Three theories contend as explanations of perpetrator behavior in the Holocaust as well as other cases of genocide: structural, intentional, and situational. Structural explanations emphasize the sense in which no single individual or choice accounts for the course of events. In opposition, intentional/cutltural accounts insist upon the genocides as intended outcomes, for how can one explain situations in which people ‘step up’ and repeatedly kill defenseless others in large numbers over sustained periods of time as anything other than a choice? Situational explanations offer a type of behavioral account; this is how people act in certain environments. Critical to the situational account as I discuss it is the ‘Asch paradigm’, i.e. experimentally attested conditions for eliciting conformityof behavior regardlesss of available evidence of prior beliefs. In what follows, I defend what I term above a version of situational explanations of perpetrator behavior. Moreover, I maintain that the factors that explain provide an understanding as well. While not committed to the complete irrelevance or exclusion of cultural or structural factors, nonetheless situational analyses can account both for what happened and why. A cardinal virtue of this version of situational explanations consists in showing how shallow the problem of understanding turns out to be for such cases.
Adorno, T. W. et al.(1950) The Authoritarian Personality, 2 vols. New York: Wiley.
2.
Alford, C. F. (1997) ‘Hitler’s Willing Executioners: What Does “Willing” Mean?’, Theory and Society26: 719–38.
3.
Arendt, H. (1963) Eichmann in Jerusalem, rev. and enlgd edn. New York: Penguin.
4.
Bartov, O. (2000) ‘Reception and Perception: Goldhagen’s Holocaust and the World’, in G. Eley (ed.) The ‘Goldhagen Effect’: History, Memory, Nazism – Facing the German Past. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
5.
Bauer, Y. (2001) Rethinking the Holocaust. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
6.
Bauman, Z. (1989) Modernity and the Holocaust. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
7.
Berenbaum, M. and Peck, A. J., eds (1998) The Holocaust and History: The Known, the Unknown, the Disputed, and the Reexamined. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
8.
Blass, T. (2000) ‘The Milgram Paradigm after 35 Years’, in T. Blass (ed.) Obedience to Authority: Current Perspectives on the Milgram Paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 35–59.
9.
Blass, T., ed. (2000) Obedience to Authority: Current Perspectives on the Milgram Paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Bowker, G. C. and Star, S. L. (2002) Sorting Things Out. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11.
Braun, R. (1994) ‘The Holocaust and Problems of Historical Representation’, History & Theory33: 172–97.
12.
Browning, C. (1992) Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland. New York: HarperPerennial.
13.
Browning, C. (1996) ‘Daniel Goldhagen’s Willing Executioners’, History & Memory8: 89–108.
14.
Browning, C. (1998a) ‘Ordinary Germans or Ordinary Men? A Reply to the Critics’, in M. Berenbaum and A. J. Peck (eds) The Holocaust and History: The Known, the Unknown, the Disputed, and the Reexamined. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, pp. 252–65.
15.
Browning, C. (1998b) ‘Afterword’, in Ordinary Men, 2nd edn. New York: Aaron Asher Books.
16.
de Mildt, D. (1996) In the Name of the People: Perpetrators of Genocide in the Reflection of their Post-War Prosecution in West Germany. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
17.
Dimsdale, J. E. (1980) Survivors, Victims, and Perpetrators. New York: Hemisphere Publishing.
18.
Friedlander, H. (1998) ‘The T4 Killers’, in M. Berenbaum and A. J. Peck (eds) The Holocaust and History: The Known, the Unknown, the Disputed, and the Reexamined. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, pp. 243–249.
19.
Friedländer, S. (1994) ‘Trauma, Memory, and Transference’, in G. H. Hartman (ed.) Holocaust Remembrance. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, pp. 252–63.
20.
Friedländer, S. (2001) ‘History, Memory, and the Historian: Facing the Shoah’, in M. Roth and C. G. Salas (eds) Disturbing Remains. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, pp. 271–81.
21.
Goldhagen, D. J. (1992) ‘The Evil of Banality’, The New Republic, 13 July (20): 49–52.
22.
Goldhagen, D. J. (1996) ‘Motives, Causes, and Alibis: a Response to Critics’, The New Republic215: 37–45.
23.
Goldhagen, D. J. (1997) Hitler’s Willing Executioners. New York: Vintage.
24.
Goldhagen, D. J. (1998) ‘Ordinary Men or Ordinary Germans?’, in M. Berenbaum and A. J. Peck (eds) The Holocaust and History: The Known, the Unknown, the Disputed, and the Reexamined. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, pp. 301–307.
25.
Haney, C., Banks, C. and Zimbardo, P. (1973) ‘Interpersonal Dynamics in a Simulated Prison’, International Journal of Criminology and Penology1: 69–97.
26.
Hilberg, R. (1985) The Destruction of the European Jews, 3 vols, rev. and definitive edn. New York: Holmes & Meier.
27.
Hilberg, R. (1993) Perpetrators, Victims, Bystanders: The Jewish Catastrophe 1933–1945. New York: HarperPerennial.
28.
Kamber, R. (2000) ‘The Logic of the Goldhagen Debate’, Res Publica6: 155–77.
29.
Kelman, H. C. and Hamilton, V. L. (1989) Crimes of Obedience. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
30.
Klee, E., Dressen, W. and Riess, V., eds (1988) ‘The Good Old Days’: The Holocaust as Seen by Its Perpetrators and Bystanders. Old Saybrook, CT: Konecky & Konecky.
31.
Klemperer, V. (1998) I Will Bear Witness: A Diary of the Nazi Years, 1933–1941. New York: Random House.
32.
Klemperer, V. (1999) I Will Bear Witness: A Diary of the Nazi Years, 1942–1945. New York: Random House.
33.
Kren, G. M. and Rappaport, L. (1980) The Holocaust and the Crisis of Human Behavior. New York: Holmes & Meier.
34.
Kunda, Z. (1999) Social Cognition: Making Sense of People. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35.
Lifton, R. J. (1993) The Protean Self. New York: Basic Books.
36.
Lorenz, C. (2002) ‘Model Murderers: Afterthoughts on the Goldhagen Method and History’, Rethinking History6: 131–50.
37.
McBroom, W. (2001) Explaining the Holocaust. Bethesda, MD: Academica Press.
38.
Mayer, A. J. (1988) Why Did the Heavens Not Darken?New York: Pantheon.
39.
Milgram, S. (1974) Obedience to Authority. New York: HarperPerennial.
40.
Miller, P. B. (1998) ‘Imagined Enemies, Real Victims: Bartov’s Transcendent Holocaust’, American Historical Review103: 1178–1181.
41.
Mommsen, H. (1998) ‘The Civil Service and the Implementation of the Holocaust: From Passive to Active Complicity’, in M. Berenbaum and A. J. Peck (eds) The Holocaust and History: the Known, the Unknown, the Disputed, and the Reexamined. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, pp. 219–27.
42.
Moses, A. D. (1998) ‘Structure and Agency in the Holocaust: The Case of Daniel Jonah Goldhagen’, History & Theory37: 194–219.
43.
Moses, A. D. (2002) ‘Conceptual Blockages and Definitional Dilemmas in the “Racial Century”: Genocides of Indigenous Peoples and the Holocaust’, Patterns of Prejudice36: 7–36.
44.
Murphy, G. L. (2002) The Big Book of Concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45.
Nagel, T. (1979) ‘Moral Luck’, in Mortal Questions. New York: Cambridge University Press. Reprinted in Moral Philosophy, 2nd edn, ed. George Sher, pp. 441–52. All citations from the latter work.
46.
Newman, L. S. and Erber, R. (2002) Understanding Genocide: The Social Psychology of the Holocaust. New York: Oxford University Press.
47.
Rhodes, R. (2002) Masters of Death: The SS Einsatzgruppen and the Invention of the Holocaust. New York: Knopf.
48.
Rosenhan, D. L. (1973) ‘On Being Sane in Insane Places’, Science179: 250–258.
49.
Ross, L. and Nisbett, R. E. (1991) The Person and the Situation. Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
50.
Roth, M. S. and Salas, C. G., eds (2001) Disturbing Remains. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute.
51.
Roth, P. A. (2003a) ‘Beyond Understanding’, in S. P. Turner and P. A. Roth (eds) The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 311–33.
52.
Roth, P. A. (2003b) ‘Why There Is Nothing Rather than Something: Quine on Behaviorism, Meaning, and Indeterminacy’, in D. Jacquette (ed.) Philosophy, Psychology, and Psychologism: Critical and Historical Readings on the Psychological Turn in Philosophy. Dordrecht and London: Kluwer Academic, pp. 263–87.
53.
Roth, P. A. (2003c) ‘Mistakes’, SynthËse136 (September): 389–408.
54.
R¸sen, J. (2001) ‘Holocaust Memory and Identity Building: Metahistorical Considerations in the Case of (West) Germany’, in M. Roth and C. G. Salas (eds) Disturbing Remains. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, pp. 252–70.
55.
Sabini, J. P. and Silver, M. (1980) ‘Destroying the Innocent with a Clear Conscience: a Sociopsychology of the Holocaust’, in J. E. Dimsdale (ed.) Survivors, Victims, and Perpetrators. New York: Hemisphere Publishing.
56.
Suedfeld, P. (2001) ‘Theories of the Holocaust: Trying to Explain the Unimaginable’, in D. Chirot and M. E. P. Seligman (eds) Ethnopolitical Warfare. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 51–70.
57.
Turner, S. (1994) Social Theory of Practices. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
58.
Turner, S. (2003) ‘Ghosts and the Machine: Philosophy of Social Science in Contemporary Perspective’, in S. P. Turner and P. A. Roth (eds) The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 1–17.
59.
Turner, S. P. and Roth, P. A., eds (2003) The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
60.
Waller, J. (2002) Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing. New York: Oxford University Press.
61.
Zimbardo, P. G. (1970) ‘The Human Choice: Individuation, Reason, and Order versus Deindividuation, Impulse, and Chaos’, in W. J. Arnold and D. Levine (eds) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1969. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, pp. 237–305.
62.
Zimbardo, P. G. (1995) ‘The Psychology of Evil’, Research in Social Psychology [Japan] 11: 125–33.
63.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2000) ‘Reflections on the Stanford Prison Experiment: Genesis, Transformations, Consequences’, in T. Blass (ed.) Obedience to Authority: Current Perspectives on the Milgram Paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 193–214.
