|
|
 |
| Dr Robert Jay Lifton |
THE NAZI DOCTORS:
Medical
Killing and
the
Psychology
of Genocide © |
|
|
| Page
324 |
Back |
|
Contents |
Index |
Home
Page |
|
Forward |
|
| |
| AUSCHWITZ: THE RACIAL CURE |
| |
nonetheless — as also perhaps does his arrogating for
himself the term “survivor.” He expressed considerable sympathy for
the camp officials faced with the intractable problem of the Gypsy camp, even
as he both admired Mengele for boldly opposing its annihilation and thought it
natural for him to join actively in that annihilation once the decision was
made. Mengele remained for Dr. B. a profound source of connection to the
Auschwitz atmosphere.
Dr. B. gave an elaborate description of
Mengele’s “early SS ideology”: the main currents of European
culture taking shape from such “Germanic” groups as the ancient
Greeks as well as the Normans and Vikings that emerging culture undermined by
Christian morality of Jewish origin, culminating in a vast historic threat
posed by Jewish influence to the Germanic race; the need to revert to ancient
German myth in creating a contemporary SS Order at the heart of the Nazi
movement, a major goal of which was the elimination of Jewish influence In Dr.
B’s recitation of all this, there was an intensity, perhaps even
enthusiasm, suggesting that it invoked the presence of his friend and that
something in him [B.] was drawn to the message. Indeed B. claimed that Mengele
“didn’t preach,” and that all these matters were discussed
between the two men “very objectively.” B. had a way of domesticating
Mengele’s wildly visionary ideas both because they were not entirely alien
to himself and because he could invoke Mengele the scientist and
“researcher on racial matters.”
Dr. B.’s psychic
struggles with what Mengele represented were reflected in his contradictory
descriptions of Mengele’s views on exterminating the Jews. He sometimes
spoke as though Mengele strongly opposed the Auschwitz killing project, and
quoted him as terming it a form of “absolute idiocy” and
“stupidity” and even declared that “Mengele would never have
joined the SS if Hitler had announced in advance that we shall let the Jews go
through the smokestacks as soon as we have triumphed.” Yet later Dr. B.
stressed that Mengele was “fully convinced that the annihilation of the
Jews was a provision for the recovery of the world, and Germany,” the only
open question being the method to be used. The latter view is undoubtedly
closer to the truth. But my point here is that Mengele became something of a
mouthpiece for Dr. B.’s own inner contradictions about the “Jewish
problem”: at times B. could refer to the overall issue of annihilating the
Jews as though it were a serious question for men of good will to contemplate,
disagree upon to some extent but approach with an open mind and with
“rational discussion.” And when he summed up the traits of character
he so admired in Mengele (“a good soldier no phony ambitions within the
SS,” and “did not hesitate to oppose … openly [whatever] …
he felt was wrong”), these were the qualities that B. had been brought up
to admire and found in his father, and that, ironically, he believed gave him
the strength to behave decently in Auschwitz.
In that vein he
attributed something more to Mengele — a genuine leadership principle. In
contrast to Höss, whom Dr. B. saw as “a perfect |
|
| |
THE NAZI DOCTORS:
Medical Killing and the
Psychology of
Genocide
Robert J. Lifton
ISBN 0-465-09094
©
1986 |
|
Back |
Page 324 |
Forward |
|
|
