to make decisions but only to carry them out, that the military training of German soldiers had not prepared them to make decisions, that the officers did not have enough information to make a decision about the rightness of their actions or involvement.)

List all arguments on the board. Then have the students supply counter-arguments. Conclude by writing the following statements on the board: It is the duty of soldiers to obey all orders. Soldiers give up their right to judge and examine when they enter the service.” Have students debate this statement or write a paper explaining their opinions. Tell students that Otto Ohlendorf was executed in 1951. Rudolf Hess was executed in March 1947. Ask students whether they think German soldiers share the blame for the atrocities committed by the Nazis with the many millions of civilians who stood by neither resisting nor protesting these activities.

Before reading aloud the speech by Heinrich Himmler in Handout 10B, explain that the speech was delivered by Himmler, chief of the elite military corps known as the SS, to top SS leaders at a meeting in Poznan, Poland, in 1943. Himmler had much of the responsibility for carrying out the Final Solution. Because of this, he was one of the most important Nazi leaders. Discuss reactions to Himmler’s speech. Were students surprised by Himmler’s pride in the slaughter? Why or why not? Distribute Handout 10B before continuing discussion. Give students time to read the biographical information about Himmler on the handout. Then ask:

• What subject does Himmler say he is discussing? (the deportation and extermination of European Jews)
• Why does he say that his topic can be talked about openly at that meeting, but not elsewhere? (The people in this group presumably share his belief in the Final Solution and his commitment to the extermination of the Jews.)
• Why does Himmler say that SS leaders should feel proud about their part in the murder of Jews? (They should feel proud because they have remained “decent.” It is a “glorious” page in German history.)

Before continuing discussion of Himmler’s speech, write the word “decent” on the board. Then ask:

• What do you think Himmler means when he says that the people who did this have remained “decent”? (true to their convictions, committed to their racist beliefs, patriotic or loyal to their country)
• How does Himmler’s definition of “decency” differ from what is usually meant by this term? (One definition of “decent” is “morally praiseworthy.” Encourage students to develop their own definitions.)

Conclude this lesson by dividing students into groups and distributing Handouts 10C and 10D. In Handout 10C Julius recalls seeing Adolf Eichmann. This handout offers a view of the Holocaust perpetrators from the perspective of one of their victims. Julius’s account is chilling in its vivid portrayal of Eichmann’s obviously sadistic enjoyment as he watches the execution of five prisoners. Students have read about Julius, a survivor of Auschwitz, in Handout 5D . Before students read 10C , review the earlier account of Julius’s concentration camp experiences.

After reading Julius’s account of his encounter with Eichmann, distribute Handout 10D. Have students answer the questions on the handout and then compare Julius’s description of Eichmann’s behavior with Eichmann’s own justification of his actions.

• How does Julius’s eyewitness account refute Eichmann’s assessment of his behavior?
• How does it damage Eichmann’s credibility?

Working in groups, have students prepare a written or an oral response that a survivor such as Julius might have given to Eichmann’s plea for leniency and to his statement that he was only obeying orders.

Connect to Civics: As a class, create a Charter of Rights for members of the armed forces. Identify rights and responsibilities of soldiers. Students can define what they believe to be the obligations of soldiers to carry out orders with which they disagree. They can also decide if soldiers will be held responsible for carrying out orders that are later judged to be criminal acts.

Interested students might research and report to the class on more recent trials of Nazi war criminals, the explanations given by Serbian soldiers for their participation in “ethnic cleansing” during the hostilities in the former Yugoslavia, or the defense of Lieutenant William Cally for his behavior at My Lai during the Vietnam War. Students can consult the Reader’s Guide and the Internet for articles on the trial of Adolf Eichmann or Klaus Barbie. Others might find out about the work of famous Nazi hunters such as Simon Wiesenthal or Beate Klarsfeld.

Connect to the Internet: In April 1997 PBS aired a two–hour television docu-mentary, The Trial of Adolf Eichmann. In conjunction with the program, PBS and ABC News created an outstanding website ( www.remember.org/eichmann ) which provides excellent materials on the trial proceedings as well as classroom activities and other resources for learning more about the Eichmann trial.

Published in cooperation with the North Carolina Council on the Holocaust
Copyright © 2002 by the North Carolina Council on the Holocaust. Updated 2005.
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/holocaust_council/