Someone who was in a concentration camp must have turned out to be a murderer themselves. Are there any known stories?
I really don’t like where this is going…
Since “terrible” is subjective, let’s move this to IMHO.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Even should this be the case, so what?
What exactly is your point?
I can’t imagine the motivation for this question, but I find it perverse.
Like others, I have to ask, “So what?” and “What’s the point?”
And I too do not like where this is going.
Vera Reitzer entire family was killed at Aushwitz and she herself only survived due to her group execution being called off due to them (IIRC) running out of gas.
She was later one of the foremost defenders of the aparthiedi regime* in South Africa.
Millions of people were killed. Millions survived the camps. Amongst such a large group you’ll find every type of person imaginable. Doubtless many victims and survivors in the Cambodian, Rawandan and Balkan genocide were evil people. Killing them was still wrong.
*The South African Jewish community was an interesting case study. Of the “white” communities in opposition to Aparthied, they were the most active, at Mandela’s trial, all non non-black defendants were Jewish. But some really infleuntual pro aparthied types were also Jews.
I look forward to the follow-up thread discussing nazis with a heart of gold.
AK84 has the right of it. Out of such a huge group of people, a certain number of them would turn out to be violent, hateful, greedy, etc. just like the Boy Scouts or firemen or, you know, PEOPLE.
I’m willing to hypothesize, without proof, that survivors of the concentration camps might engage in antisocial behavior at a higher rate than the population as a whole due to the long-term effects of horrific and inconceivable psychological trauma.
There are a number of Nazis among the Righteous Among the Nations, but just because they risked their lives to save others does not automatically make them saints in all aspects of their lives. There are also Nazis alleged to have been wonderful parents and kinds to puppies and kittens, but again, that does not mean they’re nice as overall people. You can do a wonderful thing and still be a dreadful human being, those are not mutually exclusive things.
Let me chime into the chorus that I’m not sure why the OP would ask such a question, possible motivations that come to mind seem sketchy, and, again, among millions of survivors one would expect to find every imaginable type of human being.
I propose that this thread be closed. It’s beyond offensive.
It shouldn’t. I mean It will, cause well the mods will be too scared not to.
It should stay open.
What purpose could it possibly serve? I mean, is it necessary to out the holocaust survivor with unpaid parking tickets?
As GoodOmens alludes to, it could be a fair topic of discussion to investigate what effects the trauma of the Holocaust caused survivors. I imagine it’s been studied by someone. On the other hand, if the topic is intended to explore whether any of the people targeted were “terrible people,” then I would agree with those who say the topic is unworthy of discussion here and no good could come of it.
Personally, I’ve only met a few concentration camp survivors. They were all lovely people.
An old Jewish friend of mine (“old” as in her age) once was telling me about a dude she knew who was a Holocaust survivor. She remarked that he had a really nasty personality. She then speculated that his nasty personality might have been due to unresolved trauma caused by the Holocaust. I gotta imagine that if this is true, then quite a few survivors would be similarly “nasty”. Perhaps they wouldn’t rise to the level of “terrible people”, but they probably wouldn’t be the kind of folks you’d want to have a beer with.
But I agree with other posters that this is a very weird question.
Jews weren’t the only people sent to concentration camps. The Nazis had a whole list of people they wanted to eliminate: Slavs, Romani, Jehovah’s Witnesses, blacks, homosexuals, mentally ill. And, relevant to this thread, criminals. Anyone with a persistent criminal record could be sent to a concentration camp. I think it’s safe to assume that a significant number of these criminals could be defined as “terrible people”. (Although still not as terrible as the Nazis.)
The Nazis swept up entire groups indiscriminately. I was just wondering if any among the numbers that they persecuted later did something unrelated and notorious.
For example, if a Jeffrey Dahmer type had been in Germany and a Jew, Slav, etc. I do not think the concentration camp experience would have changed his behavior. But it would be a part of his history. He would have been a concentration camp survivor and also a serial killer.
I’m sure there were people negatively influenced by the awful concentration camp experience that they changed for the worse. That is tragic, but not really why I asked. This is more of an ironic coincidental situation.
Even if the Nazis swept up a Dahmer accidentally, they wouldn’t deserve any credit for it, since they would be persecuting him for unrelated, wrong reasons.
If this example offends, I could ask the same sort of question about 9-11, or someone not dying because they overslept and missed catching a flight that crashed. Or a Dahmer type being killed in some unrelated terrorist act, then it being found out what he did. It is just a question, due to the unfortunately large number of victims and the ironic juxtaposition that created the question for me.
Actually, I’d think that a lot of the survivors were ‘terrible’ people.
Remember that the kapo’s who actually ran the camps for the Nazi’s & did much of the dirty work were prisoners, and they got extra rations & special treatment – so they would be more likely to survive. So does working for the Nazi’s to help run the camps that are killing your fellow prisoners make you a ‘terrible’ person? When the alternative is you become one of those killed?
It’s a stupid question. Of course, the obvious answer is “yes.” As has been stated, take any loose association of 1000s of people, and some of them will be people that have or will rape, murder, rob, or otherwise do some nefarious deeds.
There’s no interest or even real irony, it’s just an obvious fact about human nature and odds.
If a specific example is hard to find, it’s only because how mundane and unremarkable it is: “known holocaust survivor found to have committed murder.” “known 9/11 survivor beats his wife.” I mean . . . what’s the point?
Well duh.
Of course. It is not possible to have any group of that size without having some terrible people in it. The same thinking holds with the nazi’s. There were loads of members that were probably wonderful people. They weren’t all members by choice, didn’t join for ideological reasons and didn’t necessarily share the ethos of the hierarchy so it shouldn’t be surprising that they weren’t all monsters.
Thing is though, none that tells you anything of any great interest. It is exactly what you’d expect from any large groups of disparate human beings.
Heck, even if presented with info that the survivors of the holocaust had a higher percentage of terrible people than the general population (note: I am not claiming that is the case ) would we be at all surprised? Would that be an astounding finding? Brutality breeding brutality isn’t a shock.