Suchergebnisse

"Is a new approach on research on Nazi perpetrators (Neue Täterforschung) warranted, to allow a deeper insight into their minds? This article argues no, because the availability of sources, not the historian's intentions, defines what can be done. In most cases, particularly with low-level perpetrators, the source material is very limited, often consisting only of tombstone-data, which offer little insight in the mentality of perpetrators. However, problems in analysis exist, even when a great amount of person-related information is available. A good example is the case of an important SS-perpetrator, Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski. His rendering of facts, as well as his interpretations of them, vary greatly according to time and personal circumstances. This case study shows that a comparative evaluation of documents is indispensable, and caution against an unreflected use of the attribute 'authentic', too." (author's abstract)

Little has been written about collaboration with the Nazi occupiers in eastern Europe. Using new material from former Soviet archives, the issue of the security police in Estonia is presented as a case study. The commander of the German security police deliberately set up a structure whereby German and Estonian police officers worked closely together, thereby minimising the need for German personnel. Although the security police dealt with the issues which were politically and ideologically the most important, non-Germans like Estonians were accepted as collaborators.

In response to my review of his book, Hitler's Willing Executions, Daniel Goldhagen suggests, in the Fall 1997 issue of German Politics and Society (GPS), that I was unduly critical. His failure to address my main criticisms, and his abusive language interspersed with invectives and ad hominem attacks make replying to his article quite complicated. As I consider this style entirely inappropriate in a scholarly debate, I have restricted my response to his factual criticisms.