Dialogue, Readings and Assignments for Lexington High School's course
Sunday, November 9, 2008
America and the Holocaust
According to a growing number of historians, the United States and FDR watched the extermination of the Jews with such a total indifference that they were actually accomplices--Is this true?
Please write a journal-length response to this statement/question. You may use ideas from this as a way to brainstorm arguments for your upcoming essay.
54 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I would say, that this is very true indeed. During the time of 1932-1944 happened some contradictory things that I seem strange to me. First of all, even if I try my best, I just cannot understand the American immigration policy. It is actually a joke to talk about "real" Americans, because every inhabitant of the US, except the Native Americans, is a kind of an immigrant. Even today, most of the people I met in LHS are kids who came from Europe or Asia. So i can't get the idea and the difference between immigrants in '32-'45 because what WAS or IS the real difference between an born American and an immigrated American? The second thing is that I became a little bit angry when i read the last sentence of the essay. "We destroyed them"... Yeah, you did, but when?? It was very late, and this must not have been like that. I know, that I'm actually the least person as an Austrian, whose country was part of the killing machinery, who should be allowed to blame America in any way. But still, I think that the holocaust might have killed less people when the Americans reacted faster. Another point that I can't retrace is the argument that the bombing of Ausschwitz would have killed a lot of innocent people, or that the railroads would have been built up very fast again. This might be true, but the Germans had hardly enough money, time and power to rebuild the railroads. And since we know, that the killing of Jews was a "moral struggle" for the German soldiers, we can assume that the killing speed, if you want to name it like that, would have been slower if the railroads would have been bombed. And I have to add one question which you should think of if you say, that innocent people would have been killed too: Why bombed the US two Japanese Cities (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) where probably more innocent people were killed and this without any obvious reason at all? This bombs were not necessary, but the Ausschwitz bombing might have been. The American government made one very bad statement: The morality is less important than the opinion of the masses. DId they just didn't intervene because of the threat of loosing the next elections? Did they choose to do nothing so that they can't be impeached? Did the US learn from this? The worst thing is, it didn't. Because if they did, they would have helped the Rwandan people to fight the genocide. I think this would be understandable, and nobody should blame the US, if you say the US doesn't want to be part of the world politics and is just a little country nobody cares of (The part Austria plays in world politics are so tiny so that some people have never ever heard of Austria before) . But the American foreign policies kind of pretend that the American military actions are for the greater good and that you just help weaker countries and prevent mass murders. But where were you at the Rwandan Genocide? Did you win the Vietnam war? Why were Gulf wars necessary? Is the US the defender or the aggressor? Saddam Hussein was made to the dictator of the Iraq by, let's guess.... the US... The government has to decide and has to be honest, do you want to be a country, which can seen as a guardian angel in times of terror and genocide, or as a country which just fights for their own interests? But the way how it is today is not honest and very confusing.
I wouldn't say that the U.S. was necessarily an accomplice in the Holocaust, but I do believe that they helped play at least a small part in the extermination of the Jews. The U.S knew what was going on in Germany, they knew how what the Germans were doing. I can understand that changing something like an immigration policy may be harder than it sounds, especially when there are people who don't want it to change, but if the U.S. had just opened up their borders, then maybe the number of lives lost wouldn't have been so high. FDR did seem to try to do something in the begining, but was that really all he could have done? Could he have tried harder? Then once the U.S. found out more about the "Final Solution" they finally chose to try to do something. I think this is where they made a pretty lousy choice. They thought that by winning the war they will save the Jews. I guess I can see how they thought this, but after thinking about it that doesn't seems like the best solution. I personally think they should have focused more on trying to liberate the concentration camps, or try to sabotage the trains, to try to stall Jews from being deported to death camps. Then there's the debate on bombing Auschwitz. I can understand why they didn't want to bomb the camp directly. They didn't want to end up killing all the innocent people inside of it, yes they would probably die anyway while in that camp, but if there was a possibility that they could survive they didn't want to kill them. But they could have bombed the railways that led to Auschwitz. It may have not have permanently stopped the deportation of Jews there, but it would have at least have bought the U.S. some time to think of another plan. I think that the U.S. could have done so much more to help the Jews of Europe, but since they did try to do something (even though they sure took a while to actually do it) I wouldn't say they were exactly accomplices.
I would say that it was a horrible thing to do, not helping the needs of the weak. The U.S. could have been less restrictive of their immigration laws and lower the number of casualties, however I do not believe that the U.S. was in any way an accomplice to the Holocaust. For one, they did not commit any type of murder towards the Jews, despite the vast majority of the population being anti-Semites. Although one could argue the beliefs of anti-Semitism was the leading cause of the lack of military aid, another could argue that there is very big difference between believing and doing it. In every human being there is a moral standard and that standard is what keeps us as human beings to prevent doing what we know is morally wrong. As for the bombing of Hiroshimi and Nagasaki, the U.S. was finding a quick and easy alternative to ending the war with Japan as quickly as possible. In my opinion, this decision was very irresponsible and very inhumane. Not only did the atomic bomb kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, it also left the land in ruins. It was too unsanitary to live in due to the aftermath of the bomb(radiation).
I do not think this is true. I am sure the U.S. talked with the Nazis in order to stop these atrocities they were committing. Even though words did not solve much in this war, the U.S. at least tried to do something. Roosevelt did not want to invade Germany because the U.S. had weak troops and weaponry. If Roosevelt decided to invade Nazi Germany the U.S. forces would rout before the Garman Panzer brigades and Tiger tanks. U.S. tanks could not match up to the most Feared, German Tiger tank with its awesome fire power and thick armor. Plus the U.S. was also trying to recover from the Grate Depression. The depression hit the U.S. pretty hard. In order for the U.S. to become involved in WWII an axis country would have to attack the U.S. on our soil. Therefore Roosevelt and the U.S. are not accomplices of the Holocaust. They had every right to stay out of this conflict. If the U.S. got involved they would have to pay for weakly trained troops to enter a war in which the German army is a seasoned fighting force.
Although I don't think that FDR alone acted as an accomplice to the holocaust, America as a people should have done more. The author argues that at the time, no one could have foreseen the holocaust as a result of Nazi power, but even after Kristallnacht, a clear warning of the violence that could result from German antisemitism, America's immigration policy did not change. The author describes how the fear of the time was that, by offering help to immigrants fleeing oppressive authoritarian governments, those governments would only see it as an opportunity to scare their unwanted populations into leaving through more brutality. Unfortunately this is what happened, and the United States still didn't open their doors. Even when the Nazis had given up on driving the Jews out and had instead began their process of systematic extermination, American immigration policies did not change. Even though their was no shortage of information on the atrocities being committed in Germany, few acted, or even spoke out against them. In this way, the general American attitude towards the Holocaust was indifference because those who spoke out had limited power, and those in power took limited action.
The United States certaintly could have done more during the Holocaust, but to call them accomplices is a gross misuse of the term. The U.S. was undoubtably a hinderance, far from an aid, to Nazi Germany during World War II. The immigration policies are the area of most fault and inaction. As soon as the atrocities became apparent the processes should have been changed. When it became obvious that the Jews needed to evacuate out of violent neccessity, the beauricratic process should have been minimalized and all efforts made to hasten the distribution of visas. In such extraordinary cirmcumstances, previous regulations must be transgressed. Tackling the outflux of people with traditional means was a severe mistake of congress. The thought of "how many more Jews would have survived had the war ended even a week or ten days earlier," is one that puts the United States military effort into perspective. It is the idea that independent rescues, though unarguably valuable, are not as effictive as stopping the source of genocide. The United States could have stopped one death camp, but there still would be another; stopping the operators of the death camps and eradicating the extremist Nazi ideals is the key.
I think that the US should have done more to help the Jewish people during the Holocaust. They made life hard for Jews trying to leave Germany to escape the Nazi's by having strict immigration laws. Yet they said that they were totally against the Nazi's the sad thing was they never really entered the war to help the JEws and stop the Nazi's they entered the war to protect themselves from the Japanese after Pearl Harbor and by not trying to help the Jews and trying to stop the Nazi's the Americans I believe are accomplices of the Holocaust. They had many oppurtunities to help out the Jews who were coming into American but the continually made it hard for them to even get passage to America. The American's were very Anti-Semitic and because of their anti-semitism they were also accomplices of the Holocaust. I find it horrifying that the Americans could just stand and watch the Holocaust happen. They knew very well of what was going on in Germany yet they refused to help and send over aid or troops. I do agree with what has been said about bombing Auschwitz. I think that bombing this camp would have resulted in to many killings of innocent people. The sad thing is that the US could have come up with other ways to show the Nazi's that what they were doing was wrong and to warn the Nazi's off but the didn't and instead decided to practice isolationism. Their lack of involvment to help the Jews makes them accomplices of the Holocaust. Just like David Cash they decided to keep quite when they knew something wrong was going on. Also the Holocaust was not the only time the US has decided to remain silent and not to send in aid. During the Rwanda genocide the US didn't send in aid until the very end much like they did during the Holocaust. During this time too they knew very well what was happening they just refused to help because they feared what would happen. The US for the future should not remain silent and should send in help next time the see groups of people being terrorized then they would not be labeled as accomplices.
I think that the statement is true, but Americans should have done more to stop the extermination of the Jews. Aside from trying to gain support to stop the extermination, nothing was done. The U.S. attempted to hold rallies in New York, but was shut down by German rabbis because the U.S. was destroying Germany as the German Jews knew and loved it. Having strict immigration laws only helped the U.S. Rather than allowing more Jews into the U.S. and backing off on the immigration laws, the U.S. kept the same laws and hurt the Jews' chance at survival. Had the U.S. released part of their immigration laws, it is possible that more Jews would have survived the extermination. I don't get why Roosevelt said that he did not have the power to change the quota system of his own country. He's the president; all he had to do is get the new immigration law passed was pass it through Congress and the House of Representatives. Hitler made it almost impossible for Jews to leave Europe by stripping them of thier money and possesions, but yet he said that they had two choices: leave or get killed. The U.S. knew of Hitler's order, but did not stop him. Why didn't the U.S. allow the immigrants on the ship, St. Louis, in if they had already been allowed to leave? It is not right that these poor passengers had go back to Europe because the U.S. was ignorant in its strict immigration laws. The appointment of Breckenridge Long as Assistant Secretary of State by Roosevelt was wrong because many people knew he was an anti-Semite, meaning he would back Hitler in the extermination. If Roosevelt had wanted to find a way to stop the extermination, he would not have appointed Breckenridge Long. By the time the U.S. decides to possibly bomb Auschwitz, it is too late. Granted many innocent people would be killed by bombing the extermination camp itself, but that was the key in trying to stop the extermination. Anywhere around Auschwitz, whether it be the camp or the rails, innocent people were going to die.
No, I do not think that this is true. The article, America and the Holocaust, says that FDR did many things to stop Hitler from the extermination of the Jews. He modified the interpretation of the refugee laws, extended the visitors' visas of the Germans in America, admitted many Jews to America etc. It is just that he did not have the capacity to modify the quota system and go against the government. Many other government officials of America were not in favor of accepting too many Jews. So FDR did not gain the support of his colleagues. FDR even tried to raise his voice by demanding that Hitler stops his cruel acts. It was not a practical thing to bomb the railway that was a connection to Aushwitz because it is true that many Jews would have been killed in the process. The prime focus was to save the Jews and not to jeopardise their lives by bombing places near them. The fact is that America had just recovered from the depression, so it had many other responsibilities towards its own country. It is true that America could have done more but FDR cannot be blamed and called an accomplice because he tried his best to support the Jews. It was the situation and the problems during the late 30's and early 40's that accounted for the strong opinions that FDR faced.
Normally i would disagree with a statement like this because i think it is too harsh and drastic, however in this situation i think i agree. America was not an accomplice to the Nazis in a physical sense, however with as much power as America had, there is something to be said about the fact that the government did practically nothing to help. Even the smallest gesture from America would have helped with the holocaust, but instead they actively ignored it, preventing it from making front page news, turning down ship loads of immigrants, and making it extremely difficult to get a visa. Also, it seems pretty obvious that antisemitism played a large role in American society back then, and even though they did not take their discrimination to the same level as the Nazis did, it is discrimination nonetheless and probably added to the reasons for not helping the Jews. I would not even call America a bystander because the government so actively worked to downplay the news of the holocaust and make it hard and quickly impossible for any European Jews to find salvation in the American Borders. Although i can see why bombing Auschwitz would not necessarily have been a good step to take, i disagree with the article where is says that information was in no way kept from the people and therefore the american government should not be blamed for the peoples decision to not take action. I think that information may not have been directly kept from the people, but it was never made a priority for the people to truly understand what was happening in Europe and to me this is just at bad.
I personally believe that this statement is not true. When I think of an accomplice I think of someone who actively helps in committing the crime, something that FDR and the U.S. did not do. Although they maybe could have done more to help the Jews and some of their decisions were wrong, they were not actively helping Hitler and the Nazis to exterminate the Jews. Also, I do not think that FDR should even be included in the statement. He tried to do the best he could to save as many Jews as possible. The reason he couldn't do any more was because he faced certain restrictions such as the quotas set by the immigration laws and even then, he tried to get around these quotas as much as possible. I think it is very unfair to say that they watched the extermination with total indifference. In some cases this might be true, like with the anti-semetic congress members who wanted to lower immigration quotas rather than raise them and the widespread anti-semetic feelings among many of the American people. However, not everyone was indifferent to the fate of the Jews, especially those in positions to do something about it like FDR. Some argue that the U.S.'s choice not to bomb Auschwitz or to send in rescue missions to the camps is proof of American indifference. However, they were just doing what they thought was the best way to save the Jews and that was to defeat Hitler and destroy Nazi Germany. I don't entirely agree that this was in fact the best way to help the Jews but I do know that the Allies and the U.S. did what they thought was best and making a bad decision is not proof that one is an accomplice or indifferent to the fate of an entire people.
I think it is harsh to say the United States was an accomplice in the Holocaust. America's immigration policy was definitely too strict and confusing, and if they had loosened or made exceptions more innocent lives could have been saved. It was ridiculous that the US would not even allow the boat with Jewish immigrants to dock in America. However at the same time the United States was still recovering from a Depression, and already had millions of unemployed people, and allowing more people to enter the country would only add to the economic crisis. FDR did modify the refugee laws, extend the Germans' visitors' visas, and admitted many Jews into America. FDR did not have the ability nor did the country have the capacity increase the quota system and allow more Jewish immigrants. The US could have done more to save the Jews, but at the time the US had problems in their own country that took priority. I think FDR did as best as he knew how to help the Jews without compromising America's well being.
Unfortunatly, I have to agree that the United States were acting as accomplices in the extermination of the Jews due to their indifference. Although President Roosevelt seemed sincere of his strong condemnation of the Nazi's actions during Kristallnacht, the U.S. was under a deep ideology of racism and prejudice towards immigrants, especially the Jews. When the St. Louis carried aboard 936 immigrants, in which 6 of them were not Jewish, Cuba would not accept. So when the ship tried to enter our country, it was refused access. Also, as a result of Kristallnacht, President Roosevelt wanted to extend the visas of German and Austrian Jews in the country, despite the disapproval of anti-Semites in the country. The U.S.'s immigration policy was unfair, although a large portion of German Jews were able to escape under the quota system in America. The tests the country gave to the immrigrants were racially biased, expecting them to understand English when arriving on the border. America's media mainstream was also infiltrated with anti-Semitic propganda in the form of rallies, literature and newspapers. In such literature, Jews were blamed for any setback or problem that came. I was also shocked at the descrimination that was shown according to the video we saw in class yesterday. Jews were unable to get a descent job because of their race, nor were they able to attend beaches. Even vacation brochures ask if a person is a Jew or not. Although President Roosevelt had very close advisors who were Jewish, Congress and several state departments (especially the Defence Department) was full of anti-Semitic people, which would criticize the President's favortism of the Jews. Finally, the large majority of the American populous was unemployed, causing a awful belief that "America is for the Americans" and setting up restrictions for immigration as a result of the Great Depression. Although Roosevelt was all for defending for the Jews, the country appeared to be unwilling to help the Jews during the war do to society's anti-Semitic nature. I could not believe the the bystander role the U.S. played during World War II. However, one thing that is important now is that America is Israel's strongest allies.
The United States could have done more and should have done more, but accomplice is too strong a word. An accomplice is someone who aided in the crime, or at the very least did nothing to stop it. America took in twice as many Jewish refugees as every other country combined. Franklin Roosevelt did everything within his power as president to help the Jews of Europe, from extending visiting visas to publicizing the horrific news. His frequent meetings with Jewish leaders clearly show he wasn’t anti-Semitic. As much as Roosevelt tried to help, however, he was limited by both Congress and public opinion. I think that this – the public fear of immigrants, not the acts of our president – is the greatest source of guilt. Roosevelt surely would have tried to expand the quotas, but faced fierce opposition from Congressional leaders. Moreover there was a common fear of Jews and any immigrants, especially from Eastern Europe, that prevented action. Maybe if America hadn’t been battling the Great Depression, we would have been more willing to attack Germany. Maybe if we had felt more compassion for the “other” being persecuted in Germany or answered the moral imperative to fight genocide instead of shrinking into isolationism, we could have saved more people. We should have acted as soon as news of Kristallnacht reached our shores, but we didn’t. It is our actions that spare us the title of accomplice; it was Allied forces who defeated Hitler and liberated Nazi death camps. But for millions of Jews, we will always be a country who did too little too late.
I don't think this is 100% true. Although the United States did not do anything during the time of the actual Holocaust, at that point it was not their fault. Germany has banned all emigration. This would make it so that no one would be able to get out, and therefore no one would be able to come into the U.S. As the article we read pointed out, it's not as if the people of the United States could've predicted that all of the Jews they did not allow in were eventually going to be murdered.In my opinion the United States should've been more open to the immigrants in the first place, whether or not they were going to be killed. America was looked upon as not only a save haven but also a place of opportunity for other things. I don't think that the United States watched the extermination with indifference. There were definatly two different sides but I do not think that it make the United Stats "indifferent". The president was against what was happening but perhaps did not know how to react. He attempted to make more homes available for Jews even when they weren't in his own country. In the case of the bombing the camp or not, it is a very logical point that the Jews would be the ones that died, but in the end would it have been worth it? to prevent any more Jews being killed there? If that was looked upon or not I would like to see and to see if they actually did the calculations to figure out what the outcome would've been.
I do not think that it is true that the US was an accomplice to the slaughter of the Jews. There were certainly more things that could have been done, that is for sure. FDR could have let the ship the St. Louis dock and let the people off. He could have raised the outdated immigration quotas, which had been in place for many years, yet he did neither of these things. But that does not make him, along with the entire country, an accomplice. In the first place, he did not sit back and let it all happen, he was fighting a war against the Germans, which, although did not directly help the people in Auschwitz, saved at least some in the long run. I am not a military strategist, nor an expert on the Holocaust, so I can not say for sure if there was something else that the US and FDR could have done to help the Jews. It seems as if there were certainly opportunities to help that were passed over. It does not matter if, as the article says, people from Germany were allowed the second highest quota in the immigration laws. There were also many people from Poland, Austria, the Netherlands, and other European countries that had a terrible time getting in. And just because the number of people allowed from Germany was the second highest does not mean that it was enough, there were tens of thousands of people back in Europe still waiting to leave the country, fearing for their lives, while people in America said that they did not want any more immigrants because they would take jobs. That is not right. Basically, I do not think that the US was an accomplice to the Germans in any way, but I do think that they are completely free of blame.
I don't think that the US was an accomplice to the Holocaust due to their indifference. I think that they have been put in a very unfortunate position, because looking back on it we can see what they could or should have done. At the time they did know what was happening to the Jews of Europe and they did not act enough to save all of them. They chose to end the war as quickly as possible, instead of focusing on destroying the concentration and extermination camps. I think that choosing to end the war quickly did save more people, and was the best course of action, given the realities of the time. Had the US simply destroyed the camps the Nazis would have built more, or forced the prisoners on death marches, and even if they had saved the prisoners there was nowhere for them to go. America was dealing with major internal problems at the time, as well as fighting a war on two fronts. Public opinion thought that they should focus on stopping the Japanese, so FDR and the army were going against public opinion by fighting in Europe at all. While in retrospect they might have been able to do more, and it is beyond unfortunate that they could not save all the prisoners, I don't think their lack of action makes them accomplices.
I think the observation that many historians are making is a true one and that FDR kept quiet although they had enough evidence to stop it early on. Although FDR is responsible he is not the only responsible one. He got help to not say anything by his Cabinet, his advisors and especially what behavior he saw the Americans portraying against the Jews during the time of the Holocaust. The idea that the citizens did not want the other there was a very powerful one. The Jews were not wanted any where they went and it proves the point that the U.S were accomplices. This is true because they did not want to save the Jews who were stuck in Hitler's power and they also knew of the atrocities Hitler was committing but the reason stopping the atrocities committed against the Jewish group is that nobody wanted to get their hands dirty and stop it. The truth is that FDR was partially responsible for by being total indifferent they became accomplices, the other part of the responsibility needs to go to the Americans in general for not doing anything about it when they had the chance to save even just a couple or a few hundred Jewish citizens who were being persecuted.
There are many different views on if America was accomplices in the extermination of the Jews. I believe they were not as guilty as Hitler and his Nazi party but America has some blame for the lives that were lost. Throughout the reading my view changed. At the beginning it seemed as if FDR and his wife were trying to make Americans aware of the situation and try to help the refugees and stop the situation by starting to spread awareness. With all the anti-Semitism in America at the time I would think this tactic would be very difficult. Then with the immigration laws that had quotas, it was very difficult for not just the Jews but any immigrant. FDR took a stance against Hitler and seemed to maybe do something drastic, but instead appointed a Assistant Secretary that was Anti-Semitic, who probably would not be support any action FDR tried to take to help the situation. After Kristallnacht more than half the immigrants coming into the US were Jewish, but this doesn't seem to have been enough. Leaders around the world and people who could have done more than just discussing what they should do. No action seemed to be taken and the situation kind of just sat on the stacks of other problems everyone had at the current time. It seems to be just a bunch of ideas that were just left alone. FDR did find refuge for the rejected immigrants in other countries in Europe but then these countries were eventually invaded by Hitler and the same thing happened to these refugees as if they never left Germany or where ever they were escaped from. I keep wondering how many people would have been saved if America actually did something ten days earlier than they did. American leaders kept talking about doing something, whether it be bombing, a warning (which I don't think would have worked) to stop the horrible activities going on in a lot of Europe. I think FDR tried to take action against Hitler and he might have not been able to do more himself. FDR needed more people to support him so more things could have gotten carried out. There was really nothing he could have done about the immigration laws but all the other ideas never seemed to been used to the fullest potential. I think many of the politicians were worried about public opinion and keeping there status. Since there was a lot of Anti-Semitism in America, I believe many of the supporters FDR took the "easy way" out of not doing anything. I think sometimes politicians follow what the supporters want instead of doing what is morally right. Some of them could have thought the right thing to do was nothing, but I find it hard to believe everyone in congress was Anti-Semitic. I don't think America were completely accomplices but definitely did not do anything quickly enough to help the millions of lives that could have been saved.
I would say that the United States and FDR watched the extermination of the Jews with such total indifference that they were actually accomplices is false. The US could and should have done a lot more than they did. They could have saved thousands of Jews by opening their border to immigrants, or by interfering in Germany. The U.S. should have done more but they didn't watch with such indifference that they should be considered accomplices. "America's reaction to Kristallnacht was stronger than that of any of the other democracies." The US did know what was going on and tried to help, as much as they could without getting directly involved. FDR was against Hitler from the beginning. He was known for his dislike of Hitler and Thomas Mann noted that "for the first time he believed the Nazis would be beaten because in Roosevelt he had met someone who truly grasped the evil of Adolf Hitler." FDR and Mrs. Roosevelt pushed the immigration laws, letting more Jews into the country then the quota allowed. He was constantly seeking havens for refugees in other countries and tried to save as many people as he could, while representing the people in the US. Yes the US should have done a lot more to help the Jews in Germany, but they should not be considered accomplices to the Nazis.
The United States cannot be held as actual accomplices, yet they cannot be held as entirely irresponsible either. Different parts of the United States can be held to different degrees of accountability. I firmly believe that president FDR, and his wife Eleanor did what was in their power to do. A single person, even the president, cannot run the policy of an entire country or break down the complex checks and balance system in order to accomplish what he believes in. He did all that he could concerning immigration of European Jews to America while still abiding by the harsh immigration quotas. He extended visas, applied for larger immigration quotas and helped persuade other countries to do the same. There were also a large number of individuals who did all that they could to raise awareness of the monstrosities committed by the Nazis and did all they could do to save people from them. However there were also many individuals who did nothing to help the millions of people being slaughtered in Europe. Labor unions, business leaders, both conservative and liberal forces where too self centered and pushed to decrease or eliminate immigration quotas. Assistant Secretary of State Breckenridge Long strictly enforced immigration laws. Not to mention that the American people were somewhat Anti Somatic, making it difficult for Jews to live in the United States, and they greatly opposed their immigration to the US. Also, the US consulates did all that they could to delay and prevent Jews from receiving visas. The US did many things to help the European Jews, yet not everyone was involved. Thus one cannot label the US as an accomplice
I do not think that the United States was an accomplice to the extermination of the Jews. I think that the United States was put in a tough place. At first they received very little information about what was happening and did not know whether to believe it or not. Once they starting receiving more and more information the killings became more and more frequent and in larger numbers. I believe that getting involved in this would have saved many people, but might have led to many problems in the US as well as deaths of US citizens. Changing the number of immigrants who came into the US had its up and down sides as well. Limiting the number of immigrants was a very harsh thing to do, but like the article said, if they didn't, it could have led to many other countries trying to get rid of a certain race or type of person from their country just as Hitler was doing. I am not sure about what i would think about bombing Auschwitz. I think that in bombing Auschwitz the US would destroy the camp, but there were still many other places the Nazi's were sending the Jews. The article also said how even if railways and bridges were destroyed, it would only take a few days to restore them, which would not help all that much. I do think something should have been done to try to save more people and less time should have been done trying to decide if the news they were hearing was true. If news is heard of a huge massacre, you shouldn't wait to see if it is true and many people are dying. It should be looked into and something should be done. I think that the US could have done more, but are not at as much fault as the Nazi's and did do some help for the Jews.
It is absolutely true. The United States had a lot of problems, but they were in no way helpless. The US had a lot of power both in their military and with their allies. We could have told Hitler at any time, stop it or else we'll attack. Telling Hitler that it is a bad thing to kill the Jews obviously did nothing. We needed to take action. We could have occupied Germany, flown in parachuters. We were equipped to take down the camps at the very lest. The point has been made that it would be a bad idea to bomb the camps. Of course it is. But we could have sent in troops on the ground, to overtake the camps, remove the prisoners, and then destroy the camp. America takes great pride in seeing ourselves as the heroes. We don't turn away the needy, and we protect the victims. We did not help the victims, and we turned away the immigrants in need. We say them as parasites, and we thought that if they weren't helping us in an obvious way, then they were harming us. By standing back and watching the Holocaust, when we could have stepped in and even offered threats to Hitler, or soldiers, to take down the camps, or opened the doors to the Jews, we would have saved thousands - maybe even over a million. The Nazi victims were helped by other countries in Europe who weren't well off and they were helped by people who had the risk of being taken into a camp themselves. We did nothing. We were not killing the Jews ourselves, but we might as well have been trying to help Hitler, because by ignoring him we told him that it was ohkay, and that we would allow him to continue.
I don't think that it is fair to say that the United States were accomplices to the Holocaust. I feel that saying that the United States were accomplices is too harsh of a term to use in this context. In the article, it stated how Franklin D. Roosevelt and his wife, Eleanor Roosevelt were strong believers in fighting the Nazi's cruel persecutions against the Jews. Although the United State's immigration policies did make it difficult for many Jews to leave Germany, I do not believe that the United States specifically helped the Nazi's in persecuting the Jews, therefore not deserving of the title 'accomplice'. The United States did try to help save the Jews, while keeping in mind the needs of their own country. They were also suffering from a great deal of unemployment and flow of immigrants entering the country. With their own troubles in mind, the United States chose not to attack nor to invade Germany, remaining true to its isolation and neutrality policy. During the Holocaust, no country was able to stop the Nazi's from conquering other lands or the mass killing of Jews. If saying that the United State's lack of help during the Holocaust makes them accomplices, then all of the idle countries would also be considered accomplices. This would ultimately result in blaming the entire world for taking part in the Holocaust, when the Nazi Party was the main reason for it. Even though I do not think that the US should be named an accomplice of the Holocaust, I do believe that they could have done a little more to help. I think that from the Holocaust, the world was able to learn that silence is never the answer to something as tragic as this. However, I feel that in looking back at the Holocaust, it is easy to say "Oh, we could/should have done something," but in reality, what could we have really done?
I would Sat that this argument is false. It is 100% true that the U.S. and FDR sat back and watched the European Jews be exterminated and they did nothing to try and help the situation. There are not many "small" things that the U.S. could have done in order to prevent the Holocaust from reaching the horrible extent that it did. However the United States was not an accomplice to the Nazi's during the Holocaust. The initial reaction that Kristallnacht received from Americans showed that the horrors of what was being inflicted upon innocent people It is understandable that the America chose not to enter the war right away because they were still recovering from WWI and they needed to protect themselves first. Even though Americans watched the extermination of the Jews with an indifference, does not make them accomplices to the Nazi's during the Holocaust.
With sound intelligence of the Nazi regimes actions against the Jewish population in Europe, America should have done more. All the allied powers should have done more. The world should have done more. However, I simply can not agree with a statement that suggests that America showed such indifference that they’d deserve to be classified as accomplices to Hitler and the Nazi Regime. Hitler’s “Final Solution” took place amidst the backdrop of World War II, a conflict that produced death and destruction on an unfathomable scale. It may seem heartless but in such a situation, the U.S. government had to prioritize, and their priority was the destruction of the Axis power. Sending out bombers or army brigades to concentration camps, in retrospect, may seem like a simple solution to the problem, yet in the midst of a war of this scale that would be challenging to argue to those who actually experienced World War II, U.S. soldiers. Sending out forces on such missions would have diverted precious resources from the main battle lines where U.S. soldiers were giving their lives to fight in both the Atlantic and Pacific theaters of the world. In the end, I believe President Franklin D. Roosevelt was right in his belief that the best way to end the suffering of the Jewish population under Hitler’s control was the quick destruction of the Axis powers. As long as the Nazi regime was in power all Europeans, both Jewish and Non-Jewish could never live in peace.
No, it is not true that the United States and FDR watched the extermination of the Jews with such a total indifference that they were actually accomplices. Though they never directly intervened with the Holocaust, the U.S., FDR and his wife in particular, were constantly aware of the Holocaust and tried to do the best that they were able. FDR did not have complete control as President. He couldn’t convince a conservative Congress to take a risk on their part to either make a direct action in Europe or to relax quota systems to allow more refugees into the country. Instead of being completely indifferent to the Jews’ plight, there were examples that he made an effort for the refugees, such as the International Rescue Committee (founded by his wife in 1933), extending the visas of Germans and Austrians already in the United States, and trying to land the passengers of the St. Louis in the Virgin Islands (also in main part attributed to his wife). He was forced to work up against the public opinion in the United States, much of which was still isolationism, the struggle for themselves as the U.S. struggled with its dramatic unemployment rates, and the idea that there were other places than the U.S. that should also stand up and help the Jews. FDR even faced off against this, exemplified by his end-of-the-war decision to continue to fight against Germany instead of switch all of his military concentration to Japan, which was the course of action suggested by his advisors. FDR also had to take into concentration what direct action could do to the Jews imprisoned by the Nazis. There was a high chance that any direct action would only hurt the Jews as they would be the first victims of the Nazi’s retaliation, as well as many of the bombings (such as Auschwitz) might have a chance to help some but in the process it would kill many. When the Nazis realized their imminent defeat, they only sped up the process of their killings. There was also the opportunity for the Nazis to “spin” the situation by saying that “…their Jewish victims [had] been massacred not by their killers, but by Allied bombing” (115). By cutting off contact with the puppet government of Vichy, France, it would most likely have resulted in the closing of the route of escape through France for the European Jews.
In my opinion America did not act to their best abilities or some could say at all in saving the Jews from the Nazis but using the term "accomplices" to define America is a misnomer. I feel that America just chose not to involve themselves during the extermination of Jews because it was not their place to involve themselves in another countries affairs. True, they were mass killing innocent people but America had their own crisis's to deal with such as recovering from a great depression, trying to keep neutral, and they were already sending money to support the allies during the war. Although America was a different continent and separated by a massive body of water, they still had antisemitism flourishing within their own country. The new reports on the situation in Europe was so infrequent that it was as if they didn't care and kept a deaf ear towards the crisis. There was a neo nazi rally outside of New York City which shows that support for antisemitism was growing more popular. Eventually Jews were banned from being in certain locations and from job positions just like in Europe. The hate for Jews grew more even onto the point when refugees were denied entry even for temporary immigration because Americans didn't feel comfortable living amongst Jews. Yes, America had their own reasons for not intervening but I think they purposely decided to turn a deaf ear to the extermination of Jews but not enough to be called accomplices.
No, I don't believe that America's inaction can be seen as being accomplices. Up until this point in history, America had not yet become the "world police" that we are seen as today. In fact, in the 1930s-1940s, America was more so isolationist. It shouldn't be seen as a surprise that America/Americans let these horrific actions happen before their eyes. They didn't jump in to stop Germany's invasions, they didn't directly aid England or France. So why would they have helped a minority whom they were trying to exclude from their own country? The Jews were so much of a minority in America at the time, the extermination of the Jewish people was not a large issue to America. Yes, the Jewish community in America cried out, and even sent aid over, but there was no possible way they could persuade an entire country to help just their minority. I'm not saying the United States shouldn't have been involved, I just personally don't believe the title of "accomplice" should be given to a country just because they were bystanders. If that were the case, why not place the same title on Brazil? Canada? Thailand?
I would have to say that calling America and FDR an accomplice to the Holocaust is going too far, although this does not mean that they could have done more to stop it. The word accomplice almost implies that America tried to help the Germans in the extermination of the Jews. America was very slow in its response, but it was not an accomplice. I am not saying that I agree with American policies towards Germany and Jews during that time, but you can't call a nation an accomplice if it helped stop the destruction by ending the war. America's slow and minute response was not the result of only indifference, either, if at all. Before the war America had just gone through and was still coping with a depression. FDR already had millions of peoples to worry about. For this reason America was overly cautious about meddling with foreign affairs, although genocide shouldn't have been a foreign affair, but an universal affair. Working class Americans did not want more immigrants to be let in because they feared for their, already fragile, job situations. Also, one really can't blame FDR individually for America's pathetic response towards the holocaust, since he wasn't like a king, and had control over the whole government. He had to answer to Congress and other officials. No matter what he wanted, it had to be passed by Congress. Unfortunately Congress was divided, and thus nothing was passed easily. A few anti-semitic Government officials were also able to capitalize on this division, and further restrict the help towards the Jews. Finally, if one is going to accuse America of being an accomplice, then they would have to, also accuse the rest of the allies. For America actually was able to actually save more Jews than many of the other Allies. In reality, unfortunately, all of the the Allies and bystanders are at least partly responsible for the death of millions of Jews, but they were not accomplices. They over estimated human nature, and thought that nothing of this magnitude could ever happen. They also faced a plethora of complications and dilemmas in figuring out how to best stop the Germans. But ultimately, many just didn't want to believe that this could happen, and hoped that it would all blow over. In doing this America waited until the last second to help, but then it was too late
Due to the immigration policy of the United States during and before World War II and the strong feeling of Anti-Semitism, I feel that the US was definitly an accomplice to the Holocaust. I can understand from one point how the US citizens would not want more immigrants in the country, especially since the unemployment rate was so high. But in the case of the children trying to come into the United States, that policy does not hold true. These children do not need to work at their age. All they needed was a safe home and food and clothing. They were, in no way, going to be taking away jobs from American citizens. By denying thousands of Jews and Europeans entry to the country, the US was definitly "helping", if you will, with the genocide because when the Jews returned, especially in the case of the St. Louis, their only choice (if one can really call it a choice) was death. Anti-Semitism played a key role in being accomplices as well. Even though FDR condemed the acts of Kristallnacht, that did not change the fact that there were propaganda newspapers being published saying that Jews were the source of all of our problems, just like in Nazi Germany. Also, the fact that many of the American Embassies that were in charge of granting visas were clearly anti-Semetic helped the Holocaust be carried out because it made it almost impossible to get a visa to travel and live in the United States, thus causing the Jews to remain and die in Nazi Germany.
I wouldn't say that FDR along with people that actually tried to help were the Nazis accomplices, but I certainly think the US as a whole was an accomplice. After the night of Kristallnacht Roosevelt extended the vistors visas for the Jews. FDR and his wife I think tried the best as they could. FDR couldn't have changed the quota system of the U.S. and he did the best he could to try to change the immigration barriers. But Congress was very corrupted and didn't do much to help the Jews. In the Congress there were some anti-semetics and anti-immigrants, and some were completely the opposite. America was in their hands and they decided not to lower immigration barriers. Without the support of Congress FDR couldn't do much. I think America as a whole was an accomplice because as a whole we didn't send nearly enough military to Germany knowing the millions of people dying in the concentration camps. They could’ve threatened Germany in so many ways. Yes America was recovering from the Depression and we were in trouble, but we could have done so much more. The U.S. could've lowered its immigration barriers, it could've been a safe haven, it could've gone to Germany earlier and saved more people but no. There were too many people that didn't care for others, and that only cared for their well being. The U.S. had feelings of hate that also prevented other actions to go in place as well. If the U.S. as a whole hadn't been corrupted so much more could've been done.
Given what I understand the definition of "accomplice" to be, I don't think it is entirely correct to label the United States and their actions as such. Though the US acted in seriously morally reprehensible ways throughout the Holocaust, I don't have reason to believe that they were actively trying to aid the Nazi's in their genocide. The inaction on the part of US citizens and government agencies is a disgrace and a painful reminder of just how prejudiced and anti-semitic the climate was in the country at the time. However, I feel that the actions taken by the US were more in an effort to preserve the country and citizens' self interest rather than to kill more Jews. The US was just emerging from a deep Depression and had vowed non-intervention after the events of WWI. People in the US were, unnecessarily and hypocritically, concerned about the effects of immigration into the country. Their concern shows a deep seated racism, but they really just wanted to keep the refugees out of America, not to kill them. I don't mean to make excuse for atrocious inaction and incompetence the US reacted to the Holocaust with, but I don't believe that the actions that were taken were taken with the intent of killing Jews. On the subject of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki verses the bombing of Auschwitz, there is in fact research that shows that a land invasion or human military action would have killed far more people, both on the Japanese side and on the Allied forces, then the bombs did (read about it in US History last year). Personally, I think that the use of the atomic bomb in Japan should not have occurred, but there is evidence that it was the right decision, if the loss of life is the sole basis for that judgment.
America should have done much more to stop the holocaust, but to describe them as an accomplice is unfair. If the US is an accomplice, then so was every other non axis, non neutral country in the world during world war 2. The US accepted twice as many refugees as all other countries combined. The US committed to a European war that was not the most urgent threat to its citizens well-being. The US entertained plans to bomb Auschwitz, but they were either not possible because of the military situation or did not make sense. Bombing the railroads only meant that Jews would die on the tracks instead of in the camps. To respond to Bens question: Why bombed the US two Japanese Cities (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) where probably more innocent people were killed and this without any obvious reason at all? The Japanese would not surrender, and while the killing of innocents is basically disgusting, there were numbers to back it up. The invasion of japan (the other option to bombing) would have cost 1 million american soldiers lives. This number does not include japanese soldiers or civilians, but it surely would have been greater than the number killed in the bombings. That is an entirely different question, though. Also, to the rest of Bens tirade about the US, I understand where you are coming from. We have adopted a strange position of "guardian angel" as you said, when it is convenient for us, yet we turn a blind eye at the most important of times. I dont understand why failure to intervene in crises is only blamed on the US. European countries have armies and significant power as well. While we may act like a savior when we oftentimes are not, where was the rest of the world in Rwanda? Where are they in Darfur? Exactly where we are, safe at home. The current Iraq war was clearly a blunder. The intentions, however were to stop a dictator from using weapons of mass destruction. I guess that's like intending to help a kid being bullied but accidentally kicking him in the head though. We did do some things about the holocaust. We fully backed fighting the Nazis, the best way to end the holocaust, with troops and money (sorry to Ben that it took so long). We allowed in twice as many refugees as anybody else. We defended Palestine from the Germans. As to the bombing of Auschwitz, the idea was entertained but not doable. The US did more than most, but not nearly enough. To hold us responsible is to hold the world responsible, and to a degree I think the word is responsible.
Though the United States and FDR didn't do all that they could in order to stop the Holocaust, I don't think it's fair to call them "accomplices" to the extermination of the Jews. Even though there was so much more that the U.S. could have and should have done in order to end this mass murder, there was still a lot that they DID do. For example, The U.S. "took in double the number of Jewish refugees accepted by the rest of the world" and broadcasted and printed new about the Holocaust, showing that there were many attemps made by them to lower the number of deaths. However, the U.S. didn't reach the potential that it could have - the immigration laws could have changed to allow more Jews to safely arrive in the States. They could have tried harder However, I don't believe it's right to call the U.S. accomplices simply because they didn't do all that they could have. "Watching something with indifference", to me, would mean that they didn't do anything at all. After reading "America and the Holocaust", it's clear to me that the U.S. took many actions against the Holocaust and I therefore don't believe that they were accomplices.
It's true, The United States could have done more to help the Jews in Europe. But to be fair, not everyone in the U.S. was necessarily indifferent. The United States accepted twice as many Jewish refugees as any other country. To call the US an accomplice is completely unfair. Because of the enormity and the brutality of the Holocaust, I think everyone will always look back at what happened and think somebody should have done more. But as it stated in the article we read, nobody, not even the Jews themselves, could foresee what was about to happen next. To everyone at the time, mass killings and death camps were things that were completely unfathomable. I would also like to point out that bombing Auschwitz would have been totally counterproductive because it would have killed more of the people the U.S. wanted to save than the ones the U.S. wanted to punish.
Although the article made it seem like FDR wanted to do as much as he could to help, I do think America could and should have done more as a country to help end the extermination of the Jews. The U.S. had the information about what Germany was doing, and they knew what was going on. In the beginning it seemed that FDR wanted to help, and noted that Kristallnacht was out of control, saying "I myself can scarcely believe that such things could occur in a twentieth-century civilization" (110). This led to a lot of American anti-semites becoming angry at Roosevelt. The immigration issue is complicated. I think some American's did not feel so bad about closing America's doors because there were other places of refuge for Jews. Personally I think that is an excuse, and I think a lot of American's found any excuse they could for not helping the Jews, and not doing more. Aushwitz should have been bombed in my opinion. The Allies had the information and layout, and what they needed to accomplish the bombing. There are many reasons people give for not having bombed it, including the fact that innocent people would be hurt. No matter what, in this time of history, people were dying. If bombing Aushwitz meant that millions of other Jews would be saved in all, it would have definitely been worth it. The U.S. thought that by just winning the war the Jews would be saved, but they didn't fully grasp at how many people exactly were dying everyday, and how much action was actually necessary.
I believe that the reason the United States and FDR remained inactive bystanders is because they were so stubbornly attached to their idea of not joining the war effort, which resulted in indifference. I would not call them accomplices beacuse in my mind, an accomplice is someone who actively helps in an effort, purposefully on a specific side. I don't think the United States purposefully did nothing to help the Jews, because their aim was not to help Germany, considering they eventually went to war against them anyway. What the United States is guilty of is merely indifference. I also think that people tend to look at the United States for help because it is known for having such high-technology weapons. When in reality, any other country could have been blamed for indifference.
i believe that this is mostly true. The Americans were definitely willing to help before the war really started, they did try to seek refuge for the Jews that were coming over from Europe. Once the war had started the probability of the Jews being able to leave or even just getting a representative to help them get there visas, was almost impossible; cause when the war really started, the holocaust had progressed even more. I believe that during the war, the American citizens could have done a lot more than just watching everything happen. The only reason America joined the war was because Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. This apparently gave them a real reason to join the war. Because it took a bombing on American territory to bring them into the war, I would definitely say that the American citizens were bystanders to the holocaust. I just can't see why anyone that knew what was going on didn't do anything about it. Yes, there were people that made speeches and gathered people together to try and help the Jews, but there were so few of those kinds of people that there effect was so insignificant. I do believe that it must have been a little bit harder to help the Jews that were IN the holocaust, because we as Americans were all the way across the sea and didn't have a good access point into the Nazi run countries in Europe. Overall, the Americans could have done much much more than what they did, they are and should be considered bystanders.
I think that the quote is true because America made new immigration laws which made it harder for a foreigner to come to America. Breckinridge Long Was qouted by sayuing that with these new laws it was impossinble for an immigrant to come to America. Also resturants, and jobs became segrated by not allowing jews to eat a t there resturants and not allowing jews to work for there companys. All this was happening and FDR didn't do anything to stop the segragation. Also it was said the FDR new about the Nazis systematically killing the jews but he didn't do anything to stop it. These things would actually help the Nazis because if jews couldnt come into America then they would have to stay in Germany were they would be killed.
I can't say that the US was an /accomplice/, but I can say that they could have prevented a lot of Jewish deaths. To me, being an accomplice would have required actually helping in some way other than not stopping the Nazis. It would have required that the US support the Nazis in some way, like supplying weapons, or making their killings even more efficient. (Though sending back that ship of Jews came really close..) The US supplied weapons to England, which was pretty much all they could do if they wanted to stay "The Great Neutrality." Maybe they had to prove the point that it would take A LOT for them to go back on their word of being neutral, and that they didn't take their decrees lightly. Also, if the US had tried to stop the Nazis by doing something like bombing camps, they would have been killing the prisoners, and just doing the Nazi's jobs for them. The Nazis could just as well go back to less efficient guns-- they'd still get the killings done, and they'd have the benefit of having a whole camp's worth of Jews eliminated for them.
In my opinion, the United States and FDR could have made such an impact by helping out, but were thinking about themselves more than helping out others. It’s unfair to say that they are “accomplices” to the holocaust, but it also can’t be said that they did all that they could to make things right. With all the knowledge that they had about what was going on, they had very little effort or care to risk themselves to help innocent people who were dying. Anything they could have done would have helped out at least a little bit. The fact that they were provided with specific information about what was going on and just pushed it aside gives people a reason to be extremely upset and blame them for a lot of things. I understand that it takes a lot of effort and time to immigrate a large group of people into a country, but I believe that they could have made immigration laws a bit less harsh. They should have taken more people than they did to help out the Jewish people that were in need. Even though they weren’t there when everything was happening and weren’t literally helping out the Nazi’s with the extermination of the Jews, they did almost nothing to help. I don’t understand why with so much power that the United States claims to have, that they didn’t absolutely nothing with it. When power like that is ignored and not used for the sake of people’s lives, I find it very upsetting. I believe that it shouldn’t matter how what kind of position you’re put into and how it could affect you in the long run, when someone is desperately asking for your help about a serious situation, you can’t think about your own needs and ignore it. Should the United States be called as accomplice? No. But they can be blamed for knowing and not acting on what they knew to the full extent that they could.
The United States and FDR did not always share a unified view on the actions to take place in respect to the holocaust. The article says that FDR himself had great compassion for the Jews, but that he was limited in power due to the views of congress. FDR probably could have done more, in assigning officials that would carry out plans to help the Jews prewar. The way the article puts it, it implies a lot of the power was out of the hands of the president and the people, that they were helpless to do more, the argument of spreading the blame to another group isn't really valid, the president has no power over congress, congress the people, the people the president, and so on, you can't just say you couldn't do anything because you had no power. There were good examples though that FDR did do things to help the Jews. He was an advocate for increasing immigration, among other things. Despite the article saying that, there were more Jews who emigrated to the US than in any other country. There were still accounts of people being rejected and of the state department telling issuers of visas to stall in giving out visas. The article made the point that the power to save the Jews was out of their reach once Germany had taken over most of Europe. That is a reason why Americans should have seen this and allowed more Jews to come in. Possibly once Germany had taken over Europe, the chance to save Jews effectively had been lost, and the most important and fastest way to save the Jews was to end the war. Essentially, an entire nation can't be called an accomplice for something that they had only some negative part in. They did not for the most part reject all Jews, are fail to help them. Part of the country may have not wanted to help the Jews, but from what the article says it sounds like many including FDR were strongly supportive and because of difficulties in acting were not able to act as effectively to help more of them. The Americans definitely did want to win the war and defeat Germany and in that way showed clear support of the Jews. Sebastian Yen
While I agree that the United States could have done more to stop the extermination of the Jews, I do not think that they watched with "total indifference." After reading America and the Holocaust, it is hard to deny that Franklin Roosevelt did indeed care about the Jews and hate Hitler. He and his wife tried many different things to help the situation, and while certain action was not possible despite the fact that he was President, the fact remains that the United States took in more refugees than any other country during the war. Roosevelt was put in an extremely difficult position, because not only did the victims of the Holocaust need his help but his own country was recovering from a great depression that had left the economy paralyzed and twenty five percent of the work force unemployed. It was Roosevelt that called for an international conference to help distribute the refugees that were pouring out of Germany and Austria. Although the conference did not accomplish much, at least he tried. Also, after Kristallnacht, Roosevelt extended the visitors' visas of twenty thousand refugees to allow them to stay in America instead of having to return to Germany. Once he knew he was not going to be able to allow as many people into the country as he wanted, he looked for other places the refugees could go to instead. These are just a few arguements as to why although America was not as proactive as many people would have hoped they would be, they certainly did care about what was happening overseas and at least tried to do something to help.
Though the article proves both cases, I don't think agree that America was an accomplice to the extermination of Jews. Firstly, President Roosevelt had a distinct hatred for Hitler. As soon as he took office, he made it apparent that he disliked the Nazi regime. He also had many Jews appointed as government officials during his presidency. As well, Eleanor Roosevelt was active in rescuing refugees. She was a memeber of the International Refugee Committee, which aided refugees in finding safe havens. There is also a misconception that America rejected all of the Jewish immigrants. But America actually was the nation that took in the most refugees. And though there were many immigration restrictions, Roosevelt tried everything in his power to find safe havens elsewhere. Lastly, there were many moral dilemmas between whether or not America should have taken direct action to end the War, like bombing Auschwitz. But problems like killing thousands of Jews, the Nazi's being able to easily repair the railways, and possible Nazi retaliation complicated matters.
I believe this to be partially true, however I wouldn't go as far to say that America and FDR's inaction gives them the title of being accomplices. The term accomplice suggests to me that the Americans were working towards helping the Germans exterminate the Jews, which was not at all the case. Americans were merely bystanders in which their lack of action led to their indifference. At this point in time, Jews were such minorities that aiding them was not a top priority for the U.S, especially as the depression was coming to an end just before the war. Americans had to deal with the repercussions of that and involving themselves in foreign affairs seemed to be something of less interest. That said, I still believe that the U.S could have done so much more to prevent what was going on. I also think that if one is going to place blame on the U.S for being an accomplice, then other allies and bystanding countries should be considered for that accusation. Although the allies and bystanders may be held somewhat responsible for the death and destruction of the Jews, the title "accomplice" doesn't fit
During the holocaust, FDR tried continuously to open America's doors to Jews as a "safe haven". Though this task was very restricted due to immigration laws, FDR went to great lengths to try and help the victims of the holocaust; therefore, saying that FDR and America were accomplices in the holocaust is not at all accurate. The holocaust was a completely unanticipated event that no one inside or outside of Germany were prepared for. We as humans could not see such an inhuman crime taking place anywhere in this world. Because of this, America and all other surrounding coutries were taken by complete surprise when they became aware of the genocide taking place in Germany. FDR did what he could, as soon as he became notified of the killings, too help the Jews flee to his country for safety. At this time, America was also suffering; the economy was paralyzed and twenty-five percent of its work force was unemployed. Although the addition of immigrants would greatly deepen the suffering of America's economy, FDR made as much room possible for them. Examples of ways FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt helped the Jews are Eleanor's International Rescue Committee, which brought intellectuals, labor leaders, and political figures to sanctuary in the U.S. FDR greatly modified President Hoover's interpretation of the refugee laws and allowed a greater number of visas to be issued. Eleanor also though of other ways to bring the Jews out of Germnay by attempting to land the passengers of the St. Louis as "tourists" in the Virgin Islands. Although America did not bomb Auschwitz, which is seen as something that could have saved many Jews, FDR opened his country up as much as he possibly could for the victims of the holocaust. Deciding against the bombing was merely due to the fact that more people would have been killed than saved, including his own people. FDR and America should be recognized more as a big helping hand to the Jews during the holocaust rather than an accomplice.
I do not think that FDR should be considered an accomplice to the Holocaust. I think that America in some way should have involved themselves especially because they knew exactly what was happening in Europe. FDR was only capable of letting so many people into America and because of this he was viewed as an accomplice to the Holocaust. I do not think that it was possible however for the United States to do something as drastic as to bomb Auschwitz. The bombing definitely would have slowed down the process of systematic killing of the Jews, but the Nazis still would have found other ways to accomplish what they thought was necessary. Also at this time, Americans did not want to become involved, which is understandable. If they were to bomb Auschwitz, who would have known how the Nazis would have retaliated.
I believe that USA was an accomplice and had a responsibility to act but choose to be indifferent. The immigration restrictive laws should have been changed; Roosevelt made a poor choice in picking Long for Assistant Secretary of State who was anti Semitic. I truly believe that something could have done to change those immigration laws. Also, USA could have bombed Auschwitz, it had the right machinery and technology to do so but choose to make excuses why not to do it. Yes, Jews that were already there could have died but it would have prevented other Jews from being brutally murdered. I think the only reason why USA didn't help out was because of anti Semitism. People like Charles Coughlin condemned Jews for being the "problem" for not having enough jobs for everyone. Americans started to believe people like that and became brainwashed and opposed immigration even if it meant to save lives.
I do not think that the United States should be considered an accomplice in the extermination of the Jews. Although the United States and FDR should have put in more effort to help save Jewish lives by creating places for immigrants to live and other things, the US never did any of the killing directly, and they did not send weapons or troops to the Nazis to make the Nazi's job of extermination any easier. The position that the US held was a hard one, because with the information that they had there was little they could do without creating a situation with an even worse effect. If the US had continued bombing the area, especially Auschwitz, then the Nazis could have reacted strongly by going after and attacking the US. After reading "America and the Holocaust" it is obvious that America wasn't just and observer of the Holocaust. America certainly did take actions to help save lives and stop mass killings. I think the US could have done more to help, but they were also making sure that they did not put their own country at risk of corruption or greater losses. Just because America didn't send thousands of troops into Germany to help destroy the Nazis, does not by any means make America an accomplice.
The United States could have done more to help end the Holocaust, but i wouldnt say that the US should be considered accomplises. In the reading it says that Roosevelt gave visas to 20,000 German and Austrian Jews. This was so they could escape the Holocaust and not return home. Many Americans did not want huge masses of immigrants, especially jews, because anti semitism was high back then, coming to the US. Stacht wanted to allow 150,000 Jews into the US with 25% of their belongings. Most people in America were in denial of the Holocaust because they did not feel like something that attrocious could be taking place.
I believe that the United States bears a certain amount of guilt for their inaction despite the growing information the government received about the Holocaust, however I consider it quite low for historians to point fingers at FDR. The US government is controlled by a system of checks and balances; Congress creates laws, the president executes laws, and the Supreme Court interprets laws. It is designed so that no branch has more power over the other. The president, no matter how good his intentions, can not simply ignore congress and its regulations. FDR did, in my opinion, all he could do in his position to help Jewish refugees. He helped thousands of fleeing Jews to evade the strict immigration and refugee laws imposed by congress, convinced other foreign governments to allow Jews into their country, supported any speakers and protests against the Nazi actions, and much more. I believe the article stated my thoughts perfectly: "How ironic that Franklin Roosevelt-the man Hitler hated most, the leader constantly attacked by the isolationist press and derided by the anti-Semites, vilified by Goebbels as a 'mentally ill cripple' and as 'that Jew Rosenfeld'-should be faulted for being indifferent to the genocide". I think those who bear the most responsibility in the United States was Congress. They had the most accurate and confirmed information from other governments, eye witness accounts, and confidential military information that the public didn't have access too. Rather than try to provide safe havens to refugees they actually retarded efforts to do so by limiting the number of immigrants allowed in the US. I think overall, considering the efforts of FDR and other groups to rescue the persecuted Jews that the United States can not be considered accomplices in the murder. They certainly could have done worlds more in the effort to prevent the genocide, but I don't think they bear any more guilt than a bystander in Germany.
The U.S. can't be blamed for the Holocaust, but could probably be called accomplices. American leaders, FDR included, knew what was happening to the Jews of Europe, and did nothing in response. However, they could not be expected to intervene militarily based solely on this humanitarian crisis. The United States had nothing to gain and everything to lose had they invaded Germany, bombed Auschwitz, or sent rescue missions to save Jews. The Great Depression was still hammering the economy, and FDR and the rest of the government had to handle issues at home before dealing with foreign crises.
Although getting directly involved in saving the Jews would not have been feasible, the United States absolutely could have and should have done more to help European Jews during the Holocaust. Had the United States opened their borders to these Jewish refugees, millions of lives could have been spared. The only reason to keep the borders closed was anti-semetism, and this prejudice was responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of Jews, at least. Purposefully keeping the borders closed to refugees helped kill Jews, so yes, the U.S. are accomplices.
54 comments:
I would say, that this is very true indeed. During the time of 1932-1944 happened some contradictory things that I seem strange to me.
First of all, even if I try my best, I just cannot understand the American immigration policy. It is actually a joke to talk about "real" Americans, because every inhabitant of the US, except the Native Americans, is a kind of an immigrant. Even today, most of the people I met in LHS are kids who came from Europe or Asia. So i can't get the idea and the difference between immigrants in '32-'45 because what WAS or IS the real difference between an born American and an immigrated American?
The second thing is that I became a little bit angry when i read the last sentence of the essay. "We destroyed them"... Yeah, you did, but when?? It was very late, and this must not have been like that. I know, that I'm actually the least person as an Austrian, whose country was part of the killing machinery, who should be allowed to blame America in any way. But still, I think that the holocaust might have killed less people when the Americans reacted faster.
Another point that I can't retrace is the argument that the bombing of Ausschwitz would have killed a lot of innocent people, or that the railroads would have been built up very fast again. This might be true, but the Germans had hardly enough money, time and power to rebuild the railroads. And since we know, that the killing of Jews was a "moral struggle" for the German soldiers, we can assume that the killing speed, if you want to name it like that, would have been slower if the railroads would have been bombed.
And I have to add one question which you should think of if you say, that innocent people would have been killed too: Why bombed the US two Japanese Cities (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) where probably more innocent people were killed and this without any obvious reason at all? This bombs were not necessary, but the Ausschwitz bombing might have been.
The American government made one very bad statement: The morality is less important than the opinion of the masses. DId they just didn't intervene because of the threat of loosing the next elections? Did they choose to do nothing so that they can't be impeached?
Did the US learn from this? The worst thing is, it didn't. Because if they did, they would have helped the Rwandan people to fight the genocide.
I think this would be understandable, and nobody should blame the US, if you say the US doesn't want to be part of the world politics and is just a little country nobody cares of (The part Austria plays in world politics are so tiny so that some people have never ever heard of Austria before) . But the American foreign policies kind of pretend that the American military actions are for the greater good and that you just help weaker countries and prevent mass murders. But where were you at the Rwandan Genocide? Did you win the Vietnam war? Why were Gulf wars necessary? Is the US the defender or the aggressor? Saddam Hussein was made to the dictator of the Iraq by, let's guess.... the US...
The government has to decide and has to be honest, do you want to be a country, which can seen as a guardian angel in times of terror and genocide, or as a country which just fights for their own interests? But the way how it is today is not honest and very confusing.
I wouldn't say that the U.S. was necessarily an accomplice in the Holocaust, but I do believe that they helped play at least a small part in the extermination of the Jews. The U.S knew what was going on in Germany, they knew how what the Germans were doing. I can understand that changing something like an immigration policy may be harder than it sounds, especially when there are people who don't want it to change, but if the U.S. had just opened up their borders, then maybe the number of lives lost wouldn't have been so high. FDR did seem to try to do something in the begining, but was that really all he could have done? Could he have tried harder?
Then once the U.S. found out more about the "Final Solution" they finally chose to try to do something. I think this is where they made a pretty lousy choice. They thought that by winning the war they will save the Jews. I guess I can see how they thought this, but after thinking about it that doesn't seems like the best solution. I personally think they should have focused more on trying to liberate the concentration camps, or try to sabotage the trains, to try to stall Jews from being deported to death camps.
Then there's the debate on bombing Auschwitz. I can understand why they didn't want to bomb the camp directly. They didn't want to end up killing all the innocent people inside of it, yes they would probably die anyway while in that camp, but if there was a possibility that they could survive they didn't want to kill them. But they could have bombed the railways that led to Auschwitz. It may have not have permanently stopped the deportation of Jews there, but it would have at least have bought the U.S. some time to think of another plan.
I think that the U.S. could have done so much more to help the Jews of Europe, but since they did try to do something (even though they sure took a while to actually do it) I wouldn't say they were exactly accomplices.
I would say that it was a horrible thing to do, not helping the needs of the weak. The U.S. could have been less restrictive of their immigration laws and lower the number of casualties, however I do not believe that the U.S. was in any way an accomplice to the Holocaust. For one, they did not commit any type of murder towards the Jews, despite the vast majority of the population being anti-Semites. Although one could argue the beliefs of anti-Semitism was the leading cause of the lack of military aid, another could argue that there is very big difference between believing and doing it. In every human being there is a moral standard and that standard is what keeps us as human beings to prevent doing what we know is morally wrong. As for the bombing of Hiroshimi and Nagasaki, the U.S. was finding a quick and easy alternative to ending the war with Japan as quickly as possible. In my opinion, this decision was very irresponsible and very inhumane. Not only did the atomic bomb kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, it also left the land in ruins. It was too unsanitary to live in due to the aftermath of the bomb(radiation).
I do not think this is true. I am sure the U.S. talked with the Nazis in order to stop these atrocities they were committing. Even though words did not solve much in this war, the U.S. at least tried to do something. Roosevelt did not want to invade Germany because the U.S. had weak troops and weaponry. If Roosevelt decided to invade Nazi Germany the U.S. forces would rout before the Garman Panzer brigades and Tiger tanks. U.S. tanks could not match up to the most Feared, German Tiger tank with its awesome fire power and thick armor. Plus the U.S. was also trying to recover from the Grate Depression. The depression hit the U.S. pretty hard. In order for the U.S. to become involved in WWII an axis country would have to attack the U.S. on our soil. Therefore Roosevelt and the U.S. are not accomplices of the Holocaust. They had every right to stay out of this conflict. If the U.S. got involved they would have to pay for weakly trained troops to enter a war in which the German army is a seasoned fighting force.
Although I don't think that FDR alone acted as an accomplice to the holocaust, America as a people should have done more. The author argues that at the time, no one could have foreseen the holocaust as a result of Nazi power, but even after Kristallnacht, a clear warning of the violence that could result from German antisemitism, America's immigration policy did not change. The author describes how the fear of the time was that, by offering help to immigrants fleeing oppressive authoritarian governments, those governments would only see it as an opportunity to scare their unwanted populations into leaving through more brutality. Unfortunately this is what happened, and the United States still didn't open their doors. Even when the Nazis had given up on driving the Jews out and had instead began their process of systematic extermination, American immigration policies did not change. Even though their was no shortage of information on the atrocities being committed in Germany, few acted, or even spoke out against them. In this way, the general American attitude towards the Holocaust was indifference because those who spoke out had limited power, and those in power took limited action.
The United States certaintly could have done more during the Holocaust, but to call them accomplices is a gross misuse of the term. The U.S. was undoubtably a hinderance, far from an aid, to Nazi Germany during World War II.
The immigration policies are the area of most fault and inaction. As soon as the atrocities became apparent the processes should have been changed. When it became obvious that the Jews needed to evacuate out of violent neccessity, the beauricratic process should have been minimalized and all efforts made to hasten the distribution of visas. In such extraordinary cirmcumstances, previous regulations must be transgressed. Tackling the outflux of people with traditional means was a severe mistake of congress.
The thought of "how many more Jews would have survived had the war ended even a week or ten days earlier," is one that puts the United States military effort into perspective. It is the idea that independent rescues, though unarguably valuable, are not as effictive as stopping the source of genocide. The United States could have stopped one death camp, but there still would be another; stopping the operators of the death camps and eradicating the extremist Nazi ideals is the key.
I think that the US should have done more to help the Jewish people during the Holocaust. They made life hard for Jews trying to leave Germany to escape the Nazi's by having strict immigration laws. Yet they said that they were totally against the Nazi's the sad thing was they never really entered the war to help the JEws and stop the Nazi's they entered the war to protect themselves from the Japanese after Pearl Harbor and by not trying to help the Jews and trying to stop the Nazi's the Americans I believe are accomplices of the Holocaust. They had many oppurtunities to help out the Jews who were coming into American but the continually made it hard for them to even get passage to America. The American's were very Anti-Semitic and because of their anti-semitism they were also accomplices of the Holocaust. I find it horrifying that the Americans could just stand and watch the Holocaust happen. They knew very well of what was going on in Germany yet they refused to help and send over aid or troops.
I do agree with what has been said about bombing Auschwitz. I think that bombing this camp would have resulted in to many killings of innocent people. The sad thing is that the US could have come up with other ways to show the Nazi's that what they were doing was wrong and to warn the Nazi's off but the didn't and instead decided to practice isolationism. Their lack of involvment to help the Jews makes them accomplices of the Holocaust. Just like David Cash they decided to keep quite when they knew something wrong was going on. Also the Holocaust was not the only time the US has decided to remain silent and not to send in aid. During the Rwanda genocide the US didn't send in aid until the very end much like they did during the Holocaust. During this time too they knew very well what was happening they just refused to help because they feared what would happen.
The US for the future should not remain silent and should send in help next time the see groups of people being terrorized then they would not be labeled as accomplices.
I think that the statement is true, but Americans should have done more to stop the extermination of the Jews. Aside from trying to gain support to stop the extermination, nothing was done. The U.S. attempted to hold rallies in New York, but was shut down by German rabbis because the U.S. was destroying Germany as the German Jews knew and loved it. Having strict immigration laws only helped the U.S. Rather than allowing more Jews into the U.S. and backing off on the immigration laws, the U.S. kept the same laws and hurt the Jews' chance at survival. Had the U.S. released part of their immigration laws, it is possible that more Jews would have survived the extermination. I don't get why Roosevelt said that he did not have the power to change the quota system of his own country. He's the president; all he had to do is get the new immigration law passed was pass it through Congress and the House of Representatives. Hitler made it almost impossible for Jews to leave Europe by stripping them of thier money and possesions, but yet he said that they had two choices: leave or get killed. The U.S. knew of Hitler's order, but did not stop him. Why didn't the U.S. allow the immigrants on the ship, St. Louis, in if they had already been allowed to leave? It is not right that these poor passengers had go back to Europe because the U.S. was ignorant in its strict immigration laws. The appointment of Breckenridge Long as Assistant Secretary of State by Roosevelt was wrong because many people knew he was an anti-Semite, meaning he would back Hitler in the extermination. If Roosevelt had wanted to find a way to stop the extermination, he would not have appointed Breckenridge Long. By the time the U.S. decides to possibly bomb Auschwitz, it is too late. Granted many innocent people would be killed by bombing the extermination camp itself, but that was the key in trying to stop the extermination. Anywhere around Auschwitz, whether it be the camp or the rails, innocent people were going to die.
No, I do not think that this is true. The article, America and the Holocaust, says that FDR did many things to stop Hitler from the extermination of the Jews. He modified the interpretation of the refugee laws, extended the visitors' visas of the Germans in America, admitted many Jews to America etc. It is just that he did not have the capacity to modify the quota system and go against the government. Many other government officials of America were not in favor of accepting too many Jews. So FDR did not gain the support of his colleagues. FDR even tried to raise his voice by demanding that Hitler stops his cruel acts. It was not a practical thing to bomb the railway that was a connection to Aushwitz because it is true that many Jews would have been killed in the process. The prime focus was to save the Jews and not to jeopardise their lives by bombing places near them. The fact is that America had just recovered from the depression, so it had many other responsibilities towards its own country. It is true that America could have done more but FDR cannot be blamed and called an accomplice because he tried his best to support the Jews. It was the situation and the problems during the late 30's and early 40's that accounted for the strong opinions that FDR faced.
Normally i would disagree with a statement like this because i think it is too harsh and drastic, however in this situation i think i agree. America was not an accomplice to the Nazis in a physical sense, however with as much power as America had, there is something to be said about the fact that the government did practically nothing to help. Even the smallest gesture from America would have helped with the holocaust, but instead they actively ignored it, preventing it from making front page news, turning down ship loads of immigrants, and making it extremely difficult to get a visa. Also, it seems pretty obvious that antisemitism played a large role in American society back then, and even though they did not take their discrimination to the same level as the Nazis did, it is discrimination nonetheless and probably added to the reasons for not helping the Jews. I would not even call America a bystander because the government so actively worked to downplay the news of the holocaust and make it hard and quickly impossible for any European Jews to find salvation in the American Borders. Although i can see why bombing Auschwitz would not necessarily have been a good step to take, i disagree with the article where is says that information was in no way kept from the people and therefore the american government should not be blamed for the peoples decision to not take action. I think that information may not have been directly kept from the people, but it was never made a priority for the people to truly understand what was happening in Europe and to me this is just at bad.
I personally believe that this statement is not true. When I think of an accomplice I think of someone who actively helps in committing the crime, something that FDR and the U.S. did not do. Although they maybe could have done more to help the Jews and some of their decisions were wrong, they were not actively helping Hitler and the Nazis to exterminate the Jews. Also, I do not think that FDR should even be included in the statement. He tried to do the best he could to save as many Jews as possible. The reason he couldn't do any more was because he faced certain restrictions such as the quotas set by the immigration laws and even then, he tried to get around these quotas as much as possible. I think it is very unfair to say that they watched the extermination with total indifference. In some cases this might be true, like with the anti-semetic congress members who wanted to lower immigration quotas rather than raise them and the widespread anti-semetic feelings among many of the American people. However, not everyone was indifferent to the fate of the Jews, especially those in positions to do something about it like FDR. Some argue that the U.S.'s choice not to bomb Auschwitz or to send in rescue missions to the camps is proof of American indifference. However, they were just doing what they thought was the best way to save the Jews and that was to defeat Hitler and destroy Nazi Germany. I don't entirely agree that this was in fact the best way to help the Jews but I do know that the Allies and the U.S. did what they thought was best and making a bad decision is not proof that one is an accomplice or indifferent to the fate of an entire people.
I think it is harsh to say the United States was an accomplice in the Holocaust. America's immigration policy was definitely too strict and confusing, and if they had loosened or made exceptions more innocent lives could have been saved. It was ridiculous that the US would not even allow the boat with Jewish immigrants to dock in America. However at the same time the United States was still recovering from a Depression, and already had millions of unemployed people, and allowing more people to enter the country would only add to the economic crisis. FDR did modify the refugee laws, extend the Germans' visitors' visas, and admitted many Jews into America. FDR did not have the ability nor did the country have the capacity increase the quota system and allow more Jewish immigrants.
The US could have done more to save the Jews, but at the time the US had problems in their own country that took priority. I think FDR did as best as he knew how to help the Jews without compromising America's well being.
Unfortunatly, I have to agree that the United States were acting as accomplices in the extermination of the Jews due to their indifference. Although President Roosevelt seemed sincere of his strong condemnation of the Nazi's actions during Kristallnacht, the U.S. was under a deep ideology of racism and prejudice towards immigrants, especially the Jews. When the St. Louis carried aboard 936 immigrants, in which 6 of them were not Jewish, Cuba would not accept. So when the ship tried to enter our country, it was refused access. Also, as a result of Kristallnacht, President Roosevelt wanted to extend the visas of German and Austrian Jews in the country, despite the disapproval of anti-Semites in the country. The U.S.'s immigration policy was unfair, although a large portion of German Jews were able to escape under the quota system in America. The tests the country gave to the immrigrants were racially biased, expecting them to understand English when arriving on the border. America's media mainstream was also infiltrated with anti-Semitic propganda in the form of rallies, literature and newspapers. In such literature, Jews were blamed for any setback or problem that came. I was also shocked at the descrimination that was shown according to the video we saw in class yesterday. Jews were unable to get a descent job because of their race, nor were they able to attend beaches. Even vacation brochures ask if a person is a Jew or not. Although President Roosevelt had very close advisors who were Jewish, Congress and several state departments (especially the Defence Department) was full of anti-Semitic people, which would criticize the President's favortism of the Jews. Finally, the large majority of the American populous was unemployed, causing a awful belief that "America is for the Americans" and setting up restrictions for immigration as a result of the Great Depression. Although Roosevelt was all for defending for the Jews, the country appeared to be unwilling to help the Jews during the war do to society's anti-Semitic nature. I could not believe the the bystander role the U.S. played during World War II. However, one thing that is important now is that America is Israel's strongest allies.
The United States could have done more and should have done more, but accomplice is too strong a word. An accomplice is someone who aided in the crime, or at the very least did nothing to stop it. America took in twice as many Jewish refugees as every other country combined. Franklin Roosevelt did everything within his power as president to help the Jews of Europe, from extending visiting visas to publicizing the horrific news. His frequent meetings with Jewish leaders clearly show he wasn’t anti-Semitic. As much as Roosevelt tried to help, however, he was limited by both Congress and public opinion. I think that this – the public fear of immigrants, not the acts of our president – is the greatest source of guilt. Roosevelt surely would have tried to expand the quotas, but faced fierce opposition from Congressional leaders. Moreover there was a common fear of Jews and any immigrants, especially from Eastern Europe, that prevented action. Maybe if America hadn’t been battling the Great Depression, we would have been more willing to attack Germany. Maybe if we had felt more compassion for the “other” being persecuted in Germany or answered the moral imperative to fight genocide instead of shrinking into isolationism, we could have saved more people. We should have acted as soon as news of Kristallnacht reached our shores, but we didn’t. It is our actions that spare us the title of accomplice; it was Allied forces who defeated Hitler and liberated Nazi death camps. But for millions of Jews, we will always be a country who did too little too late.
I don't think this is 100% true. Although the United States did not do anything during the time of the actual Holocaust, at that point it was not their fault. Germany has banned all emigration. This would make it so that no one would be able to get out, and therefore no one would be able to come into the U.S. As the article we read pointed out, it's not as if the people of the United States could've predicted that all of the Jews they did not allow in were eventually going to be murdered.In my opinion the United States should've been more open to the immigrants in the first place, whether or not they were going to be killed. America was looked upon as not only a save haven but also a place of opportunity for other things.
I don't think that the United States watched the extermination with indifference. There were definatly two different sides but I do not think that it make the United Stats "indifferent". The president was against what was happening but perhaps did not know how to react. He attempted to make more homes available for Jews even when they weren't in his own country. In the case of the bombing the camp or not, it is a very logical point that the Jews would be the ones that died, but in the end would it have been worth it? to prevent any more Jews being killed there? If that was looked upon or not I would like to see and to see if they actually did the calculations to figure out what the outcome would've been.
I do not think that it is true that the US was an accomplice to the slaughter of the Jews. There were certainly more things that could have been done, that is for sure. FDR could have let the ship the St. Louis dock and let the people off. He could have raised the outdated immigration quotas, which had been in place for many years, yet he did neither of these things. But that does not make him, along with the entire country, an accomplice. In the first place, he did not sit back and let it all happen, he was fighting a war against the Germans, which, although did not directly help the people in Auschwitz, saved at least some in the long run.
I am not a military strategist, nor an expert on the Holocaust, so I can not say for sure if there was something else that the US and FDR could have done to help the Jews. It seems as if there were certainly opportunities to help that were passed over. It does not matter if, as the article says, people from Germany were allowed the second highest quota in the immigration laws. There were also many people from Poland, Austria, the Netherlands, and other European countries that had a terrible time getting in. And just because the number of people allowed from Germany was the second highest does not mean that it was enough, there were tens of thousands of people back in Europe still waiting to leave the country, fearing for their lives, while people in America said that they did not want any more immigrants because they would take jobs. That is not right.
Basically, I do not think that the US was an accomplice to the Germans in any way, but I do think that they are completely free of blame.
I don't think that the US was an accomplice to the Holocaust due to their indifference. I think that they have been put in a very unfortunate position, because looking back on it we can see what they could or should have done. At the time they did know what was happening to the Jews of Europe and they did not act enough to save all of them. They chose to end the war as quickly as possible, instead of focusing on destroying the concentration and extermination camps. I think that choosing to end the war quickly did save more people, and was the best course of action, given the realities of the time. Had the US simply destroyed the camps the Nazis would have built more, or forced the prisoners on death marches, and even if they had saved the prisoners there was nowhere for them to go. America was dealing with major internal problems at the time, as well as fighting a war on two fronts. Public opinion thought that they should focus on stopping the Japanese, so FDR and the army were going against public opinion by fighting in Europe at all. While in retrospect they might have been able to do more, and it is beyond unfortunate that they could not save all the prisoners, I don't think their lack of action makes them accomplices.
I think the observation that many historians are making is a true one and that FDR kept quiet although they had enough evidence to stop it early on. Although FDR is responsible he is not the only responsible one. He got help to not say anything by his Cabinet, his advisors and especially what behavior he saw the Americans portraying against the Jews during the time of the Holocaust. The idea that the citizens did not want the other there was a very powerful one. The Jews were not wanted any where they went and it proves the point that the U.S were accomplices. This is true because they did not want to save the Jews who were stuck in Hitler's power and they also knew of the atrocities Hitler was committing but the reason stopping the atrocities committed against the Jewish group is that nobody wanted to get their hands dirty and stop it. The truth is that FDR was partially responsible for by being total indifferent they became accomplices, the other part of the responsibility needs to go to the Americans in general for not doing anything about it when they had the chance to save even just a couple or a few hundred Jewish citizens who were being persecuted.
There are many different views on if America was accomplices in the extermination of the Jews. I believe they were not as guilty as Hitler and his Nazi party but America has some blame for the lives that were lost. Throughout the reading my view changed. At the beginning it seemed as if FDR and his wife were trying to make Americans aware of the situation and try to help the refugees and stop the situation by starting to spread awareness. With all the anti-Semitism in America at the time I would think this tactic would be very difficult. Then with the immigration laws that had quotas, it was very difficult for not just the Jews but any immigrant. FDR took a stance against Hitler and seemed to maybe do something drastic, but instead appointed a Assistant Secretary that was Anti-Semitic, who probably would not be support any action FDR tried to take to help the situation. After Kristallnacht more than half the immigrants coming into the US were Jewish, but this doesn't seem to have been enough. Leaders around the world and people who could have done more than just discussing what they should do. No action seemed to be taken and the situation kind of just sat on the stacks of other problems everyone had at the current time. It seems to be just a bunch of ideas that were just left alone. FDR did find refuge for the rejected immigrants in other countries in Europe but then these countries were eventually invaded by Hitler and the same thing happened to these refugees as if they never left Germany or where ever they were escaped from. I keep wondering how many people would have been saved if America actually did something ten days earlier than they did. American leaders kept talking about doing something, whether it be bombing, a warning (which I don't think would have worked) to stop the horrible activities going on in a lot of Europe. I think FDR tried to take action against Hitler and he might have not been able to do more himself. FDR needed more people to support him so more things could have gotten carried out. There was really nothing he could have done about the immigration laws but all the other ideas never seemed to been used to the fullest potential. I think many of the politicians were worried about public opinion and keeping there status. Since there was a lot of Anti-Semitism in America, I believe many of the supporters FDR took the "easy way" out of not doing anything. I think sometimes politicians follow what the supporters want instead of doing what is morally right. Some of them could have thought the right thing to do was nothing, but I find it hard to believe everyone in congress was Anti-Semitic. I don't think America were completely accomplices but definitely did not do anything quickly enough to help the millions of lives that could have been saved.
I would say that the United States and FDR watched the extermination of the Jews with such total indifference that they were actually accomplices is false. The US could and should have done a lot more than they did. They could have saved thousands of Jews by opening their border to immigrants, or by interfering in Germany. The U.S. should have done more but they didn't watch with such indifference that they should be considered accomplices. "America's reaction to Kristallnacht was stronger than that of any of the other democracies." The US did know what was going on and tried to help, as much as they could without getting directly involved. FDR was against Hitler from the beginning. He was known for his dislike of Hitler and Thomas Mann noted that "for the first time he believed the Nazis would be beaten because in Roosevelt he had met someone who truly grasped the evil of Adolf Hitler." FDR and Mrs. Roosevelt pushed the immigration laws, letting more Jews into the country then the quota allowed.
He was constantly seeking havens for refugees in other countries and tried to save as many people as he could, while representing the people in the US. Yes the US should have done a lot more to help the Jews in Germany, but they should not be considered accomplices to the Nazis.
The United States cannot be held as actual accomplices, yet they cannot be held as entirely irresponsible either. Different parts of the United States can be held to different degrees of accountability. I firmly believe that president FDR, and his wife Eleanor did what was in their power to do. A single person, even the president, cannot run the policy of an entire country or break down the complex checks and balance system in order to accomplish what he believes in. He did all that he could concerning immigration of European Jews to America while still abiding by the harsh immigration quotas. He extended visas, applied for larger immigration quotas and helped persuade other countries to do the same. There were also a large number of individuals who did all that they could to raise awareness of the monstrosities committed by the Nazis and did all they could do to save people from them.
However there were also many individuals who did nothing to help the millions of people being slaughtered in Europe. Labor unions, business leaders, both conservative and liberal forces where too self centered and pushed to decrease or eliminate immigration quotas. Assistant Secretary of State Breckenridge Long strictly enforced immigration laws. Not to mention that the American people were somewhat Anti Somatic, making it difficult for Jews to live in the United States, and they greatly opposed their immigration to the US. Also, the US consulates did all that they could to delay and prevent Jews from receiving visas. The US did many things to help the European Jews, yet not everyone was involved. Thus one cannot label the US as an accomplice
I do not think that the United States was an accomplice to the extermination of the Jews. I think that the United States was put in a tough place. At first they received very little information about what was happening and did not know whether to believe it or not. Once they starting receiving more and more information the killings became more and more frequent and in larger numbers. I believe that getting involved in this would have saved many people, but might have led to many problems in the US as well as deaths of US citizens. Changing the number of immigrants who came into the US had its up and down sides as well. Limiting the number of immigrants was a very harsh thing to do, but like the article said, if they didn't, it could have led to many other countries trying to get rid of a certain race or type of person from their country just as Hitler was doing. I am not sure about what i would think about bombing Auschwitz. I think that in bombing Auschwitz the US would destroy the camp, but there were still many other places the Nazi's were sending the Jews. The article also said how even if railways and bridges were destroyed, it would only take a few days to restore them, which would not help all that much. I do think something should have been done to try to save more people and less time should have been done trying to decide if the news they were hearing was true. If news is heard of a huge massacre, you shouldn't wait to see if it is true and many people are dying. It should be looked into and something should be done. I think that the US could have done more, but are not at as much fault as the Nazi's and did do some help for the Jews.
It is absolutely true. The United States had a lot of problems, but they were in no way helpless. The US had a lot of power both in their military and with their allies. We could have told Hitler at any time, stop it or else we'll attack. Telling Hitler that it is a bad thing to kill the Jews obviously did nothing. We needed to take action. We could have occupied Germany, flown in parachuters. We were equipped to take down the camps at the very lest. The point has been made that it would be a bad idea to bomb the camps. Of course it is. But we could have sent in troops on the ground, to overtake the camps, remove the prisoners, and then destroy the camp. America takes great pride in seeing ourselves as the heroes. We don't turn away the needy, and we protect the victims. We did not help the victims, and we turned away the immigrants in need. We say them as parasites, and we thought that if they weren't helping us in an obvious way, then they were harming us. By standing back and watching the Holocaust, when we could have stepped in and even offered threats to Hitler, or soldiers, to take down the camps, or opened the doors to the Jews, we would have saved thousands - maybe even over a million. The Nazi victims were helped by other countries in Europe who weren't well off and they were helped by people who had the risk of being taken into a camp themselves. We did nothing. We were not killing the Jews ourselves, but we might as well have been trying to help Hitler, because by ignoring him we told him that it was ohkay, and that we would allow him to continue.
I don't think that it is fair to say that the United States were accomplices to the Holocaust. I feel that saying that the United States were accomplices is too harsh of a term to use in this context. In the article, it stated how Franklin D. Roosevelt and his wife, Eleanor Roosevelt were strong believers in fighting the Nazi's cruel persecutions against the Jews. Although the United State's immigration policies did make it difficult for many Jews to leave Germany, I do not believe that the United States specifically helped the Nazi's in persecuting the Jews, therefore not deserving of the title 'accomplice'. The United States did try to help save the Jews, while keeping in mind the needs of their own country. They were also suffering from a great deal of unemployment and flow of immigrants entering the country. With their own troubles in mind, the United States chose not to attack nor to invade Germany, remaining true to its isolation and neutrality policy. During the Holocaust, no country was able to stop the Nazi's from conquering other lands or the mass killing of Jews. If saying that the United State's lack of help during the Holocaust makes them accomplices, then all of the idle countries would also be considered accomplices. This would ultimately result in blaming the entire world for taking part in the Holocaust, when the Nazi Party was the main reason for it. Even though I do not think that the US should be named an accomplice of the Holocaust, I do believe that they could have done a little more to help. I think that from the Holocaust, the world was able to learn that silence is never the answer to something as tragic as this. However, I feel that in looking back at the Holocaust, it is easy to say "Oh, we could/should have done something," but in reality, what could we have really done?
I would Sat that this argument is false. It is 100% true that the U.S. and FDR sat back and watched the European Jews be exterminated and they did nothing to try and help the situation. There are not many "small" things that the U.S. could have done in order to prevent the Holocaust from reaching the horrible extent that it did. However the United States was not an accomplice to the Nazi's during the Holocaust. The initial reaction that Kristallnacht received from Americans showed that the horrors of what was being inflicted upon innocent people It is understandable that the America chose not to enter the war right away because they were still recovering from WWI and they needed to protect themselves first. Even though Americans watched the extermination of the Jews with an indifference, does not make them accomplices to the Nazi's during the Holocaust.
With sound intelligence of the Nazi regimes actions against the Jewish population in Europe, America should have done more. All the allied powers should have done more. The world should have done more. However, I simply can not agree with a statement that suggests that America showed such indifference that they’d deserve to be classified as accomplices to Hitler and the Nazi Regime.
Hitler’s “Final Solution” took place amidst the backdrop of World War II, a conflict that produced death and destruction on an unfathomable scale. It may seem heartless but in such a situation, the U.S. government had to prioritize, and their priority was the destruction of the Axis power. Sending out bombers or army brigades to concentration camps, in retrospect, may seem like a simple solution to the problem, yet in the midst of a war of this scale that would be challenging to argue to those who actually experienced World War II, U.S. soldiers. Sending out forces on such missions would have diverted precious resources from the main battle lines where U.S. soldiers were giving their lives to fight in both the Atlantic and Pacific theaters of the world. In the end, I believe President Franklin D. Roosevelt was right in his belief that the best way to end the suffering of the Jewish population under Hitler’s control was the quick destruction of the Axis powers. As long as the Nazi regime was in power all Europeans, both Jewish and Non-Jewish could never live in peace.
No, it is not true that the United States and FDR watched the extermination of the Jews with such a total indifference that they were actually accomplices. Though they never directly intervened with the Holocaust, the U.S., FDR and his wife in particular, were constantly aware of the Holocaust and tried to do the best that they were able. FDR did not have complete control as President. He couldn’t convince a conservative Congress to take a risk on their part to either make a direct action in Europe or to relax quota systems to allow more refugees into the country. Instead of being completely indifferent to the Jews’ plight, there were examples that he made an effort for the refugees, such as the International Rescue Committee (founded by his wife in 1933), extending the visas of Germans and Austrians already in the United States, and trying to land the passengers of the St. Louis in the Virgin Islands (also in main part attributed to his wife). He was forced to work up against the public opinion in the United States, much of which was still isolationism, the struggle for themselves as the U.S. struggled with its dramatic unemployment rates, and the idea that there were other places than the U.S. that should also stand up and help the Jews. FDR even faced off against this, exemplified by his end-of-the-war decision to continue to fight against Germany instead of switch all of his military concentration to Japan, which was the course of action suggested by his advisors.
FDR also had to take into concentration what direct action could do to the Jews imprisoned by the Nazis. There was a high chance that any direct action would only hurt the Jews as they would be the first victims of the Nazi’s retaliation, as well as many of the bombings (such as Auschwitz) might have a chance to help some but in the process it would kill many. When the Nazis realized their imminent defeat, they only sped up the process of their killings. There was also the opportunity for the Nazis to “spin” the situation by saying that “…their Jewish victims [had] been massacred not by their killers, but by Allied bombing” (115). By cutting off contact with the puppet government of Vichy, France, it would most likely have resulted in the closing of the route of escape through France for the European Jews.
In my opinion America did not act to their best abilities or some could say at all in saving the Jews from the Nazis but using the term "accomplices" to define America is a misnomer. I feel that America just chose not to involve themselves during the extermination of Jews because it was not their place to involve themselves in another countries affairs. True, they were mass killing innocent people but America had their own crisis's to deal with such as recovering from a great depression, trying to keep neutral, and they were already sending money to support the allies during the war. Although America was a different continent and separated by a massive body of water, they still had antisemitism flourishing within their own country. The new reports on the situation in Europe was so infrequent that it was as if they didn't care and kept a deaf ear towards the crisis. There was a neo nazi rally outside of New York City which shows that support for antisemitism was growing more popular. Eventually Jews were banned from being in certain locations and from job positions just like in Europe. The hate for Jews grew more even onto the point when refugees were denied entry even for temporary immigration because Americans didn't feel comfortable living amongst Jews. Yes, America had their own reasons for not intervening but I think they purposely decided to turn a deaf ear to the extermination of Jews but not enough to be called accomplices.
No, I don't believe that America's inaction can be seen as being accomplices.
Up until this point in history, America had not yet become the "world police" that we are seen as today. In fact, in the 1930s-1940s, America was more so isolationist. It shouldn't be seen as a surprise that America/Americans let these horrific actions happen before their eyes. They didn't jump in to stop Germany's invasions, they didn't directly aid England or France. So why would they have helped a minority whom they were trying to exclude from their own country?
The Jews were so much of a minority in America at the time, the extermination of the Jewish people was not a large issue to America. Yes, the Jewish community in America cried out, and even sent aid over, but there was no possible way they could persuade an entire country to help just their minority.
I'm not saying the United States shouldn't have been involved, I just personally don't believe the title of "accomplice" should be given to a country just because they were bystanders. If that were the case, why not place the same title on Brazil? Canada? Thailand?
I would have to say that calling America and FDR an accomplice to the Holocaust is going too far, although this does not mean that they could have done more to stop it. The word accomplice almost implies that America tried to help the Germans in the extermination of the Jews. America was very slow in its response, but it was not an accomplice. I am not saying that I agree with American policies towards Germany and Jews during that time, but you can't call a nation an accomplice if it helped stop the destruction by ending the war.
America's slow and minute response was not the result of only indifference, either, if at all. Before the war America had just gone through and was still coping with a depression. FDR already had millions of peoples to worry about. For this reason America was overly cautious about meddling with foreign affairs, although genocide shouldn't have been a foreign affair, but an universal affair. Working class Americans did not want more immigrants to be let in because they feared for their, already fragile, job situations.
Also, one really can't blame FDR individually for America's pathetic response towards the holocaust, since he wasn't like a king, and had control over the whole government. He had to answer to Congress and other officials. No matter what he wanted, it had to be passed by Congress. Unfortunately Congress was divided, and thus nothing was passed easily. A few anti-semitic Government officials were also able to capitalize on this division, and further restrict the help towards the Jews.
Finally, if one is going to accuse America of being an accomplice, then they would have to, also accuse the rest of the allies. For America actually was able to actually save more Jews than many of the other Allies. In reality, unfortunately, all of the the Allies and bystanders are at least partly responsible for the death of millions of Jews, but they were not accomplices. They over estimated human nature, and thought that nothing of this magnitude could ever happen. They also faced a plethora of complications and dilemmas in figuring out how to best stop the Germans. But ultimately, many just didn't want to believe that this could happen, and hoped that it would all blow over. In doing this America waited until the last second to help, but then it was too late
Due to the immigration policy of the United States during and before World War II and the strong feeling of Anti-Semitism, I feel that the US was definitly an accomplice to the Holocaust. I can understand from one point how the US citizens would not want more immigrants in the country, especially since the unemployment rate was so high. But in the case of the children trying to come into the United States, that policy does not hold true. These children do not need to work at their age. All they needed was a safe home and food and clothing. They were, in no way, going to be taking away jobs from American citizens. By denying thousands of Jews and Europeans entry to the country, the US was definitly "helping", if you will, with the genocide because when the Jews returned, especially in the case of the St. Louis, their only choice (if one can really call it a choice) was death.
Anti-Semitism played a key role in being accomplices as well. Even though FDR condemed the acts of Kristallnacht, that did not change the fact that there were propaganda newspapers being published saying that Jews were the source of all of our problems, just like in Nazi Germany. Also, the fact that many of the American Embassies that were in charge of granting visas were clearly anti-Semetic helped the Holocaust be carried out because it made it almost impossible to get a visa to travel and live in the United States, thus causing the Jews to remain and die in Nazi Germany.
I wouldn't say that FDR along with people that actually tried to help were the Nazis accomplices, but I certainly think the US as a whole was an accomplice. After the night of Kristallnacht Roosevelt extended the vistors visas for the Jews. FDR and his wife I think tried the best as they could. FDR couldn't have changed the quota system of the U.S. and he did the best he could to try to change the immigration barriers. But Congress was very corrupted and didn't do much to help the Jews. In the Congress there were some anti-semetics and anti-immigrants, and some were completely the opposite. America was in their hands and they decided not to lower immigration barriers. Without the support of Congress FDR couldn't do much. I think America as a whole was an accomplice because as a whole we didn't send nearly enough military to Germany knowing the millions of people dying in the concentration camps. They could’ve threatened Germany in so many ways. Yes America was recovering from the Depression and we were in trouble, but we could have done so much more. The U.S. could've lowered its immigration barriers, it could've been a safe haven, it could've gone to Germany earlier and saved more people but no. There were too many people that didn't care for others, and that only cared for their well being. The U.S. had feelings of hate that also prevented other actions to go in place as well. If the U.S. as a whole hadn't been corrupted so much more could've been done.
Given what I understand the definition of "accomplice" to be, I don't think it is entirely correct to label the United States and their actions as such. Though the US acted in seriously morally reprehensible ways throughout the Holocaust, I don't have reason to believe that they were actively trying to aid the Nazi's in their genocide. The inaction on the part of US citizens and government agencies is a disgrace and a painful reminder of just how prejudiced and anti-semitic the climate was in the country at the time. However, I feel that the actions taken by the US were more in an effort to preserve the country and citizens' self interest rather than to kill more Jews. The US was just emerging from a deep Depression and had vowed non-intervention after the events of WWI. People in the US were, unnecessarily and hypocritically, concerned about the effects of immigration into the country. Their concern shows a deep seated racism, but they really just wanted to keep the refugees out of America, not to kill them. I don't mean to make excuse for atrocious inaction and incompetence the US reacted to the Holocaust with, but I don't believe that the actions that were taken were taken with the intent of killing Jews.
On the subject of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki verses the bombing of Auschwitz, there is in fact research that shows that a land invasion or human military action would have killed far more people, both on the Japanese side and on the Allied forces, then the bombs did (read about it in US History last year). Personally, I think that the use of the atomic bomb in Japan should not have occurred, but there is evidence that it was the right decision, if the loss of life is the sole basis for that judgment.
America should have done much more to stop the holocaust, but to describe them as an accomplice is unfair. If the US is an accomplice, then so was every other non axis, non neutral country in the world during world war 2. The US accepted twice as many refugees as all other countries combined. The US committed to a European war that was not the most urgent threat to its citizens well-being. The US entertained plans to bomb Auschwitz, but they were either not possible because of the military situation or did not make sense. Bombing the railroads only meant that Jews would die on the tracks instead of in the camps.
To respond to Bens question: Why bombed the US two Japanese Cities (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) where probably more innocent people were killed and this without any obvious reason at all? The Japanese would not surrender, and while the killing of innocents is basically disgusting, there were numbers to back it up. The invasion of japan (the other option to bombing) would have cost 1 million american soldiers lives. This number does not include japanese soldiers or civilians, but it surely would have been greater than the number killed in the bombings. That is an entirely different question, though.
Also, to the rest of Bens tirade about the US, I understand where you are coming from. We have adopted a strange position of "guardian angel" as you said, when it is convenient for us, yet we turn a blind eye at the most important of times. I dont understand why failure to intervene in crises is only blamed on the US. European countries have armies and significant power as well. While we may act like a savior when we oftentimes are not, where was the rest of the world in Rwanda? Where are they in Darfur? Exactly where we are, safe at home. The current Iraq war was clearly a blunder. The intentions, however were to stop a dictator from using weapons of mass destruction. I guess that's like intending to help a kid being bullied but accidentally kicking him in the head though.
We did do some things about the holocaust. We fully backed fighting the Nazis, the best way to end the holocaust, with troops and money (sorry to Ben that it took so long). We allowed in twice as many refugees as anybody else. We defended Palestine from the Germans. As to the bombing of Auschwitz, the idea was entertained but not doable. The US did more than most, but not nearly enough. To hold us responsible is to hold the world responsible, and to a degree I think the word is responsible.
Though the United States and FDR didn't do all that they could in order to stop the Holocaust, I don't think it's fair to call them "accomplices" to the extermination of the Jews. Even though there was so much more that the U.S. could have and should have done in order to end this mass murder, there was still a lot that they DID do. For example, The U.S. "took in double the number of Jewish refugees accepted by the rest of the world" and broadcasted and printed new about the Holocaust, showing that there were many attemps made by them to lower the number of deaths. However, the U.S. didn't reach the potential that it could have - the immigration laws could have changed to allow more Jews to safely arrive in the States. They could have tried harder However, I don't believe it's right to call the U.S. accomplices simply because they didn't do all that they could have. "Watching something with indifference", to me, would mean that they didn't do anything at all. After reading "America and the Holocaust", it's clear to me that the U.S. took many actions against the Holocaust and I therefore don't believe that they were accomplices.
It's true, The United States could have done more to help the Jews in Europe. But to be fair, not everyone in the U.S. was necessarily indifferent. The United States accepted twice as many Jewish refugees as any other country. To call the US an accomplice is completely unfair. Because of the enormity and the brutality of the Holocaust, I think everyone will always look back at what happened and think somebody should have done more. But as it stated in the article we read, nobody, not even the Jews themselves, could foresee what was about to happen next. To everyone at the time, mass killings and death camps were things that were completely unfathomable. I would also like to point out that bombing Auschwitz would have been totally counterproductive because it would have killed more of the people the U.S. wanted to save than the ones the U.S. wanted to punish.
Although the article made it seem like FDR wanted to do as much as he could to help, I do think America could and should have done more as a country to help end the extermination of the Jews. The U.S. had the information about what Germany was doing, and they knew what was going on. In the beginning it seemed that FDR wanted to help, and noted that Kristallnacht was out of control, saying "I myself can scarcely believe that such things could occur in a twentieth-century civilization" (110). This led to a lot of American anti-semites becoming angry at Roosevelt.
The immigration issue is complicated. I think some American's did not feel so bad about closing America's doors because there were other places of refuge for Jews. Personally I think that is an excuse, and I think a lot of American's found any excuse they could for not helping the Jews, and not doing more.
Aushwitz should have been bombed in my opinion. The Allies had the information and layout, and what they needed to accomplish the bombing. There are many reasons people give for not having bombed it, including the fact that innocent people would be hurt. No matter what, in this time of history, people were dying. If bombing Aushwitz meant that millions of other Jews would be saved in all, it would have definitely been worth it. The U.S. thought that by just winning the war the Jews would be saved, but they didn't fully grasp at how many people exactly were dying everyday, and how much action was actually necessary.
I believe that the reason the United States and FDR remained inactive bystanders is because they were so stubbornly attached to their idea of not joining the war effort, which resulted in indifference. I would not call them accomplices beacuse in my mind, an accomplice is someone who actively helps in an effort, purposefully on a specific side. I don't think the United States purposefully did nothing to help the Jews, because their aim was not to help Germany, considering they eventually went to war against them anyway. What the United States is guilty of is merely indifference.
I also think that people tend to look at the United States for help because it is known for having such high-technology weapons. When in reality, any other country could have been blamed for indifference.
i believe that this is mostly true. The Americans were definitely willing to help before the war really started, they did try to seek refuge for the Jews that were coming over from Europe. Once the war had started the probability of the Jews being able to leave or even just getting a representative to help them get there visas, was almost impossible; cause when the war really started, the holocaust had progressed even more. I believe that during the war, the American citizens could have done a lot more than just watching everything happen. The only reason America joined the war was because Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. This apparently gave them a real reason to join the war. Because it took a bombing on American territory to bring them into the war, I would definitely say that the American citizens were bystanders to the holocaust. I just can't see why anyone that knew what was going on didn't do anything about it. Yes, there were people that made speeches and gathered people together to try and help the Jews, but there were so few of those kinds of people that there effect was so insignificant. I do believe that it must have been a little bit harder to help the Jews that were IN the holocaust, because we as Americans were all the way across the sea and didn't have a good access point into the Nazi run countries in Europe. Overall, the Americans could have done much much more than what they did, they are and should be considered bystanders.
I think that the quote is true because America made new immigration laws which made it harder for a foreigner to come to America. Breckinridge Long Was qouted by sayuing that with these new laws it was impossinble for an immigrant to come to America. Also resturants, and jobs became segrated by not allowing jews to eat a t there resturants and not allowing jews to work for there companys. All this was happening and FDR didn't do anything to stop the segragation. Also it was said the FDR new about the Nazis systematically killing the jews but he didn't do anything to stop it. These things would actually help the Nazis because if jews couldnt come into America then they would have to stay in Germany were they would be killed.
I can't say that the US was an /accomplice/, but I can say that they could have prevented a lot of Jewish deaths.
To me, being an accomplice would have required actually helping in some way other than not stopping the Nazis. It would have required that the US support the Nazis in some way, like supplying weapons, or making their killings even more efficient. (Though sending back that ship of Jews came really close..)
The US supplied weapons to England, which was pretty much all they could do if they wanted to stay "The Great Neutrality." Maybe they had to prove the point that it would take A LOT for them to go back on their word of being neutral, and that they didn't take their decrees lightly.
Also, if the US had tried to stop the Nazis by doing something like bombing camps, they would have been killing the prisoners, and just doing the Nazi's jobs for them. The Nazis could just as well go back to less efficient guns-- they'd still get the killings done, and they'd have the benefit of having a whole camp's worth of Jews eliminated for them.
In my opinion, the United States and FDR could have made such an impact by helping out, but were thinking about themselves more than helping out others. It’s unfair to say that they are “accomplices” to the holocaust, but it also can’t be said that they did all that they could to make things right. With all the knowledge that they had about what was going on, they had very little effort or care to risk themselves to help innocent people who were dying. Anything they could have done would have helped out at least a little bit. The fact that they were provided with specific information about what was going on and just pushed it aside gives people a reason to be extremely upset and blame them for a lot of things. I understand that it takes a lot of effort and time to immigrate a large group of people into a country, but I believe that they could have made immigration laws a bit less harsh. They should have taken more people than they did to help out the Jewish people that were in need. Even though they weren’t there when everything was happening and weren’t literally helping out the Nazi’s with the extermination of the Jews, they did almost nothing to help. I don’t understand why with so much power that the United States claims to have, that they didn’t absolutely nothing with it. When power like that is ignored and not used for the sake of people’s lives, I find it very upsetting. I believe that it shouldn’t matter how what kind of position you’re put into and how it could affect you in the long run, when someone is desperately asking for your help about a serious situation, you can’t think about your own needs and ignore it. Should the United States be called as accomplice? No. But they can be blamed for knowing and not acting on what they knew to the full extent that they could.
The United States and FDR did not always share a unified view on the actions to take place in respect to the holocaust. The article says that FDR himself had great compassion for the Jews, but that he was limited in power due to the views of congress. FDR probably could have done more, in assigning officials that would carry out plans to help the Jews prewar. The way the article puts it, it implies a lot of the power was out of the hands of the president and the people, that they were helpless to do more, the argument of spreading the blame to another group isn't really valid, the president has no power over congress, congress the people, the people the president, and so on, you can't just say you couldn't do anything because you had no power. There were good examples though that FDR did do things to help the Jews. He was an advocate for increasing immigration, among other things. Despite the article saying that, there were more Jews who emigrated to the US than in any other country. There were still accounts of people being rejected and of the state department telling issuers of visas to stall in giving out visas. The article made the point that the power to save the Jews was out of their reach once Germany had taken over most of Europe. That is a reason why Americans should have seen this and allowed more Jews to come in. Possibly once Germany had taken over Europe, the chance to save Jews effectively had been lost, and the most important and fastest way to save the Jews was to end the war. Essentially, an entire nation can't be called an accomplice for something that they had only some negative part in. They did not for the most part reject all Jews, are fail to help them. Part of the country may have not wanted to help the Jews, but from what the article says it sounds like many including FDR were strongly supportive and because of difficulties in acting were not able to act as effectively to help more of them. The Americans definitely did want to win the war and defeat Germany and in that way showed clear support of the Jews.
Sebastian Yen
While I agree that the United States could have done more to stop the extermination of the Jews, I do not think that they watched with "total indifference." After reading America and the Holocaust, it is hard to deny that Franklin Roosevelt did indeed care about the Jews and hate Hitler. He and his wife tried many different things to help the situation, and while certain action was not possible despite the fact that he was President, the fact remains that the United States took in more refugees than any other country during the war. Roosevelt was put in an extremely difficult position, because not only did the victims of the Holocaust need his help but his own country was recovering from a great depression that had left the economy paralyzed and twenty five percent of the work force unemployed. It was Roosevelt that called for an international conference to help distribute the refugees that were pouring out of Germany and Austria. Although the conference did not accomplish much, at least he tried. Also, after Kristallnacht, Roosevelt extended the visitors' visas of twenty thousand refugees to allow them to stay in America instead of having to return to Germany. Once he knew he was not going to be able to allow as many people into the country as he wanted, he looked for other places the refugees could go to instead. These are just a few arguements as to why although America was not as proactive as many people would have hoped they would be, they certainly did care about what was happening overseas and at least tried to do something to help.
Though the article proves both cases, I don't think agree that America was an accomplice to the extermination of Jews. Firstly, President Roosevelt had a distinct hatred for Hitler. As soon as he took office, he made it apparent that he disliked the Nazi regime. He also had many Jews appointed as government officials during his presidency. As well, Eleanor Roosevelt was active in rescuing refugees. She was a memeber of the International Refugee Committee, which aided refugees in finding safe havens.
There is also a misconception that America rejected all of the Jewish immigrants. But America actually was the nation that took in the most refugees. And though there were many immigration restrictions, Roosevelt tried everything in his power to find safe havens elsewhere.
Lastly, there were many moral dilemmas between whether or not America should have taken direct action to end the War, like bombing Auschwitz. But problems like killing thousands of Jews, the Nazi's being able to easily repair the railways, and possible Nazi retaliation complicated matters.
I believe this to be partially true, however I wouldn't go as far to say that America and FDR's inaction gives them the title of being accomplices. The term accomplice suggests to me that the Americans were working towards helping the Germans exterminate the Jews, which was not at all the case. Americans were merely bystanders in which their lack of action led to their indifference. At this point in time, Jews were such minorities that aiding them was not a top priority for the U.S, especially as the depression was coming to an end just before the war. Americans had to deal with the repercussions of that and involving themselves in foreign affairs seemed to be something of less interest. That said, I still believe that the U.S could have done so much more to prevent what was going on. I also think that if one is going to place blame on the U.S for being an accomplice, then other allies and bystanding countries should be considered for that accusation. Although the allies and bystanders may be held somewhat responsible for the death and destruction of the Jews, the title "accomplice" doesn't fit
During the holocaust, FDR tried continuously to open America's doors to Jews as a "safe haven". Though this task was very restricted due to immigration laws, FDR went to great lengths to try and help the victims of the holocaust; therefore, saying that FDR and America were accomplices in the holocaust is not at all accurate.
The holocaust was a completely unanticipated event that no one inside or outside of Germany were prepared for. We as humans could not see such an inhuman crime taking place anywhere in this world. Because of this, America and all other surrounding coutries were taken by complete surprise when they became aware of the genocide taking place in Germany. FDR did what he could, as soon as he became notified of the killings, too help the Jews flee to his country for safety. At this time, America was also suffering; the economy was paralyzed and twenty-five percent of its work force was unemployed. Although the addition of immigrants would greatly deepen the suffering of America's economy, FDR made as much room possible for them.
Examples of ways FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt helped the Jews are Eleanor's International Rescue Committee, which brought intellectuals, labor leaders, and political figures to sanctuary in the U.S. FDR greatly modified President Hoover's interpretation of the refugee laws and allowed a greater number of visas to be issued. Eleanor also though of other ways to bring the Jews out of Germnay by attempting to land the passengers of the St. Louis as "tourists" in the Virgin Islands.
Although America did not bomb Auschwitz, which is seen as something that could have saved many Jews, FDR opened his country up as much as he possibly could for the victims of the holocaust. Deciding against the bombing was merely due to the fact that more people would have been killed than saved, including his own people. FDR and America should be recognized more as a big helping hand to the Jews during the holocaust rather than an accomplice.
I do not think that FDR should be considered an accomplice to the Holocaust. I think that America in some way should have involved themselves especially because they knew exactly what was happening in Europe. FDR was only capable of letting so many people into America and because of this he was viewed as an accomplice to the Holocaust. I do not think that it was possible however for the United States to do something as drastic as to bomb Auschwitz. The bombing definitely would have slowed down the process of systematic killing of the Jews, but the Nazis still would have found other ways to accomplish what they thought was necessary. Also at this time, Americans did not want to become involved, which is understandable. If they were to bomb Auschwitz, who would have known how the Nazis would have retaliated.
I believe that USA was an accomplice and had a responsibility to act but choose to be indifferent. The immigration restrictive laws should have been changed; Roosevelt made a poor choice in picking Long for Assistant Secretary of State who was anti Semitic. I truly believe that something could have done to change those immigration laws.
Also, USA could have bombed Auschwitz, it had the right machinery and technology to do so but choose to make excuses why not to do it. Yes, Jews that were already there could have died but it would have prevented other Jews from being brutally murdered.
I think the only reason why USA didn't help out was because of anti Semitism. People like Charles Coughlin condemned Jews for being the "problem" for not having enough jobs for everyone. Americans started to believe people like that and became brainwashed and opposed immigration even if it meant to save lives.
I do not think that the United States should be considered an accomplice in the extermination of the Jews. Although the United States and FDR should have put in more effort to help save Jewish lives by creating places for immigrants to live and other things, the US never did any of the killing directly, and they did not send weapons or troops to the Nazis to make the Nazi's job of extermination any easier. The position that the US held was a hard one, because with the information that they had there was little they could do without creating a situation with an even worse effect. If the US had continued bombing the area, especially Auschwitz, then the Nazis could have reacted strongly by going after and attacking the US. After reading "America and the Holocaust" it is obvious that America wasn't just and observer of the Holocaust. America certainly did take actions to help save lives and stop mass killings. I think the US could have done more to help, but they were also making sure that they did not put their own country at risk of corruption or greater losses. Just because America didn't send thousands of troops into Germany to help destroy the Nazis, does not by any means make America an accomplice.
The United States could have done more to help end the Holocaust, but i wouldnt say that the US should be considered accomplises. In the reading it says that Roosevelt gave visas to 20,000 German and Austrian Jews. This was so they could escape the Holocaust and not return home. Many Americans did not want huge masses of immigrants, especially jews, because anti semitism was high back then, coming to the US. Stacht wanted to allow 150,000 Jews into the US with 25% of their belongings. Most people in America were in denial of the Holocaust because they did not feel like something that attrocious could be taking place.
I believe that the United States bears a certain amount of guilt for their inaction despite the growing information the government received about the Holocaust, however I consider it quite low for historians to point fingers at FDR. The US government is controlled by a system of checks and balances; Congress creates laws, the president executes laws, and the Supreme Court interprets laws. It is designed so that no branch has more power over the other. The president, no matter how good his intentions, can not simply ignore congress and its regulations. FDR did, in my opinion, all he could do in his position to help Jewish refugees. He helped thousands of fleeing Jews to evade the strict immigration and refugee laws imposed by congress, convinced other foreign governments to allow Jews into their country, supported any speakers and protests against the Nazi actions, and much more. I believe the article stated my thoughts perfectly: "How ironic that Franklin Roosevelt-the man Hitler hated most, the leader constantly attacked by the isolationist press and derided by the anti-Semites, vilified by Goebbels as a 'mentally ill cripple' and as 'that Jew Rosenfeld'-should be faulted for being indifferent to the genocide".
I think those who bear the most responsibility in the United States was Congress. They had the most accurate and confirmed information from other governments, eye witness accounts, and confidential military information that the public didn't have access too. Rather than try to provide safe havens to refugees they actually retarded efforts to do so by limiting the number of immigrants allowed in the US.
I think overall, considering the efforts of FDR and other groups to rescue the persecuted Jews that the United States can not be considered accomplices in the murder. They certainly could have done worlds more in the effort to prevent the genocide, but I don't think they bear any more guilt than a bystander in Germany.
The U.S. can't be blamed for the Holocaust, but could probably be called accomplices. American leaders, FDR included, knew what was happening to the Jews of Europe, and did nothing in response. However, they could not be expected to intervene militarily based solely on this humanitarian crisis. The United States had nothing to gain and everything to lose had they invaded Germany, bombed Auschwitz, or sent rescue missions to save Jews. The Great Depression was still hammering the economy, and FDR and the rest of the government had to handle issues at home before dealing with foreign crises.
Although getting directly involved in saving the Jews would not have been feasible, the United States absolutely could have and should have done more to help European Jews during the Holocaust. Had the United States opened their borders to these Jewish refugees, millions of lives could have been spared. The only reason to keep the borders closed was anti-semetism, and this prejudice was responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of Jews, at least. Purposefully keeping the borders closed to refugees helped kill Jews, so yes, the U.S. are accomplices.
Post a Comment