Choices
People’s choices of action or inaction changes the outcome of situations. During the Holocaust, the Nazi’s mass murder of Jews, ordinary European citizens shaped history by standing up to the Nazis or witnessing the injustices from a distance. Their decisions were greatly influenced by their understanding of the universe of obligation, which sociologist Helen Fein defined as ¨Toward whom obligations are owed, to whom rules apply, and whose injuries call for [amends]” (“We and They” 56). The majority of citizens chose to protect themselves and their families in order to ensure their safety and future. However, there was a small group of people, upstanders, who stood up to the Nazi regime by rescuing and saving the victims’ lives. Bystanders’ …show more content…
However, they chose not to do anything, which led to the victims’ death. Furthermore, when the citizens saw the remains of dead people scattered on the floor, they believed, “Writh [when he] ended the meeting by threatening to send anyone who spread “absurd rumors of burning persons” to a concentration camp. The townspeople took him at his word. They did not break their silence” (Strom 371). Indirectly, the townspeople played a big part in the deaths of people in the concentration camps. They were aware of the atrocities occurring in the neighboring camps, yet they chose to remain silent, knowing they would be risking their safety if they disobeyed and talked. The rest of the town felt more obligated towards their own families than strangers or even their friends. Instead, the bystanders should have spread the news and revolted together. This would have saved millions of lives and may have even inspired others to become upstanders as well. The more bystanders watch and choose to say nothing, perpetrators get more powerful.
In Ogden’s “The Hangman,” the townspeople indirectly supported the Hangman’s murders by letting him continue. For example, when the Hangman chose the next victim of his gallows tree
People’s choices of action or inaction changes the outcome of situations. During the Holocaust, the Nazi’s mass murder of Jews, ordinary European citizens shaped history by standing up to the Nazis or witnessing the injustices from a distance. Their decisions were greatly influenced by their understanding of the universe of obligation, which sociologist Helen Fein defined as ¨Toward whom obligations are owed, to whom rules apply, and whose injuries call for [amends]” (“We and They” 56). The majority of citizens chose to protect themselves and their families in order to ensure their safety and future. However, there was a small group of people, upstanders, who stood up to the Nazi regime by rescuing and saving the victims’ lives. Bystanders’ …show more content…
However, they chose not to do anything, which led to the victims’ death. Furthermore, when the citizens saw the remains of dead people scattered on the floor, they believed, “Writh [when he] ended the meeting by threatening to send anyone who spread “absurd rumors of burning persons” to a concentration camp. The townspeople took him at his word. They did not break their silence” (Strom 371). Indirectly, the townspeople played a big part in the deaths of people in the concentration camps. They were aware of the atrocities occurring in the neighboring camps, yet they chose to remain silent, knowing they would be risking their safety if they disobeyed and talked. The rest of the town felt more obligated towards their own families than strangers or even their friends. Instead, the bystanders should have spread the news and revolted together. This would have saved millions of lives and may have even inspired others to become upstanders as well. The more bystanders watch and choose to say nothing, perpetrators get more powerful.
In Ogden’s “The Hangman,” the townspeople indirectly supported the Hangman’s murders by letting him continue. For example, when the Hangman chose the next victim of his gallows tree