Ex-Auschwitz SS guard charged in Germany

Certainly, there is no way to justify the actions of those who ran the camps and many of those who worked there. However, in a military or paramilitary organization is not "just carrying out orders" a valid defense for those on the lower end of the food chain? My understanding is that membership in the Allemaigne (?sp) SS as opposed to the Waffen SS was purely voluntary. That being said, did one necessarily know for what one was volunteering, at least in the early stages of the conflict? I can imagine any number of reasons why the sentence given would be completely justified. I can imagine a few for which it would not be. Does simply having worn a black uniform and standing in a guard tower justify punishment?

 

Did they let them "just stand guard in a tower" though. Again my impression is that there was at least some pressure for everyone to get their hands dirty. One could I suppose volunteer for combat and I suspect that would be honored within a reasonable time frame. That's not guaranteed of staying clear of the atrocities though.

 

I don't know what level of "participation" was required at the camps; thus my uncertainty as to how appropriate the court's decision was. It is something of an ethical dilemma. I can't condone collective guilt or guilt by association as a norm. However, the Holocaust was by no means a "norm". The enormity of the crime tends to overwhelm other consideration; and understandably so.

We take it as a given in the West that someone in uniform has no obligation to obey an unlawful order. I don't know that, legally, this was much of a consideration in the Third Reich. If one's superior gave a distasteful/illegal order (and keep in mind that what occurred in Germany was viewed as legal under German law) I don't know that this would be a consideration in the defense of whoever disobeyed. I could hang a Heydrich with a clean conscience. Punishing the man in question is not so clear cut. Perhaps his sentence was much better than he deserved; then again it's possible that what he did doesn't justify what has happened now.

 

I was under the impression as well that 'camp guards' were typically unfit for combat duty (thus being camp guards). You go through basic training etc etc and then get assigned to a role...cook, infantry, etc....so maybe they had no option but to be a guard in this case? Soldiers don't exactly get to pick their assignments.

 

One of the original Waffen SS divisions, Totenkpof if memory serves, was made up of camp guards. So, at least in the early stages, fitness for combat was not a consideration for duty in a camp. As the war progressed, I don't know if this persisted. I believe (and will gladly sit corrected if such is not the case) that in some instances members of the Waffen SS were assigned camp duty while recuperating from combat wounds.

 

That's a valid argument and, given the enormity of the crime, one that's difficult to argue against. Personally, I'm still bothered by the notion of collective guilt. I have a difficult time accepting that it's okay to punish someone simply for wearing a suit and being at a specific place at a specific time. As I noted above, though, the nature of the holocaust takes it out of the realm of "the norm". Whether deserved or not, punishing this man will make no difference. What is important is that what he participated in, at whatever level, should not be forgotten.

 

That's what trials are for.

.

 

I read a while back that "many" guards got pissed ...really pissed on a regular basis to deal with what they were doing...anybody else heard this?

 

I have long thought about this very situation, and I have never come up with a solution. It's difficult to know the circumstances and all of the evidence to convict him correctly. I'll let the man upstairs figure that all out, in the meantime, I'd still lock em up.

 

I've never heard that specifically CAC, the only 'good' thing I've heard of Concentration camp guards is that some of them didn't participate in physical, and in rare cases both physical and verbal abuse of prisoners, and just stayed quiet.

 

This was in reference to the guards that ushered people into gas chambers...got smashed every night - to be able to live with themselves.

 

"upon entry to the Wehrmacht"

not trying to pick nits just genuinely curious. Were any of the staff at the camps not SS members?

 

From what my fallible memory suggest yes. There were some civilian staff and even some inmates on staff. I'm not sure whether or not there was any connection with the Heer my impression was that the Gestapo and other such made at least token appearances. Was the SS part of the Wehrmacht? Obviously I'm not very confident that any of the above is accurate.

 

Once upon a time I knew these things but memory is not my best feature and all of my references are at home. I should have phrased my query better. There were civilians on staff at the camps. What I meant to ask was the affiliation of the uniformed staff members. I don't believe the SS was ever considered a part of the Wehrmacht although some Waffen SS units and, IIRC, Einsatzgruppen came under Wehrmacht control in some instances. I'll gladly sit corrected if someone here has a better memory.

 

First of all, I doubt there is any evidence, either testimony or documents, that can shed light on any of your very good questions. While understanding and sharing the revulsion towards deeds of the Holocaust, I'd be inclined to not prosecute if he shows any genuine remorse and stayed away from any post-war Nazi or uber-right activity.

Speaking of accountability, why is it just "small fry" Germans get prosecuted? How about the members of the Malice in France who shepherded the Jews in southern France to their deaths? or the Lithuanians who actually did the trigger-pulling in some mass executions in the East? or even them, in several countries, who made the decision not to grant a certain freighter filled with Jews asylum? Aren't these people also just as much accomplices as our little tower guard?

 

At this point I'd think only the "small fry" are left. Someone who was say 20 in 1938 would be 100 today. Anyone with any seniority would likely be well over 100 by now. Given the stresses involved their chance of still being alive is pretty low.

The question of why they weren't held accountable decades ago is another matter.

 

The SS and Waffen SS were under one umbrella and soldiers could and did transfer between the two wings. If this guy tried to transfer out into the fighting wing that would be an affirmative defense, but he would still need to stand trial and make that case.
It isn't a matter of whether he should automatically go to prison, it's a question of whether he should stand trial. He was a guard at a concentration camp, so of course he should stand trial.


.

 

I wouldn't argue with a trial if there's some question as to what he did. I apparently misread something along the way and thought he had been convicted simply for being a guard. My bad.