Prisoner Behavior and Social System in the Nazi Concentration Camps

Abstract

Until recently, American theory and discussion on prisoner behavior in the Nazi concentration camps differed in important ways from most European work. The American peculiarities stem from two main sources. First, there were gross reporting errors which added to the common difficulties in making sense of the camp system and genocide. Second, before the end of World War II and after, there was quick publication of poorly-grounded theories, reflecting concern with narrowly psychodynamic processes, rather than social processes. The present paper reviews study findings on the importance of human groups in the struggle for survival. Particular attention is given to the emergence of a prisoner social system and to the normative aspects of such a system. Along with references to the relevant work of others, the author deals at some length with his own early research, involving intensive interviews with fifty-two camp sur vivors who emigrated to the United States. In that study, data were gathered on changes with time in the camps in (1) patterns of interpersonal relations, (2) sharing with other prisoners and assisting them, and (3) thefts from other prisoners. The paper considers several propositions on human behavior in extreme situations. These include the proposition by Bruno Bettelheim that the longer prisoners were confined, the more they identified with the SS; that a prisoner had reached the final stage of adjustment to the camp situation when he had changed his personality so as to accept as his own the values11 of his captors. The paper summarizes the author's findings on prisoner behavior in especially extreme situations such as prolonged punishment assemblies and winter- time transports of Auschwitz evacuees; on the attitudes of respondents toward "old" prisoners and toward members of prisoner underground organizations; and on the length of imprisonment of members of various national and inter national camp committees. Evidence is offered which suggests that stable pairing was the most common type of interpersonal relationship pattern and that most survivors had a sharing relationship of mutuality with one or more persons; that the pair was the basic unit of survival. Respondents showing decline in sharing behavior were in the camps sub stantially less time than those showing no change. Those respondents who showed greater and more stable general social participation were in the camps con siderably longer than those whose participation declined. Respondents showing decline in thefts (taking from other prisoners only) or consideration of theft, were in the camps longer than those showing increasing theft behavior. The study findings offered conflict at many points with narrowly psycho dynamic interpretations of prisoner behavior. It is concluded that in the camps the human group and social change system emerge as the most fruitful foci for scientific analysis.

Concentration Camp Rituals

“…According to Goffman ([1963] 1990:11-55), an individual is stigmatized when not receiving full recognition of social identities. Common denominators for all types of stigma are that a stigmatized individual would have been accepted into general social rituals but that the stigma removes him or her from the community (Bauman 1991; Freidson 1983; Goffman [1963] 1990:11-55; Langer 1991, 1996; Luchterhand 1953; Mccarthy and Hagan 2005; Megargee 2013a, 2013b; Round 2006; Ryn 1990; Stein 2009; Suderland 2010; van Ree 2013).…”

“…In the German camps during the Second World War, the aim was to kill from a distance, and the camps were highly efficient and industrialized in their operations (Bauman 1991; Langer 1991; Megargee 2013a, 2013b). Previous studies have thus analyzed the efficient and industrialized killing of other people and survival strategies in concentration camps (Bauman 1991; Langer 1991, 1996; Luchterhand 1953; Megargee 2013a, 2013b; Round 2006; Ryn 1990; Stein 2009; Sunderland 2010; van Ree 2013). Researchers have emphasized the importance of narratives but have not focused on narratives about rituals as a starting point.…”

Bruno Bettelheim (1903-1990) und die Konzentrationslager

“…Trotz seiner ein drucksvollen Beschreibungen, etw a im Zusammenhang m it den hygieni schen Bedingungen, denen alle Häftlinge unterworfen waren, attestiert er nur den "alten" Häftlingen eine Regression ins Infantile. Luchterhand (1967), Pingel (1978) und andere bestreiten aufgrund ihrer Quellenstudien und eigenen Befragungen von Überlebenden den Allgcmcinheitsgrad der Bcttclhcimschen Thesen über die Stadien der Anpassung und die Bedeutung des Unterschieds zwischen alten und neuen Häftlingen (vgl. als Überblick Luchterhand 1980 Foreman (1959, 292).…”

Suizidalität unter Extrembelastungen

“…1946;Kogon, 1946;Levi, 1958). Soziale Isolation scheint Suizide gefordert zu haben (Luchterhand, 1967;Ryn u. Klodzinski, 1976). Die Voraussetzungen rur suizidales Verhalten können aber auch von den verschiedenen Phasen der KZ-Haft abhängig gewesen sein.…”