How were concentration and extermination camp guards recruited?How historically accurate is “Life is Beautiful” when it comes to Jewish extermination?How successful were Einsatzkommando Tunis and how much was Rommel complicit?In a Nazi concentration, labor, or death camp, what was a “'sale' Appel”?Were concentration camp guards allowed to talk about their work at home?How did people die in Nazi extermination camps?How young were children left alive in Auschwitz?How did Nazi concentration camp staff deal with survivors of gassings?How many people died in the nazi concentration camps and death trains and marches?
What's the most profitable use for an elemental transmuter?
How to capture a possible figure of speech with "E se io fossi vago" in translation?
Is it bizarre that a professor asks every student for a 3 inch by 5 inch photograph?
What could a technologically advanced but outnumbered alien race do to destroy humanity?
Router model and/or firmware version identifiable in network traffic?
What does “studies need to be taken with more than the usual grain of salt” mean?
Doubt on finding simplex's initial canonical tableau (II Phase)
How much caffeine would there be if I reuse tea leaves in a second brewing?
Why are so many cities in the list of 50 most violent cities in the world located in South and Central America?
Why did the Government cancel the Brexit-deal vote today?
Proof that if covariance is zero then there is no linear relationship
Why do some switching regulator require tantalum or electrolytic capacitors instead of ceramic?
How are letters between governments being transported and delivered?
How to deal with non-stop callers in the service desk
How short does a trip need to be before flying is less safe than other forms of transportation?
How TikZ uses $ for calculations of relative coordinates?
How do I figure out how many hydrogens my compound actually has using a mass and NMR spectrum?
Iterator for traversing a tree [v2]
What happens to a Bladesinger reincarnated as a Human?
What do you call this when cats hunch their backs and their fur stands on end?
where does black come from in CMYK color mode?
Can tankless & conventional water heaters join forces?
What happens to extra attacks after you kill your declared target
My bike's adjustable stem keeps falling down
How were concentration and extermination camp guards recruited?
How historically accurate is “Life is Beautiful” when it comes to Jewish extermination?How successful were Einsatzkommando Tunis and how much was Rommel complicit?In a Nazi concentration, labor, or death camp, what was a “'sale' Appel”?Were concentration camp guards allowed to talk about their work at home?How did people die in Nazi extermination camps?How young were children left alive in Auschwitz?How did Nazi concentration camp staff deal with survivors of gassings?How many people died in the nazi concentration camps and death trains and marches?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
I'm interested in knowing how the Nazi regime went about hiring the guards and other camp personnel who did the dirty work.
Were they screened for sadism, callousness, obedience, or some other trait that was conducive to the job, or did they not do much about it until someone turned out to be too gentle, compassionate, or principled to dish out the abuse?
Related, was it ever a practice to parole criminals in exchange for their obedience (sort of a, "Do as you're told and we'll let you abuse all of the victims you want")?
holocaust nazism concentrational-camps
|
show 4 more comments
I'm interested in knowing how the Nazi regime went about hiring the guards and other camp personnel who did the dirty work.
Were they screened for sadism, callousness, obedience, or some other trait that was conducive to the job, or did they not do much about it until someone turned out to be too gentle, compassionate, or principled to dish out the abuse?
Related, was it ever a practice to parole criminals in exchange for their obedience (sort of a, "Do as you're told and we'll let you abuse all of the victims you want")?
holocaust nazism concentrational-camps
43
The Stanford Prison Experiment proven that given absolute control over prisoners humans tend to abuse power... to the extreme, while the Milgram Experiment has shown that we are happy to hurt other people as long as it is for "the greater good". In summary - you don't need to be a special kind of a bastard to work in the concentration camp, most Joes Average will do.
– Yasskier
May 31 at 3:47
9
@Yasskier I agree. A relevant book is “Banality of Evil” about Eichmann by Hannah Arendt. Remember that Nazis considered themselves good guys.
– Neith
May 31 at 13:00
40
@Yasskier The Stanford Prison Experiment itself is weak evidence for that thesis. The Wikipedia article itself details numerous problems with that study. Whatever it is, it isn't evidence that guards spontaneously become sadistic in a prison setting.
– John Coleman
May 31 at 14:44
5
@johnColeman thank you for including that. I'll also add that the Milgram experiment did not show people "happy" to deliver the shocks, but that they continued to deliver them with minimal pressure, although the participants were greatly and visibly distressed
– user1675016
May 31 at 17:54
6
@Yasskier I would not be so quick to cite the stanford prison experiment. It was pretty badly done, and many people have come out saying that the professor basically wanted them to "act out."
– Arya
Jun 2 at 0:52
|
show 4 more comments
I'm interested in knowing how the Nazi regime went about hiring the guards and other camp personnel who did the dirty work.
Were they screened for sadism, callousness, obedience, or some other trait that was conducive to the job, or did they not do much about it until someone turned out to be too gentle, compassionate, or principled to dish out the abuse?
Related, was it ever a practice to parole criminals in exchange for their obedience (sort of a, "Do as you're told and we'll let you abuse all of the victims you want")?
holocaust nazism concentrational-camps
I'm interested in knowing how the Nazi regime went about hiring the guards and other camp personnel who did the dirty work.
Were they screened for sadism, callousness, obedience, or some other trait that was conducive to the job, or did they not do much about it until someone turned out to be too gentle, compassionate, or principled to dish out the abuse?
Related, was it ever a practice to parole criminals in exchange for their obedience (sort of a, "Do as you're told and we'll let you abuse all of the victims you want")?
holocaust nazism concentrational-camps
holocaust nazism concentrational-camps
asked May 31 at 2:31
EvilSnackEvilSnack
4224 silver badges8 bronze badges
4224 silver badges8 bronze badges
43
The Stanford Prison Experiment proven that given absolute control over prisoners humans tend to abuse power... to the extreme, while the Milgram Experiment has shown that we are happy to hurt other people as long as it is for "the greater good". In summary - you don't need to be a special kind of a bastard to work in the concentration camp, most Joes Average will do.
– Yasskier
May 31 at 3:47
9
@Yasskier I agree. A relevant book is “Banality of Evil” about Eichmann by Hannah Arendt. Remember that Nazis considered themselves good guys.
– Neith
May 31 at 13:00
40
@Yasskier The Stanford Prison Experiment itself is weak evidence for that thesis. The Wikipedia article itself details numerous problems with that study. Whatever it is, it isn't evidence that guards spontaneously become sadistic in a prison setting.
– John Coleman
May 31 at 14:44
5
@johnColeman thank you for including that. I'll also add that the Milgram experiment did not show people "happy" to deliver the shocks, but that they continued to deliver them with minimal pressure, although the participants were greatly and visibly distressed
– user1675016
May 31 at 17:54
6
@Yasskier I would not be so quick to cite the stanford prison experiment. It was pretty badly done, and many people have come out saying that the professor basically wanted them to "act out."
– Arya
Jun 2 at 0:52
|
show 4 more comments
43
The Stanford Prison Experiment proven that given absolute control over prisoners humans tend to abuse power... to the extreme, while the Milgram Experiment has shown that we are happy to hurt other people as long as it is for "the greater good". In summary - you don't need to be a special kind of a bastard to work in the concentration camp, most Joes Average will do.
– Yasskier
May 31 at 3:47
9
@Yasskier I agree. A relevant book is “Banality of Evil” about Eichmann by Hannah Arendt. Remember that Nazis considered themselves good guys.
– Neith
May 31 at 13:00
40
@Yasskier The Stanford Prison Experiment itself is weak evidence for that thesis. The Wikipedia article itself details numerous problems with that study. Whatever it is, it isn't evidence that guards spontaneously become sadistic in a prison setting.
– John Coleman
May 31 at 14:44
5
@johnColeman thank you for including that. I'll also add that the Milgram experiment did not show people "happy" to deliver the shocks, but that they continued to deliver them with minimal pressure, although the participants were greatly and visibly distressed
– user1675016
May 31 at 17:54
6
@Yasskier I would not be so quick to cite the stanford prison experiment. It was pretty badly done, and many people have come out saying that the professor basically wanted them to "act out."
– Arya
Jun 2 at 0:52
43
43
The Stanford Prison Experiment proven that given absolute control over prisoners humans tend to abuse power... to the extreme, while the Milgram Experiment has shown that we are happy to hurt other people as long as it is for "the greater good". In summary - you don't need to be a special kind of a bastard to work in the concentration camp, most Joes Average will do.
– Yasskier
May 31 at 3:47
The Stanford Prison Experiment proven that given absolute control over prisoners humans tend to abuse power... to the extreme, while the Milgram Experiment has shown that we are happy to hurt other people as long as it is for "the greater good". In summary - you don't need to be a special kind of a bastard to work in the concentration camp, most Joes Average will do.
– Yasskier
May 31 at 3:47
9
9
@Yasskier I agree. A relevant book is “Banality of Evil” about Eichmann by Hannah Arendt. Remember that Nazis considered themselves good guys.
– Neith
May 31 at 13:00
@Yasskier I agree. A relevant book is “Banality of Evil” about Eichmann by Hannah Arendt. Remember that Nazis considered themselves good guys.
– Neith
May 31 at 13:00
40
40
@Yasskier The Stanford Prison Experiment itself is weak evidence for that thesis. The Wikipedia article itself details numerous problems with that study. Whatever it is, it isn't evidence that guards spontaneously become sadistic in a prison setting.
– John Coleman
May 31 at 14:44
@Yasskier The Stanford Prison Experiment itself is weak evidence for that thesis. The Wikipedia article itself details numerous problems with that study. Whatever it is, it isn't evidence that guards spontaneously become sadistic in a prison setting.
– John Coleman
May 31 at 14:44
5
5
@johnColeman thank you for including that. I'll also add that the Milgram experiment did not show people "happy" to deliver the shocks, but that they continued to deliver them with minimal pressure, although the participants were greatly and visibly distressed
– user1675016
May 31 at 17:54
@johnColeman thank you for including that. I'll also add that the Milgram experiment did not show people "happy" to deliver the shocks, but that they continued to deliver them with minimal pressure, although the participants were greatly and visibly distressed
– user1675016
May 31 at 17:54
6
6
@Yasskier I would not be so quick to cite the stanford prison experiment. It was pretty badly done, and many people have come out saying that the professor basically wanted them to "act out."
– Arya
Jun 2 at 0:52
@Yasskier I would not be so quick to cite the stanford prison experiment. It was pretty badly done, and many people have come out saying that the professor basically wanted them to "act out."
– Arya
Jun 2 at 0:52
|
show 4 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
Short answer – it was less "hiring" and more "drafting". No pre-screening happened that I could find evidence of (well, except for the general "has to be a good Nazi" principle, which might count towards that), but being soft on incarcerated was strongly discouraged, which led to a predictable result of "refining" the most harsh guard possible.
The camps were primarily guarded by the SS-Totenkopfverbände – a special division of the SS. One didn't join the camp guards – one joined the SS. At that point, it didn't really matter what one wanted – members of the SS were expected to follow orders as much as soldiers were. If you were assigned to SS-Totenkopfverbände, you went to guard the camp.
While technically there were no "screening for sadism", SS were comprised of people who either truly accepted Nazi ideology or successfully faked it. Thus, they indeed were "pre-screened" for being 1) obedient (because of patriotism), 2) dismissive towards certain groups of people. As concentration camps held people who a Nazi would consider subhuman, the treatment of inmates would be... not good. In fact, Theodor Eicke, commandant of Dachau (the first concentration camp and the model for subsequent camps), encouraged his people to treat inmates with "inflexible harshness": they were the enemies of the state, after all! And that attitude was replicated in other camps – the Dachau camp was a training facility for the SS guards. As such, anyone who completed that training would appropriate the behavior of his SS teachers.
In the last days of WW2, SS formed so-called "SS-Mannschaft" (Auxiliary SS) – a ragtag bunch of personnel drafted from Volkssturm, Army and basically any other source SS could get people from to try and keep camps running to the last moment while personnel of the SS proper could escape. These troops did not go through the usual SS selection process and did not get the same training as SS-TV personnel, so their behaviour could be very varied. But due to the chaos caused by quickly progressing Allied offensives, almost no documentation exist on what happened in camps in those days.
P.S. While searching for sources for this answer, I kept finding stories about dismissal of guards deemed "too kind" to prisoners. I couldn't track down any of these to a reliable source, but there might be some truth to them. If true, it would serve to further reinforce the Eicke principles.
P.P.S. Regarding your "parole to criminals" question – they weren't drafted to be camp guards, but you might want to read up on Strafbatallions (Army version, pretty tame and generally drafted from minor offenders) and Dirlewanger Brigade (SS version. It was initially supposed to be drafted from poachers. That idea was quickly lost, and the unit was drafted from murderers, burglars, criminally insane and so on. It had its debut during the occupation of Poland, and quickly earned itself the reputation of being a congregation of slaughterers, looters and rapists. Believe or not, but things went downhill from there.).
Sources:
Комендант Освенцима. Автобиографические записки Рудольфа Гесса.
(unofficial translation of "Commandant of Auschwitz : The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess", Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Gmbh., Stuttgart, 1958)
Koehl, Robert, "The SS: A History 1919–45", Stroud: Tempus, 2000
13
Note that very early camps were also staffed by SA members who had fought in the street battles. Abusing democrats and communists in a camp was a logical extension of doing so when they could still fight back.
– o.m.
May 31 at 5:10
With regards to the comment about sadism, one commandant was even fired for being too eager to kill Jews.
– pipe
May 31 at 14:29
2
@Pipe according to this wiki page, "Eberl was dismissed on the spot.[170] Among the reasons for dismissal were: incompetently disposing of the tens of thousands of dead bodies, using inefficient methods of killing, and not properly concealing the mass killing."
– Evargalo
May 31 at 17:09
@Evargalo Yep. He was ordering too many, at a rate that the camp couldn't handle. No time to bury them etc.
– pipe
May 31 at 22:06
1
@o.m. and even before that the earliest of camps were just part of the regular prison system and staffed by people taking from the existing prison system roster. That's in fact how the camps got started in the first place, before the nazis took power as an overflow for the overcrowded German prison system. And not just in Germany, the Netherlands for example had several concentration camps prior to WW2 (including one for refugees from nazi Germany) which were later used by the Germans.
– jwenting
Jun 3 at 4:35
|
show 1 more comment
This question is almost a mirror of the more usual one about the defense that supposedly "decent" people were committing atrocities only under duress. The answer to that question is that
- usually people could avoid participation in atrocities,
- doing so might limit their promotion chances, or put them to the frontlines where armed enemies would shoot at them,
- they may or may not have been aware that it was relatively easy to avoid participation.
Regarding your question, after the chaotic early years the Nazis were trying to organize the genocide in a way that would slow the mental deterioration of their troops, which was a concern and prompted the switch from mass shootings to the gas chambers. Read Himmler's speech in Posen and perhaps Goldhagen's book about the police battalion 101 (also read the criticism of Goldhagen's views). The Nazis were looking for people to operate an "industrial" killing operation, not undisciplined people who slow the lines with personal atrocities.
add a comment
|
Actually, the horrific tasks of herding gassing victims into shower rooms, gassing them, and moving bodies into cremation ovens, was performed by "Kapos" in the camps, who were themselves inmates, Jewish inmates too. The SS organized prisoners into a hierarchical structure of tyranny in which they played inmates against each other, and had inmates perform the detailed tasks of the gassings. Kapos who were reliable evidently lived longer, but they too could be murdered at any time... delaying inmates' executions was an extortion tactic that the SS used to recruit those Kapos.
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
1
This looks like a useful answer. Providing sources would improve it.
– Lars Bosteen
Jun 20 at 1:55
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "324"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52916%2fhow-were-concentration-and-extermination-camp-guards-recruited%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Short answer – it was less "hiring" and more "drafting". No pre-screening happened that I could find evidence of (well, except for the general "has to be a good Nazi" principle, which might count towards that), but being soft on incarcerated was strongly discouraged, which led to a predictable result of "refining" the most harsh guard possible.
The camps were primarily guarded by the SS-Totenkopfverbände – a special division of the SS. One didn't join the camp guards – one joined the SS. At that point, it didn't really matter what one wanted – members of the SS were expected to follow orders as much as soldiers were. If you were assigned to SS-Totenkopfverbände, you went to guard the camp.
While technically there were no "screening for sadism", SS were comprised of people who either truly accepted Nazi ideology or successfully faked it. Thus, they indeed were "pre-screened" for being 1) obedient (because of patriotism), 2) dismissive towards certain groups of people. As concentration camps held people who a Nazi would consider subhuman, the treatment of inmates would be... not good. In fact, Theodor Eicke, commandant of Dachau (the first concentration camp and the model for subsequent camps), encouraged his people to treat inmates with "inflexible harshness": they were the enemies of the state, after all! And that attitude was replicated in other camps – the Dachau camp was a training facility for the SS guards. As such, anyone who completed that training would appropriate the behavior of his SS teachers.
In the last days of WW2, SS formed so-called "SS-Mannschaft" (Auxiliary SS) – a ragtag bunch of personnel drafted from Volkssturm, Army and basically any other source SS could get people from to try and keep camps running to the last moment while personnel of the SS proper could escape. These troops did not go through the usual SS selection process and did not get the same training as SS-TV personnel, so their behaviour could be very varied. But due to the chaos caused by quickly progressing Allied offensives, almost no documentation exist on what happened in camps in those days.
P.S. While searching for sources for this answer, I kept finding stories about dismissal of guards deemed "too kind" to prisoners. I couldn't track down any of these to a reliable source, but there might be some truth to them. If true, it would serve to further reinforce the Eicke principles.
P.P.S. Regarding your "parole to criminals" question – they weren't drafted to be camp guards, but you might want to read up on Strafbatallions (Army version, pretty tame and generally drafted from minor offenders) and Dirlewanger Brigade (SS version. It was initially supposed to be drafted from poachers. That idea was quickly lost, and the unit was drafted from murderers, burglars, criminally insane and so on. It had its debut during the occupation of Poland, and quickly earned itself the reputation of being a congregation of slaughterers, looters and rapists. Believe or not, but things went downhill from there.).
Sources:
Комендант Освенцима. Автобиографические записки Рудольфа Гесса.
(unofficial translation of "Commandant of Auschwitz : The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess", Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Gmbh., Stuttgart, 1958)
Koehl, Robert, "The SS: A History 1919–45", Stroud: Tempus, 2000
13
Note that very early camps were also staffed by SA members who had fought in the street battles. Abusing democrats and communists in a camp was a logical extension of doing so when they could still fight back.
– o.m.
May 31 at 5:10
With regards to the comment about sadism, one commandant was even fired for being too eager to kill Jews.
– pipe
May 31 at 14:29
2
@Pipe according to this wiki page, "Eberl was dismissed on the spot.[170] Among the reasons for dismissal were: incompetently disposing of the tens of thousands of dead bodies, using inefficient methods of killing, and not properly concealing the mass killing."
– Evargalo
May 31 at 17:09
@Evargalo Yep. He was ordering too many, at a rate that the camp couldn't handle. No time to bury them etc.
– pipe
May 31 at 22:06
1
@o.m. and even before that the earliest of camps were just part of the regular prison system and staffed by people taking from the existing prison system roster. That's in fact how the camps got started in the first place, before the nazis took power as an overflow for the overcrowded German prison system. And not just in Germany, the Netherlands for example had several concentration camps prior to WW2 (including one for refugees from nazi Germany) which were later used by the Germans.
– jwenting
Jun 3 at 4:35
|
show 1 more comment
Short answer – it was less "hiring" and more "drafting". No pre-screening happened that I could find evidence of (well, except for the general "has to be a good Nazi" principle, which might count towards that), but being soft on incarcerated was strongly discouraged, which led to a predictable result of "refining" the most harsh guard possible.
The camps were primarily guarded by the SS-Totenkopfverbände – a special division of the SS. One didn't join the camp guards – one joined the SS. At that point, it didn't really matter what one wanted – members of the SS were expected to follow orders as much as soldiers were. If you were assigned to SS-Totenkopfverbände, you went to guard the camp.
While technically there were no "screening for sadism", SS were comprised of people who either truly accepted Nazi ideology or successfully faked it. Thus, they indeed were "pre-screened" for being 1) obedient (because of patriotism), 2) dismissive towards certain groups of people. As concentration camps held people who a Nazi would consider subhuman, the treatment of inmates would be... not good. In fact, Theodor Eicke, commandant of Dachau (the first concentration camp and the model for subsequent camps), encouraged his people to treat inmates with "inflexible harshness": they were the enemies of the state, after all! And that attitude was replicated in other camps – the Dachau camp was a training facility for the SS guards. As such, anyone who completed that training would appropriate the behavior of his SS teachers.
In the last days of WW2, SS formed so-called "SS-Mannschaft" (Auxiliary SS) – a ragtag bunch of personnel drafted from Volkssturm, Army and basically any other source SS could get people from to try and keep camps running to the last moment while personnel of the SS proper could escape. These troops did not go through the usual SS selection process and did not get the same training as SS-TV personnel, so their behaviour could be very varied. But due to the chaos caused by quickly progressing Allied offensives, almost no documentation exist on what happened in camps in those days.
P.S. While searching for sources for this answer, I kept finding stories about dismissal of guards deemed "too kind" to prisoners. I couldn't track down any of these to a reliable source, but there might be some truth to them. If true, it would serve to further reinforce the Eicke principles.
P.P.S. Regarding your "parole to criminals" question – they weren't drafted to be camp guards, but you might want to read up on Strafbatallions (Army version, pretty tame and generally drafted from minor offenders) and Dirlewanger Brigade (SS version. It was initially supposed to be drafted from poachers. That idea was quickly lost, and the unit was drafted from murderers, burglars, criminally insane and so on. It had its debut during the occupation of Poland, and quickly earned itself the reputation of being a congregation of slaughterers, looters and rapists. Believe or not, but things went downhill from there.).
Sources:
Комендант Освенцима. Автобиографические записки Рудольфа Гесса.
(unofficial translation of "Commandant of Auschwitz : The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess", Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Gmbh., Stuttgart, 1958)
Koehl, Robert, "The SS: A History 1919–45", Stroud: Tempus, 2000
13
Note that very early camps were also staffed by SA members who had fought in the street battles. Abusing democrats and communists in a camp was a logical extension of doing so when they could still fight back.
– o.m.
May 31 at 5:10
With regards to the comment about sadism, one commandant was even fired for being too eager to kill Jews.
– pipe
May 31 at 14:29
2
@Pipe according to this wiki page, "Eberl was dismissed on the spot.[170] Among the reasons for dismissal were: incompetently disposing of the tens of thousands of dead bodies, using inefficient methods of killing, and not properly concealing the mass killing."
– Evargalo
May 31 at 17:09
@Evargalo Yep. He was ordering too many, at a rate that the camp couldn't handle. No time to bury them etc.
– pipe
May 31 at 22:06
1
@o.m. and even before that the earliest of camps were just part of the regular prison system and staffed by people taking from the existing prison system roster. That's in fact how the camps got started in the first place, before the nazis took power as an overflow for the overcrowded German prison system. And not just in Germany, the Netherlands for example had several concentration camps prior to WW2 (including one for refugees from nazi Germany) which were later used by the Germans.
– jwenting
Jun 3 at 4:35
|
show 1 more comment
Short answer – it was less "hiring" and more "drafting". No pre-screening happened that I could find evidence of (well, except for the general "has to be a good Nazi" principle, which might count towards that), but being soft on incarcerated was strongly discouraged, which led to a predictable result of "refining" the most harsh guard possible.
The camps were primarily guarded by the SS-Totenkopfverbände – a special division of the SS. One didn't join the camp guards – one joined the SS. At that point, it didn't really matter what one wanted – members of the SS were expected to follow orders as much as soldiers were. If you were assigned to SS-Totenkopfverbände, you went to guard the camp.
While technically there were no "screening for sadism", SS were comprised of people who either truly accepted Nazi ideology or successfully faked it. Thus, they indeed were "pre-screened" for being 1) obedient (because of patriotism), 2) dismissive towards certain groups of people. As concentration camps held people who a Nazi would consider subhuman, the treatment of inmates would be... not good. In fact, Theodor Eicke, commandant of Dachau (the first concentration camp and the model for subsequent camps), encouraged his people to treat inmates with "inflexible harshness": they were the enemies of the state, after all! And that attitude was replicated in other camps – the Dachau camp was a training facility for the SS guards. As such, anyone who completed that training would appropriate the behavior of his SS teachers.
In the last days of WW2, SS formed so-called "SS-Mannschaft" (Auxiliary SS) – a ragtag bunch of personnel drafted from Volkssturm, Army and basically any other source SS could get people from to try and keep camps running to the last moment while personnel of the SS proper could escape. These troops did not go through the usual SS selection process and did not get the same training as SS-TV personnel, so their behaviour could be very varied. But due to the chaos caused by quickly progressing Allied offensives, almost no documentation exist on what happened in camps in those days.
P.S. While searching for sources for this answer, I kept finding stories about dismissal of guards deemed "too kind" to prisoners. I couldn't track down any of these to a reliable source, but there might be some truth to them. If true, it would serve to further reinforce the Eicke principles.
P.P.S. Regarding your "parole to criminals" question – they weren't drafted to be camp guards, but you might want to read up on Strafbatallions (Army version, pretty tame and generally drafted from minor offenders) and Dirlewanger Brigade (SS version. It was initially supposed to be drafted from poachers. That idea was quickly lost, and the unit was drafted from murderers, burglars, criminally insane and so on. It had its debut during the occupation of Poland, and quickly earned itself the reputation of being a congregation of slaughterers, looters and rapists. Believe or not, but things went downhill from there.).
Sources:
Комендант Освенцима. Автобиографические записки Рудольфа Гесса.
(unofficial translation of "Commandant of Auschwitz : The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess", Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Gmbh., Stuttgart, 1958)
Koehl, Robert, "The SS: A History 1919–45", Stroud: Tempus, 2000
Short answer – it was less "hiring" and more "drafting". No pre-screening happened that I could find evidence of (well, except for the general "has to be a good Nazi" principle, which might count towards that), but being soft on incarcerated was strongly discouraged, which led to a predictable result of "refining" the most harsh guard possible.
The camps were primarily guarded by the SS-Totenkopfverbände – a special division of the SS. One didn't join the camp guards – one joined the SS. At that point, it didn't really matter what one wanted – members of the SS were expected to follow orders as much as soldiers were. If you were assigned to SS-Totenkopfverbände, you went to guard the camp.
While technically there were no "screening for sadism", SS were comprised of people who either truly accepted Nazi ideology or successfully faked it. Thus, they indeed were "pre-screened" for being 1) obedient (because of patriotism), 2) dismissive towards certain groups of people. As concentration camps held people who a Nazi would consider subhuman, the treatment of inmates would be... not good. In fact, Theodor Eicke, commandant of Dachau (the first concentration camp and the model for subsequent camps), encouraged his people to treat inmates with "inflexible harshness": they were the enemies of the state, after all! And that attitude was replicated in other camps – the Dachau camp was a training facility for the SS guards. As such, anyone who completed that training would appropriate the behavior of his SS teachers.
In the last days of WW2, SS formed so-called "SS-Mannschaft" (Auxiliary SS) – a ragtag bunch of personnel drafted from Volkssturm, Army and basically any other source SS could get people from to try and keep camps running to the last moment while personnel of the SS proper could escape. These troops did not go through the usual SS selection process and did not get the same training as SS-TV personnel, so their behaviour could be very varied. But due to the chaos caused by quickly progressing Allied offensives, almost no documentation exist on what happened in camps in those days.
P.S. While searching for sources for this answer, I kept finding stories about dismissal of guards deemed "too kind" to prisoners. I couldn't track down any of these to a reliable source, but there might be some truth to them. If true, it would serve to further reinforce the Eicke principles.
P.P.S. Regarding your "parole to criminals" question – they weren't drafted to be camp guards, but you might want to read up on Strafbatallions (Army version, pretty tame and generally drafted from minor offenders) and Dirlewanger Brigade (SS version. It was initially supposed to be drafted from poachers. That idea was quickly lost, and the unit was drafted from murderers, burglars, criminally insane and so on. It had its debut during the occupation of Poland, and quickly earned itself the reputation of being a congregation of slaughterers, looters and rapists. Believe or not, but things went downhill from there.).
Sources:
Комендант Освенцима. Автобиографические записки Рудольфа Гесса.
(unofficial translation of "Commandant of Auschwitz : The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess", Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, Gmbh., Stuttgart, 1958)
Koehl, Robert, "The SS: A History 1919–45", Stroud: Tempus, 2000
edited May 31 at 19:00
Community♦
1
1
answered May 31 at 5:07
Danila SmirnovDanila Smirnov
6,6501 gold badge31 silver badges39 bronze badges
6,6501 gold badge31 silver badges39 bronze badges
13
Note that very early camps were also staffed by SA members who had fought in the street battles. Abusing democrats and communists in a camp was a logical extension of doing so when they could still fight back.
– o.m.
May 31 at 5:10
With regards to the comment about sadism, one commandant was even fired for being too eager to kill Jews.
– pipe
May 31 at 14:29
2
@Pipe according to this wiki page, "Eberl was dismissed on the spot.[170] Among the reasons for dismissal were: incompetently disposing of the tens of thousands of dead bodies, using inefficient methods of killing, and not properly concealing the mass killing."
– Evargalo
May 31 at 17:09
@Evargalo Yep. He was ordering too many, at a rate that the camp couldn't handle. No time to bury them etc.
– pipe
May 31 at 22:06
1
@o.m. and even before that the earliest of camps were just part of the regular prison system and staffed by people taking from the existing prison system roster. That's in fact how the camps got started in the first place, before the nazis took power as an overflow for the overcrowded German prison system. And not just in Germany, the Netherlands for example had several concentration camps prior to WW2 (including one for refugees from nazi Germany) which were later used by the Germans.
– jwenting
Jun 3 at 4:35
|
show 1 more comment
13
Note that very early camps were also staffed by SA members who had fought in the street battles. Abusing democrats and communists in a camp was a logical extension of doing so when they could still fight back.
– o.m.
May 31 at 5:10
With regards to the comment about sadism, one commandant was even fired for being too eager to kill Jews.
– pipe
May 31 at 14:29
2
@Pipe according to this wiki page, "Eberl was dismissed on the spot.[170] Among the reasons for dismissal were: incompetently disposing of the tens of thousands of dead bodies, using inefficient methods of killing, and not properly concealing the mass killing."
– Evargalo
May 31 at 17:09
@Evargalo Yep. He was ordering too many, at a rate that the camp couldn't handle. No time to bury them etc.
– pipe
May 31 at 22:06
1
@o.m. and even before that the earliest of camps were just part of the regular prison system and staffed by people taking from the existing prison system roster. That's in fact how the camps got started in the first place, before the nazis took power as an overflow for the overcrowded German prison system. And not just in Germany, the Netherlands for example had several concentration camps prior to WW2 (including one for refugees from nazi Germany) which were later used by the Germans.
– jwenting
Jun 3 at 4:35
13
13
Note that very early camps were also staffed by SA members who had fought in the street battles. Abusing democrats and communists in a camp was a logical extension of doing so when they could still fight back.
– o.m.
May 31 at 5:10
Note that very early camps were also staffed by SA members who had fought in the street battles. Abusing democrats and communists in a camp was a logical extension of doing so when they could still fight back.
– o.m.
May 31 at 5:10
With regards to the comment about sadism, one commandant was even fired for being too eager to kill Jews.
– pipe
May 31 at 14:29
With regards to the comment about sadism, one commandant was even fired for being too eager to kill Jews.
– pipe
May 31 at 14:29
2
2
@Pipe according to this wiki page, "Eberl was dismissed on the spot.[170] Among the reasons for dismissal were: incompetently disposing of the tens of thousands of dead bodies, using inefficient methods of killing, and not properly concealing the mass killing."
– Evargalo
May 31 at 17:09
@Pipe according to this wiki page, "Eberl was dismissed on the spot.[170] Among the reasons for dismissal were: incompetently disposing of the tens of thousands of dead bodies, using inefficient methods of killing, and not properly concealing the mass killing."
– Evargalo
May 31 at 17:09
@Evargalo Yep. He was ordering too many, at a rate that the camp couldn't handle. No time to bury them etc.
– pipe
May 31 at 22:06
@Evargalo Yep. He was ordering too many, at a rate that the camp couldn't handle. No time to bury them etc.
– pipe
May 31 at 22:06
1
1
@o.m. and even before that the earliest of camps were just part of the regular prison system and staffed by people taking from the existing prison system roster. That's in fact how the camps got started in the first place, before the nazis took power as an overflow for the overcrowded German prison system. And not just in Germany, the Netherlands for example had several concentration camps prior to WW2 (including one for refugees from nazi Germany) which were later used by the Germans.
– jwenting
Jun 3 at 4:35
@o.m. and even before that the earliest of camps were just part of the regular prison system and staffed by people taking from the existing prison system roster. That's in fact how the camps got started in the first place, before the nazis took power as an overflow for the overcrowded German prison system. And not just in Germany, the Netherlands for example had several concentration camps prior to WW2 (including one for refugees from nazi Germany) which were later used by the Germans.
– jwenting
Jun 3 at 4:35
|
show 1 more comment
This question is almost a mirror of the more usual one about the defense that supposedly "decent" people were committing atrocities only under duress. The answer to that question is that
- usually people could avoid participation in atrocities,
- doing so might limit their promotion chances, or put them to the frontlines where armed enemies would shoot at them,
- they may or may not have been aware that it was relatively easy to avoid participation.
Regarding your question, after the chaotic early years the Nazis were trying to organize the genocide in a way that would slow the mental deterioration of their troops, which was a concern and prompted the switch from mass shootings to the gas chambers. Read Himmler's speech in Posen and perhaps Goldhagen's book about the police battalion 101 (also read the criticism of Goldhagen's views). The Nazis were looking for people to operate an "industrial" killing operation, not undisciplined people who slow the lines with personal atrocities.
add a comment
|
This question is almost a mirror of the more usual one about the defense that supposedly "decent" people were committing atrocities only under duress. The answer to that question is that
- usually people could avoid participation in atrocities,
- doing so might limit their promotion chances, or put them to the frontlines where armed enemies would shoot at them,
- they may or may not have been aware that it was relatively easy to avoid participation.
Regarding your question, after the chaotic early years the Nazis were trying to organize the genocide in a way that would slow the mental deterioration of their troops, which was a concern and prompted the switch from mass shootings to the gas chambers. Read Himmler's speech in Posen and perhaps Goldhagen's book about the police battalion 101 (also read the criticism of Goldhagen's views). The Nazis were looking for people to operate an "industrial" killing operation, not undisciplined people who slow the lines with personal atrocities.
add a comment
|
This question is almost a mirror of the more usual one about the defense that supposedly "decent" people were committing atrocities only under duress. The answer to that question is that
- usually people could avoid participation in atrocities,
- doing so might limit their promotion chances, or put them to the frontlines where armed enemies would shoot at them,
- they may or may not have been aware that it was relatively easy to avoid participation.
Regarding your question, after the chaotic early years the Nazis were trying to organize the genocide in a way that would slow the mental deterioration of their troops, which was a concern and prompted the switch from mass shootings to the gas chambers. Read Himmler's speech in Posen and perhaps Goldhagen's book about the police battalion 101 (also read the criticism of Goldhagen's views). The Nazis were looking for people to operate an "industrial" killing operation, not undisciplined people who slow the lines with personal atrocities.
This question is almost a mirror of the more usual one about the defense that supposedly "decent" people were committing atrocities only under duress. The answer to that question is that
- usually people could avoid participation in atrocities,
- doing so might limit their promotion chances, or put them to the frontlines where armed enemies would shoot at them,
- they may or may not have been aware that it was relatively easy to avoid participation.
Regarding your question, after the chaotic early years the Nazis were trying to organize the genocide in a way that would slow the mental deterioration of their troops, which was a concern and prompted the switch from mass shootings to the gas chambers. Read Himmler's speech in Posen and perhaps Goldhagen's book about the police battalion 101 (also read the criticism of Goldhagen's views). The Nazis were looking for people to operate an "industrial" killing operation, not undisciplined people who slow the lines with personal atrocities.
answered May 31 at 16:45
o.m.o.m.
11k18 silver badges42 bronze badges
11k18 silver badges42 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
Actually, the horrific tasks of herding gassing victims into shower rooms, gassing them, and moving bodies into cremation ovens, was performed by "Kapos" in the camps, who were themselves inmates, Jewish inmates too. The SS organized prisoners into a hierarchical structure of tyranny in which they played inmates against each other, and had inmates perform the detailed tasks of the gassings. Kapos who were reliable evidently lived longer, but they too could be murdered at any time... delaying inmates' executions was an extortion tactic that the SS used to recruit those Kapos.
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
1
This looks like a useful answer. Providing sources would improve it.
– Lars Bosteen
Jun 20 at 1:55
add a comment
|
Actually, the horrific tasks of herding gassing victims into shower rooms, gassing them, and moving bodies into cremation ovens, was performed by "Kapos" in the camps, who were themselves inmates, Jewish inmates too. The SS organized prisoners into a hierarchical structure of tyranny in which they played inmates against each other, and had inmates perform the detailed tasks of the gassings. Kapos who were reliable evidently lived longer, but they too could be murdered at any time... delaying inmates' executions was an extortion tactic that the SS used to recruit those Kapos.
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
1
This looks like a useful answer. Providing sources would improve it.
– Lars Bosteen
Jun 20 at 1:55
add a comment
|
Actually, the horrific tasks of herding gassing victims into shower rooms, gassing them, and moving bodies into cremation ovens, was performed by "Kapos" in the camps, who were themselves inmates, Jewish inmates too. The SS organized prisoners into a hierarchical structure of tyranny in which they played inmates against each other, and had inmates perform the detailed tasks of the gassings. Kapos who were reliable evidently lived longer, but they too could be murdered at any time... delaying inmates' executions was an extortion tactic that the SS used to recruit those Kapos.
Actually, the horrific tasks of herding gassing victims into shower rooms, gassing them, and moving bodies into cremation ovens, was performed by "Kapos" in the camps, who were themselves inmates, Jewish inmates too. The SS organized prisoners into a hierarchical structure of tyranny in which they played inmates against each other, and had inmates perform the detailed tasks of the gassings. Kapos who were reliable evidently lived longer, but they too could be murdered at any time... delaying inmates' executions was an extortion tactic that the SS used to recruit those Kapos.
answered Jun 20 at 1:48
PeaceLoveDovePeaceLoveDove
11 bronze badge
11 bronze badge
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.
1
This looks like a useful answer. Providing sources would improve it.
– Lars Bosteen
Jun 20 at 1:55
add a comment
|
1
This looks like a useful answer. Providing sources would improve it.
– Lars Bosteen
Jun 20 at 1:55
1
1
This looks like a useful answer. Providing sources would improve it.
– Lars Bosteen
Jun 20 at 1:55
This looks like a useful answer. Providing sources would improve it.
– Lars Bosteen
Jun 20 at 1:55
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f52916%2fhow-were-concentration-and-extermination-camp-guards-recruited%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
43
The Stanford Prison Experiment proven that given absolute control over prisoners humans tend to abuse power... to the extreme, while the Milgram Experiment has shown that we are happy to hurt other people as long as it is for "the greater good". In summary - you don't need to be a special kind of a bastard to work in the concentration camp, most Joes Average will do.
– Yasskier
May 31 at 3:47
9
@Yasskier I agree. A relevant book is “Banality of Evil” about Eichmann by Hannah Arendt. Remember that Nazis considered themselves good guys.
– Neith
May 31 at 13:00
40
@Yasskier The Stanford Prison Experiment itself is weak evidence for that thesis. The Wikipedia article itself details numerous problems with that study. Whatever it is, it isn't evidence that guards spontaneously become sadistic in a prison setting.
– John Coleman
May 31 at 14:44
5
@johnColeman thank you for including that. I'll also add that the Milgram experiment did not show people "happy" to deliver the shocks, but that they continued to deliver them with minimal pressure, although the participants were greatly and visibly distressed
– user1675016
May 31 at 17:54
6
@Yasskier I would not be so quick to cite the stanford prison experiment. It was pretty badly done, and many people have come out saying that the professor basically wanted them to "act out."
– Arya
Jun 2 at 0:52