Bystander Society: Conformity and

Complicity in Nazi Germany and the

Holocaust Mary Fulbrook
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/bystander-society-conformity-and-complicity-in-nazi-g
ermany-and-the-holocaust-mary-fulbrook/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Holocaust Bystander in Polish Culture, 1942-2015:

The Story of Innocence Maryla Hopfinger

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-holocaust-bystander-in-polish-
culture-1942-2015-the-story-of-innocence-maryla-hopfinger/

Hunger in War and Peace: Women and Children in Germany,

1914–1924 Mary Elisabeth Cox

https://ebookmass.com/product/hunger-in-war-and-peace-women-and-
children-in-germany-1914-1924-mary-elisabeth-cox/

Before the Holocaust: Antisemitic Violence and the

Reaction of German Elites and Institutions during the
Nazi Takeover Hermann Beck

https://ebookmass.com/product/before-the-holocaust-antisemitic-
violence-and-the-reaction-of-german-elites-and-institutions-
during-the-nazi-takeover-hermann-beck/

Marriages, Families, and Relationships: Making Choices

in a Diverse Society Mary Ann Lamanna

https://ebookmass.com/product/marriages-families-and-
relationships-making-choices-in-a-diverse-society-mary-ann-
lamanna/
Holocaust Memory and National Museums in Britain

https://ebookmass.com/product/holocaust-memory-and-national-
museums-in-britain/

The Art of Complicity in Martial and Statius: Martial's

Epigrams, Statius' Silvae, and Domitianic Rome
Gunderson

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-art-of-complicity-in-martial-
and-statius-martials-epigrams-statius-silvae-and-domitianic-rome-
gunderson/

Toxic: A History Of Nerve Agents, From Nazi Germany To

Putin’s Russia 1st Edition Edition Dan Kaszeta

https://ebookmass.com/product/toxic-a-history-of-nerve-agents-
from-nazi-germany-to-putins-russia-1st-edition-edition-dan-
kaszeta/

Grace and Conformity: The Reformed Conformist Tradition

and the Early Stuart Church of England (Oxford Studies
in Historical Theology) Stephen Hampton

https://ebookmass.com/product/grace-and-conformity-the-reformed-
conformist-tradition-and-the-early-stuart-church-of-england-
oxford-studies-in-historical-theology-stephen-hampton/

Grace and Conformity: The Reformed Conformist Tradition

and the Early Stuart Church of England (OXFORD STU IN
HISTORICAL THEOLOGY SERIES) Hampton

https://ebookmass.com/product/grace-and-conformity-the-reformed-
conformist-tradition-and-the-early-stuart-church-of-england-
oxford-stu-in-historical-theology-series-hampton/
BYSTANDER SOCIETY
 BYSTANDER SOCIETY
CONFORMITY AND COMPLICITY IN NAZI GERMANY
AND THE HOLOCAUST

MARY FULBROOK
 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the
University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing
worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and
certain other countries.
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.
© Mary Fulbrook 2023
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in
writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under
terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning
reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
Oxford University Press, at the address above.

You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same
condition on any acquirer.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Fulbrook, Mary, 1951- author.
Title: Bystander society : conformity and complicity in Nazi Germany and
the Holocaust / Mary Fulbrook.
Other titles: Conformity and complicity in Nazi Germany and the Holocaust
Description: New York, NY : Oxford University Press, 2023. | Includes index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2023022536 (print) | LCCN 2023022537 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780197691717 (hardback) | ISBN 9780197691724 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: Holocaust, Jewish (1939–1945)—Moral and ethical aspects. |
Holocaust, Jewish (1939–1945)—Social aspects. | National socialism—Social aspects—
Germany. |
World War, 1939–1945—Collaborationists. |
Antisemitism—Social aspects—Germany—History—20th century. |
Conformity—Germany x History—20th century. | Apathy—Germany.
Classification: LCC D804.3 .F848 2023 (print) | LCC D804.3 (ebook) |
DDC 940.53/180943—dc23/eng/20230520
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023022536
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023022537
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197691717.001.0001
 Contents

Preface
Acknowledgements

Introduction: Bystanders and Collective Violence

PART I. THE SLIPPERY SLOPE: SOCIAL SEGREGATION IN NA

ZI GERMANY
1. Lives in Germany before 1933
2. Falling into Line: Spring 1933
3. Ripping Apart at the Seams: The Racialization of Identity, 1933
–1934
4. Shifting Communities: Dissembling and the Cost of Conformity
5. A Nation of ‘Aryans’? The Normalization of Racial Discrimination

PART II. THE EXPANSION OF VIOLENCE AT HOME AND ABR

OAD
6. Changing Horizons: Views from Within and Without
7. Shock Waves: Polarization in Peacetime Society, November 193
8
8. Divided Fates: Empathy, Exit, and Death, 1939–1941
9. Over the Precipice: From Persecution to Genocide in the Baltics
10. Inner Emigration and the Fiction of Ignorance
11. Towards the End: Rescue, Survival, and Self-Justifications
 CONCLUSION
12. The Bystander Myth and Responses to Violence

Notes
Index
 Preface

I have long been puzzled about how the many millions of Germans
who were neither enthusiastic supporters nor political opponents or
direct victims of Nazism—what I have called the ‘muddled middle’—
accommodated themselves to living within the Nazi dictatorship; and
how, in the face of escalating violence, so many could become
complicit in systemic racism, some even actively facilitating mass
murder, and yet later claim they had been merely innocent
bystanders. The development of the Third Reich, and the unleashing
of a genocidal war, in which millions of civilians were wilfully
murdered with the active participation of collaborators and auxiliaries
in other countries across Europe, cannot be understood solely in
terms of a chronology of Nazi policies, or the actions and reactions
of key individuals, groups, and institutions in Germany, important as
these are. We also have to understand how far wider groups became
involved—and why so many people stood passively by, either unable
or unwilling to intervene on the side of victims.
To do this, we need in some way to put together the social history
of prewar Nazi Germany with the explosions of violence that began
with territorial expansion in 1938 and the invasion of Poland in 1939,
and escalated massively in the ‘war of annihilation’ on the Eastern
Front from 1941. We have to understand what social changes
occurred that made the extraordinary radicalization of violence
possible even in the renowned ‘land of poets and thinkers’, and even
before murderous violence was exported to the Eastern European
borderlands that had so often witnessed bloody pogroms in
preceding decades. In short: we need to understand how, in their
daily lives, vast numbers of Germans began to discriminate against
‘non-Aryan’ compatriots; and what were the longer-term implications
for ignoring, condoning, or facilitating genocide beyond the borders
of the Reich.
By exploring individual responses to common challenges, I have
sought in this book to evaluate the processes through which people
could variously become, to widely differing degrees, complicit in the
murderous consequences of Nazi rule. Viewed in this way, it
becomes clear that significant changes in German society through
the Nazi period are more complex, more messy, than some accounts
of the Third Reich would suggest. The long-standing view of
‘German society’ as some monolithic mass subjected to totalitarian
rule is clearly inadequate; but so too are summary notions of a
‘perpetrator society’ (Tätergesellschaft), or a ‘consensual
dictatorship’ (Konsensdiktatur), or ‘implicated subjects’ that have
variously gained in popularity in recent decades. Similarly, appeals to
notions such as endemic antisemitism, or obedience to authority, risk
drifting off into a disembodied history of ideas, or typecasting ‘the
Germans’ with some supposedly persisting characteristics.
I have tried in this book to understand, through personal
accounts, the gradual and at first seemingly minimal shifts in
people’s behaviours, perceptions, and social relationships within
Germany during the peacetime years of Hitler’s rule; and then the
rapid, radical reorientation of attitudes and actions as the Reich
expanded, and during the genocidal war that Germany unleashed on
Europe and the world. Although focussing on individual experiences
in selected locations, and exploring the development of complicity in
the conflagration of crimes that we call the Holocaust, I have sought
to develop a more broadly applicable argument about the conditions
for widespread passivity in face of unspeakable violence.
These are huge topics, posing questions that people have
grappled with for decades; this horrific history of brutality and mass
murder remains in fundamental respects utterly incomprehensible.
Yet we have to try to make sense of it in whatever ways we can, in
order to develop a fuller understanding of the multiple ways in which
the reprehensible and unthinkable ultimately became possible. It
seemed to me that the vexed issue of bystanding—of standing
passively by, failing to intervene and assist victims, effectively
condoning violence by not standing up to condemn it, even
sustaining the perpetrator side by appearing to support public
demonstrations of violence—required far more systematic analysis
than the various loose uses of the term had so far suggested. It is in
principle impossible to try to remain neutral under conditions of
persistent, state-sponsored violence. The question then becomes
one of why so many people choose to act in one way rather than
another, and under what conditions people’s perceptions and
behaviour shift, with what (often ultimately fatal) consequences for
others.
The argument is developed in this book with respect to German
society and the Holocaust. But there are significant wider
implications. Passivity, indifference, choosing to ignore the fates of
others are not historical givens; they are actively produced and
fostered under certain conditions and vary with historical
circumstances. In face of persisting discrimination and persecution,
and repeated eruptions of collective violence, understanding the
production of what I have called a ‘bystander society’ is of
continuing and far wider relevance.
 Acknowledgements

The research for this book was based in a collaborative research

project sponsored by the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council
(AHRC), with additional funding for impact activities very generously
provided by the Pears Foundation. I would like to thank both the
AHRC and Trevor Pears for their crucial financial support for the
project. I would also particularly like to thank my close academic
collaborators for their invaluable support and intellectual stimulation
over the course of the research and writing of this book: Stephanie
Bird, Stefanie Rauch, Christoph Thonfeld, and Bas Willems. Writing a
book is always necessarily a somewhat isolated endeavour, but this
was made infinitely more enjoyable by regular interactions with
members of the research group, always appropriately both critical
and constructive in their comments.
Impact activities relating to the wider collaborative project were
greatly enhanced by working on the production of short films with
Graham Riach, to whom I am extremely grateful for his seemingly
unshakeable good humour—whether tramping around death sites in
Lithuania, tracing Nazism through the streets of Berlin, or dealing
with rambling academic discussions in my office and on Zoom.
Bringing the project to the attention of wider audiences was ably
facilitated by our Impact Fellow, Dan Edmonds, also generously
funded by the Pears Foundation; and by cooperation with colleagues
from the Centre for Holocaust Education in the UCL Institute of
Education, particularly Helen McCord, Andy Pearce, and Corey Soper,
who assisted in outreach to teachers and schools. Catherine Stokes
of the UCL IAS provided invaluable administrative support to our
group throughout. I would also like to take this opportunity to
remember the late documentary filmmaker Luke Holland, whose
recorded interviews with people who were involved in or close
witnesses to the Holocaust played a significant role in our wider
project, even though I have not drawn on his material in this book.
His commitment and continuing engagement with key issues around
those ‘on the side of the perpetrators’ was much appreciated, and
his archival legacy will, I hope, encourage and facilitate far more
research in this area.
The ideas in this book have been developed and presented in a
number of versions over the years. Early stimulation for my own
approach came from the 2015 conference on Bystanders organized
by Christina Morina and Krijn Thijs in Amsterdam, and I am very
glad now to be able to continue the discussion with Christina Morina
in a new collaborative project funded by the AHRC and the German
Research Foundation (DFG) with a broader pan-European focus.
Further impetus for the project came from being asked to deliver a
keynote at the Nottingham conference on Privacy and Private Lives
in Nazi Germany, organized by Elizabeth Harvey, Johannes Hürter,
Maiken Umbach, and Andreas Wirsching. I am also grateful to
colleagues at Yad Vashem for their valuable comments on the
occasion of my David Bankier Memorial Lecture in 2018. I received
helpful input to my thinking specifically on Kristallnacht at the
conference held at the University of Southern California to mark the
anniversary of this event in November 2018. A further location
where I was able to benefit in person from reactions to my evolving
ideas was at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver in March
2020; I greatly enjoyed that occasion and was then fortunate to
catch virtually the last plane out before airports closed for travel.
Much of my writing took place during the Covid pandemic from
spring 2020, with repeated lockdowns. There were some
unexpectedly beneficial aspects of this otherwise horrendous
worldwide public health crisis. Interacting on screen with colleagues
near and far, across the world, in workshops, seminars, and
conferences, was a constant source of pleasure, made possible by
the wonders of internet technology, even if somewhat constrained
by circumstances. I would particularly like to thank members of the
informal regular discussion group on History and Psychoanalysis,
with whom I have had so many stimulating and invigorating
discussions over the years, first in person and more recently on
Zoom; they have sustained this project in many ways. I have also
benefitted from the input of members of a seminar group
wonderfully hosted by Irene Kacandes that arose from a cancelled
Lessons and Legacies conference. The persistent travel restrictions
affected the book in less beneficial ways too. Most obviously, the
pandemic put a sudden end to further archival research and site
visits, and for long stretches of time even access to secondary
materials in local libraries was severely restricted. Not least, as for so
many other people, family health issues were often severely
distracting. Writing was therefore a far more disjointed process than
it might otherwise have been.
I am immensely grateful to Jürgen Matthäus for his careful
reading and perceptive comments on a full draft of the manuscript,
as well as assistance with obtaining images from the United States
Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM). Through coediting and
coauthoring with him on another project, I had already come to
appreciate his incredible expertise, as well as his sheer good
humour, efficiency, and reliability. I would also like to extend
particular thanks to David Silberklang for his expert and helpful
comments on one of the later chapters, and his assistance with
obtaining key photographs from the Yad Vashem archive. Needless
to say, I take full responsibility for any remaining errors and
infelicities.
My particular thanks go to my agent, Emma Parry, for her
enduring encouragement; this means a lot to me. And I am
extremely grateful to Tim Bent of Oxford University Press for what
he nicely called his ‘meddlesome’ comments in the final stages of
editing the manuscript; I really appreciate his close engagement
with the text, even if I have neither accepted all his suggestions for
stylistic changes nor satisfied his repeated quest for greater
statistical quantification in an area that I see as intrinsically
characterized by fluidity, ambiguity, and ambivalence.
 As always, members of my family have variously sustained,
supported, and distracted me throughout the writing of this book.
Conrad, Erica, and Carl, and their respective partners, have
continued to be wonderful companions in their very different ways,
while particular mention should be made of the growing band of life-
enhancing grandchildren on both sides of the Atlantic. Julian has, as
ever, unfailingly accompanied me throughout the research and
writing, helping me to explore disagreeable places and
uncomfortable material, while abandoning any hope that I might one
day turn to work on a more congenial subject.
Mary Fulbrook
London, 12 February 2023
 Introduction
Bystanders and Collective Violence

In April 1933, just over two months after Hitler had been appointed
chancellor of Germany, a prominent lawyer was forced to parade
through the streets of Munich with his clothes in tatters, bearing a
placard with the words ‘This filthy Jew shall no longer stand in
judgement over us!’ A young businesswoman whom I shall call
‘Klara’ happened to be passing by when she witnessed this public
humiliation. Hardly able to believe her eyes, she was overwhelmed
by a combination of horror and compassion. She tried to push her
way through the crowds in the hope of being able to help in some
way—but to no effect. Nor was she able to gain assistance from
other bystanders: neither ‘Aryans’ nor Jewish Germans were willing
to intervene. Eventually the lawyer was taken to the public square
by the railway station, where he was repeatedly kicked on the
ground ‘for the pleasure of the gaping masses,’ before finally being
allowed to go home. This incident shocked Klara so much that she
wrote vividly about it in an essay penned some six years later, in
1939.1
Not only this lawyer, whose name we do not know, but other
Jews too were subject to abuse and victimization following Hitler’s
rise to power; when Klara ran to get help from Jewish friends, she
found that one of them, a rabbi, had himself been arrested. But why
did non-Jewish Germans not raise their voices in protest? Why did so
many of them watch, whether silently or even in apparent approval?
And—the question so many of us ask ourselves in the aftermath of
the Holocaust and in the face of violence to this day—what would we
have done in these circumstances?
 The passivity of bystanders deeply affected Klara, who saw
herself as a patriotic German. Her brother had died in active service
in the Great War, and she had herself nursed wounded soldiers. She
was full of ‘national pride’, coming from a family that had lived in
Germany for generations, able to trace ancestors back into the
seventeenth century.2 Yet this incident challenged all sense of what
it meant to be German. ‘What hurts is not the fact that I witnessed
this, but rather that my compatriots, whom I love so much, for
whom I joyously gave all that I am, that they allowed this, that is
what hurts so unspeakably! I am ashamed for them.’ The fact that
her compatriots now supported a regime claiming that Jews were
‘parasites’ on the German people was for Klara ‘far harder to
struggle with than the humiliations and injuries that we had to take
in our stride’.
It was the apparently enthusiastic and supportive reactions of
bystanders, the crowds who gathered to watch the public
degradation of the Jewish lawyer, and the fundamental redefinition
of what it meant to be German, that caused Klara, a patriotic
German Jew, so much distress.3
Taking action, whether by assisting victims or alerting authorities, is
widely encouraged in liberal democratic societies. The ‘bystander’—a
term that does not translate well, with no direct German equivalent
—is generally urged not to remain passive, but rather to ‘stand up’
for what is right—whether by speaking out against bullying;
challenging sexist, racist, or homophobic language and behaviour;
calling for outside assistance; or providing witness statements to
help bring perpetrators to account.4 ‘Standing up’ is often framed in
terms of individual courage. Such an approach may be necessary;
but the fundamental message of this book is that it is also
insufficient. What might be morally laudable stance in a liberal,
democratic regime may be, in other circumstances, both ineffective
and potentially suicidal.
To understand bystanding under conditions of persisting violence
sponsored by those in power, we have to understand more than
elements of individual courage or small group psychology. We also,
with respect specifically to Nazi Germany, have to go beyond
simplistic assumptions about supposed ‘national character’ or long-
lasting traditions of antisemitism of obedience to authority.
Bystanding is socially constructed and can change over time.
This book argues that certain types of social relations and political
conditions produce a greater likelihood of widespread passivity in
face of collective violence. In what I call a ‘bystander society’, fewer
people are likely to stand up and act on ‘the courage of their
convictions’ in face of violence against those ousted from the
community and vilified as ‘others’.
In Nazi Germany, as this book reveals, these conditions were
historically produced, rather than pre-existent, in a process that
developed over several years. It was not intrinsically a ‘perpetrator
society’, but over time it became a society in which widespread
conformity produced growing complicity in establishing the
preconditions for genocide. In wartime Eastern Europe, the more
rapid and ever more radical dynamics of violence mean that active
involvement in perpetration, as well as complicity, passivity, and
resistance, need to be examined in a different way. By exploring the
development in more detail through personal accounts, it becomes
clear that experiences in the prewar years played a significant role
both in the facilitation of ever more radical acts of perpetration
during wartime and in wider responses to atrocities among both
Germans and local populations.
To embark on this enquiry in historical detail, we need first to
clarify some wider, theoretical issues around the concept of
bystanders and then also consider some more specific questions
about the nature of German society and varying degrees of
responsibility for the persecution and murder of European Jews.
First, the more abstract theoretical issues. Inactivity in the face of
violence is in itself a form of action, effectively condoning or even
appearing to support the perpetrators, and certainly not halting or
hindering the violence. Certainly some of the German terms used—
Zuschauer (onlookers), even more so Gaffer or Schaulustiger
(gawper, rubbernecker)—imply a degree of fascination or enjoyment
in watching a spectacle involving violence. Perhaps equally frequent,
though, is not so much gazing at but rather looking away from
violence (Wegschauer): pretending not to have seen, not to have
registered what is going on, in order to avoid becoming
uncomfortable or involved. It is simply easier to have ‘not known’,
thereby not having to face any questions of guilt about an outcome
that might potentially have been averted.
Passivity therefore raises the question of whether ‘bystanders’
also bear some responsibility for the outcomes of violence, and
whether indeed there can be such a thing as the proverbial ‘innocent
bystander’. It is perhaps easy enough to pose this question in
circumstances where help—police or some kind of official authority—
may be readily to hand.
People of course vary in their capacity for action, and distinctions
have to be made. On one view, the notion of a ‘moral bystander’, to
use the philosopher Ernesto Verdeja’s term, allows us to distinguish
between, on the one hand, those who do not fully comprehend what
is happening or are powerless to act effectively and, on the other,
those who are, as Verdeja put it, ‘in a position to intercede and
consequently alter the direction of events, and yet fail to act’.5 This
approach highlights two crucial features for the interpretation of
bystander behaviours: appropriate awareness of what it is that is
going on, and the degree to which a person is able to intervene
effectively. A child, for example, is less likely to be able to assess the
situation or exert effective power and authority than an adult;
parents or caregivers may feel it too risky to intervene in a fight
between others without putting their own children at risk; a
passerby may witness a police officer holding down a man by
kneeling on his windpipe, despite protestations that he could not
breathe, and wonder whether, since this was an incident where
police were already involved, it would really be right to intervene.
People happening to witness such scenes of violence could readily
be labelled ‘innocent bystanders’, who cannot be held personally
responsible for physical injuries or fatal outcomes. Yet these
examples also underline the fact that ‘bystanders’ cannot be
considered purely at an individual level, without taking into account
the wider context. As the last example indicates, wearing a uniform
does not necessarily demonstrate that certain actions are
acceptable; and a bystander’s video evidence of the incident in
Minneapolis on 25 May 2020 in which a police officer, Derek Chauvin,
held his knee on the neck of the dying George Floyd, proved crucial
in the trial and murder conviction of Chauvin.6 Circumstances matter.
Accounts of bystanders generally focus on the immediate
participants and dynamics of specific incidents of violence, assuming
that chance witnesses can at least potentially come to the assistance
of victims, whether directly or indirectly. The external environment of
the conflict is taken as in some sense neutral, a regime or system
committed to upholding ‘law and order’. Even when it is a police
officer exerting unwarranted violence, as in the Chauvin case, it is
assumed that he can be brought to account. In principle, then, the
bystander should be able to intervene in some way.
But bystander support for victims is a very different matter when
it is the regime itself that is at the root of the violence: when it is the
authorities who have instigated or are actively involved in violence,
or wilfully refrain from intervening on behalf of victims. The
conundrum people faced in in Nazi Germany arose from the
combination of violence actively instigated or sanctioned by the
regime and wider, systemic and structural violence that seeped
through society in both policy-related and informal ways.
The context is not neutral and needs to be taken into account
more explicitly. This is particularly the case when a regime based on
violence itself persists over a lengthy period of time. The dynamics
of the system change, and people themselves are changed by
accommodating themselves to living within such a state. Perceptions
change, too, affecting how situations of violence are interpreted and
acted upon (or not).
Awareness and capacity for effective action are therefore not just
questions of what individuals ‘see’ or their capacity for effective
action, as in the somewhat abstract formulations of philosophers,
but also of the wider cultural frameworks within which witnesses
interpret what they think they are seeing, and the social and political
conditions in which they assess what action they think might be
appropriate or effective—or too risky. Some of this may be a matter
of prevalent norms, as in unwillingness to speak out in circles where
racist, sexist, or homophobic comments are seen as acceptable, or
made light of when criticized (as in the dismissive notion of ‘just
banter’ or ‘locker room talk’).7 Similarly, the view of victims as in
some way to be feared as well as vilified may be more widely
shared. Given unequal power relations and a sense that speaking up
is futile, critics may be unwilling to share their disquiet, and this is
particularly the case if these norms are officially propagated and
publicly enforced. So the wider context of both perception and
choice of action matters enormously. We have therefore to explore
the conditions under which people believe that violent action against
particular groups may be justifiable, proportionate, even desirable;
or feel that there is little point in speaking up. We also have to
understand, by contrast, the circumstances in which individuals feel
it necessary or even possible to dispute dominant interpretations.
Challenging violence under dictatorial and repressive conditions is a
quite different matter from reporting a fight on the street or
confronting playground bullying in a democracy, however terrifying
the violence may be for unwilling victims in such cases.
The meaning of ‘bystanding’ depends on context—and this
context can almost by definition be only temporary. People may be
‘neutral’ bystanders when they first witness an event: but within
moments, neutrality will no longer be possible, as onlookers
variously move in the directly opposite directions of either condoning
or condemning the violence, and with differing degrees of activity in
each case: indicating sympathy for one side or the other, more
actively engaging in support for one side or the other, calling for
help, or participating in and benefitting from perpetration. Building in
the time dimension, it can even extend to the ambiguous double
meaning suggested by former US president Donald Trump in the first
presidential election debate of September 2020. When challenged on
his refusal to condemn the violent actions of white supremacists and
racists, including a right-wing, anti-immigrant group called the Proud
Boys, Trump exhorted the Proud Boys to ‘stand back and stand by’,
since ‘somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left’.
‘Standing by’ was clearly here intended as an injunction to remain
quiet for the time being, but to be prepared for future action when
conditions were right.8 And, indeed, Trump then unleashed anti-
democratic violence by inciting supporters to march on the Capitol
on 6 January 2021 to disrupt the formal adoption as president of Joe
Biden, the legitimate winner of the election that Trump falsely
claimed was ‘stolen’. In the United States, ultimately, democratic
institutions and authorities prevailed in 2021, and despite all Trump’s
prevarications Biden duly became president. Even so, election
‘denialism’ continued to be a strong force in American politics.
Conditions were of course quite different in Germany under Nazi
rule. We know a great deal about Hitler, the Nazi party and
movement, and official policies in the Third Reich; victims and
survivors have left painful traces and searing accounts with
agonizing details about their persecution. But what about members
of the wider population? We have a far less precise view of the ways
in which those who were not themselves directly perpetrators or
victims accommodated themselves and participated in an evolving
system of collective violence, or the extent to which members of
mainstream society were themselves in part responsible for, or
complicit in, the ultimately murderous outcomes of Nazi persecution.
After German defeat in 1945, the myth of the ‘innocent bystander’
was born. Refusing to accept the accusation of indifference to the
fate of Jewish fellow citizens, people claimed they had been either
ignorant or impotent; they would bear no responsibility for what
they had allowed to happen in their midst, let alone concede that
they had themselves played a significant part in unfolding processes
of discrimination and exclusion, the essential precursors to genocide.
Was the notion of having been ‘an innocent bystander’ merely a
convenient postwar myth?

It is abundantly clear that violence against Jews—as Klara Rosenthal

and many others witnessed in the very first months of Nazi rule—
was both instigated and sanctioned by the Nazi regime. But it was
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 AS YOU LIKE IT
By Mrs. J. Meissner

All the words in this pattern should be in your every-

day vocabulary. For instance, the first word means a
lot to golfers, and there are several that will please
the housewives.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
32 33 34 35
36 37 38 39 40
41 42
43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
51 52 53 54
55 56 57 58
59 60 61 62 63 64
65 66 67 68 69
70 71 72 73 74
75 76 77

[18]

HORIZONTAL
 Cavity1 Id est42
Morning5 prayer Towards
43
Down9with Part 45
of the eye
Form13of “to be” Petition
48
Condiment
14 made from Indef.50article
bean Haunch51
A number
15 Greetings
53
Short17song Skill 54
A seed
18 vessel Splendor
55
To sift
21 Kind57 of type
Sooner
23 than A poet60
A purpose
24 Armed 61 conflict
Point26 Aeriform
63 fluid
Chronicles
27 Tilted65
Mexican
29 cat A tree68
Terminate
32 To lengthen
70
Affinity
33 Witty71saying
To be34drowsy Male73 adult
By 36 Before74 time
Doctrines
37 Measure
75
Baubles
38 The 76whole
Parent
40 Inquiries
77
Spanish
41 for “the”

VERTICAL

Hearty1 Ailing
37
Mineral
2 Perch39
Motto3 Lubricant
44
Man’s5name Respect
46
Yes 6 Killed
47
That thing
7 Rouse48
 Modern8 Figure with equal
Candy
10 49angles
Commotion
11 Part 50
of circle
Unites
12 with thread Doll 52
Daubs
14 Passages
54
Four16score and ten Soak56
Vessel
19 for ashes Lick 58
up
Jumbled
20 type Forepart
59 of vessel
Nothing
22 Since62
Vipers
24 Metal64bearing rocks
Open25for debate Short66for Isaac
Insect
27 Small67speck
Composed
28 of thin Comrade
68
plates Noah’s
69 vessel
Game30 Towards
71
Child’s
31 plaything Preposition
72
Ground
32 Mother
73
Make35afraid

[21]

[Contents]
Puzzle No. 54
 TINY TIM
By W. S. Boyd

Sixteen black squares to one hundred and fifteen

white is a pretty fine average. A too black pattern
means the constructor was a bit lazy. This is small,
but the words are not ordinary by any means.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10
11 12 13 14
15 16 17
18 19 20
21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
32 33 34
35 36
37

[20]

HORIZONTAL

Stocks
1 and bonds Hits 23
lightly
Hail 9
 Anger10 Famous
26 Irish chalice
More11exact of 10th century
Paris13subway Stir 29
Roulade
15 Snake31
Builder
16 Make 32fast
Harmonize
18 Shellfish
33
Discretion
20 Period
35
Expletive
21 Members
36 of hill tribe,
British India
Baked37 clay

VERTICAL

Refractory
1 Reposed
17 again
Boast2 Arrogant
19 person
First lady
3 Surgeon’s
22 cylindrical
Tranquil
4 saw
Act 5 Years24
Built 6 One25 who heaps
Girl’s 7name Town27of Gold Coast
To gyp 8 Gull 28
(Scotch)
Beaten
12 track Nurse30
Bird 14
of fable Quarrel
34

[23]

[Contents]
Puzzle No. 55
 A SPOTTED SPECTER
By J. T. Rich

In spite of an abbreviation here and there, this puzzle

is one which is high in its rating. There aren’t so
many difficult words in it; but the few that do exist will
keep you searching, or we miss our guess.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34 35
36 37 38 39 40 41
42 43 44
45 46 47
48 49 50 51 52
53 54 55 56 57 58 59
60 61 62 63 64 65
66 67 68
69 70 71 72 73 74
75 76 77 78 79 80 81
82 83 84
85 86

[22]
HORIZONTAL

Consumptive
1 Epoch47
Part of7 a whole Part 48
of a hammer
Wings 12 Coarse
50
Carrion
13 Snugly
53
Member14 of Japanese Mineral
55 spring
race Required
57
A fragmentary
15 thing Soon60
Disciple
17 And 61
so forth
Eastern
20 state Human63 being
Flying21insect Anxiety
65
Small 23bottle Exist66
Note24 of the scale Treat67as a celebrity
Three-toed
25 sloth Southern
68 state
Anchor27 Like 69
For example
28 Small71aperture
Nobleman
30 Mild 72
expletive
Girl’s32name Post74graduate (abbr.)
Body33of water Short75poems
Matron34 Character
79 in “Arabian
Noble 36 Nights”
Before38 Booty82
Small 40mug Bird 83
Girdle42 Inland
84body of water
To catch
44 sight of Ensnare
85
Unite45 Compartment
86
One46 holding extreme
opinions

VERTICAL
 Pilgrimage
1 to Mecca To suppose
41
Old age2 Barbarian
43
Part of3 machinery Organ44 of the body
To be4prolific To languish
48
Fibrous5 substance Small49hole
Astern6 To heat
51 to fix colors
Heroine7 of famous To retch
52
poem Flat 53
basket
Prison8 Sough54
Belonging
9 to him Scotchman
55
Explosive
10 In the
56midst of
Part 11
of boat The 58
time of light
Attack
15 To vouchsafe
59
Wanderers
16 Metallic
62 material
Heathens
18 The 64
angel of death
Consumed
19 Single
70
Whetstone
22 Interdiction
71
Official
23 endorsement Magnesium
73 silicate
Dexterity
25 Breakwater
74
Evils26 Not (prefix)
76
Sharp28 Negative
77 particle
Joke29 Past78
Accessory
31 of a plane Transport
80 by relays of
Mixer35 men and horses
A stand
37 College
81 fraternity
To fee
39again

[25]
[Contents]
Puzzle No. 56
 LITTLE BUT NEAT
By Isidore Edelstein

A pretty construction by an old-timer at the game.

And don’t run away with the idea that its size has
anything to do with ease of solution! Tackle it, and
you’ll get what we mean.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29
30 31 32 33 34
35 36 37 38 39
40 41 42 43
44 45 46 47 48 49
50 51 52 53
54 55 56 57 58 59 60
61 62 63 64 65 66
67 68 69 70 71
72 73 74
75 76 77

[24]

HORIZONTAL
 Carouse
1 Precipitation
41
Question
5 Weed 42
Burdened
7 Negative
43
Part 11
of “to be” Struck
44 an attitude
Beverage
12 Speak46
Possessive
13 pronoun Town48in Germany
Perform
14 Matter
50
Guide15 High53explosive
Total17 Having
55 islands
Fossil
19gum Color58again
Wrath21 Rodent
61
Atrocious
22 Seaport
63 in Sicily
Insect
25 Period
65 of time
Vision
26 Watchful
67
Gloomy
28 Mohammed’s
69 adopted
Period
30 of time son
Come 31to fruition Subnormal
70 person
Encountered
33 Thus72
Requires
35 Absorbing
73 of gases
Fool37 Preposition
74
Attack
38 Support
75
Part 40
of “to be” Observe
76
At no77time

VERTICAL

Swift 1 Bite 35
Prince2 Mournful
36
Self 3 Metallic
38 rock
Graceful
4 Unit 39
of weight
Rotated
6 rapidly Connected
45 rooms
Legal7document Conjunction
47
 Weapon8 Grimace
49
Paradise
9 State51of U. S. (abbr.)
Point10of compass House52 animal
Projection
16 Clutch
54
Anthropoids
17 Fasten
56
Shyness
18 Clock57faces
Exposes
20 Elevate
58
Organ
23 Legendary
59 character
Vase24 House60 and land
Reparation
27 Genus62 of plants
Governmental
29 act of Thread
64
pardon Repetition
66 as a means
Fabulist
30 of note of learning
Postscript
32 Huge 68mythical bird
Belief
34 Single
71

[27]

[Contents]
Puzzle No. 57
 SEVEN GREEK CROSSES
By John B. Sirich, Jr.

We counted the half-crosses to make up Mr. Sirich’s

grand total. Please note: no unkeyed letters, no
abbreviations or contractions, and comparatively few
two- and three-letter words. Also double interlock
throughout. Io triumphe!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16
17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28
29 30
31 32 33 34
35 36 37 38 39
40 41 42
43 44 45 46 47
48 49 50 51
52 53

[26]

HORIZONTAL
 Domestic1 animal Member
30
(female) Gave 31formally
Interlaced
5 Begins
33
Spanish 9 dance Vehicle
35
Charge11 with gas Dried36fruit (bot.)
Devoured
13 Term38of address
Bitter14 Article
40
Monastic
16 female Large41snake
Exclamation
17 Note42of musical scale
Pile 18
loosely Contest
43
Perform
19 Impost
45
Civil20War general Rear47
Long22hair of lions (pl.) Become
48 planted
Stitch
24 deeply
Ran 25 rapidly Celestials
50
Foundation
27 Facile
52
Procured
29 Portion
53

VERTICAL

Nurturer
1 Indications
24
Beverage
2 Fish26
Regarding
3 Perceive
28
Age 4 Dog 31
Interlacement
5 Charge
32
Conjunction
6 City 33
in Nebraska
Large7vehicle Sibilant
34 rale
Studies
8 Hollow
35
Syrian9 god Procured
37
Group10 of eight Rodents
39
Oriental
11 measure Age 44
Sufficient
12 (poet) Plaything
45
End 15
of day (poet) Finish
46
 Avid21 Bronze
47
Unit 22
of measure Bone49
An ascidian
23 Proceed
51

[29]

[Contents]
Puzzle No. 58