Hannah Arendt Deportations from Western Europe

P‌‍‍‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‍‍‌‌‌‌‍lease write an Introduction and conclu‌‍‍‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‍‍‌‌‌‌‍sion connected to the Body paragraphs‌‍‍‌‌‍‌‌‌‌‌‍‍‍‌‌‌‌‍

1.Why did the Danes speak out against anti-Semitism?In Denmark, the Germans witnessed peculiar behavior among the Danish Jews, as well as the government which was in contrast to the rest of Europe. The Germans witnessed great non-violent action in Denmark (Arendt, 2006, pp. 499). Denmark proved to be almost immune to anti-Semitism and the Danes were the only ones that dared speak out in opposition to the Germans. The Germans were likely aware of the resistance that they were likely to experience in Denmark and as such approached them cautiously through the introduction of the yellow badge. The response by the Danes was that the king would be the first to wear it (Arendt, 2006, pp. 500). Furthermore, Danish government officials also stated that they would be the first to resign in the face of anti-Jewish measures of any kind ( Arendt, 2006, pp. 500). The Germans did not comprehend the resistance and found it illogical that a government would protect people to whom it had denied categorically naturalization and permission to work (Arendt, 2006, pp. 500).Danes spoke out against anti-Semitism because Jews in Denmark were regarded to be Danes and as such Danes refused to hand them over to the Germans even when they were ordered to do so. This is because of the presence of Jews who existed in the country prior to the Jewish refugees and who had been assimilated into Denmark. Therefore, the resistance experienced in Denmark also meant that the Germans were unsuccessful in introduction of any distinction between native Danes of Jewish origin and German Jewish refugees. The Danes' protection of the Jews can further be explained by principles that the Danes held close such as strong adherence to democratic principles (Felicia & Banke et al., 2013). Additionally, the resistance of the Danes was also facilitated by the fact that they had negotiated a privileged status with the Germans to retain their own government. This allowed the Danes to put limits on how far they could cooperate with the Germans (Arendt, 2006, pp. 499). The Danes also used the stateless nature of the Jewish refugees as an advantage and claimed that the Nazis could no longer claim them without Jewish assent. This meant that the Jewish refugees were under the protection of the Danish government (Arendt, 2006, pp. 500).Danish citizens were also actively involved in resisting Germany as experienced in August 1943 when Danish workers started roots in Danish shipyards and went on strike refusing to repair German ships (Arendt, 2006). The resistance of Danish people towards Germany is also witnessed in that the cost of transportation of Jewish people without means was paid for largely by wealthy Danish citizens. This allowed the Jews to escape to Sweden. This is peculiar, particularly taking into consideration that this happened at a time when Jews were paying for their own deportation. Non-Danish Jews also received permission to work thus making them better off than they were prior (Arendt, 2006).

2. Possible reasons for the change in Nazis who when met with open native resistanceGerman authorities in Denmark played a crucial role in sabotaging the orders they received from Berlin. The open resistance that these authorities experienced in Denmark resulted in their minds being exposed and changed. They no longer looked at the elimination of whole people as a matter of course, as they experienced resistance as a matter of principle (Arendt, 2006, pp. 501). German officials who had been living in Denmark were no longer the same and did not exhibit the ‘rough toughness’ they initially had. This is evidenced in the case of General von Hannecken who refused to put troops at the disposal of the Reich Plenipotentiary and Dr. Werner Best and his unit who objected to measures they were ordered to carry out (Arendt, 2006, pp. 501).Some Nazis when met with open resistance changed their mind because they had used the idea of roughness as a way to self deceive themselves. This served to conceal their ruthless desire for conformity at any price (Arendt, 2006, pp. 501). This was evidenced during the Nuremberg Trials where the defendants accused, as well as betrayed each other. The defendants further made claims that they had always been against the elimination of Jews. This, therefore, meant that they did not have enough conviction that the extermination of Jews was the right thing to do. This is why when they were faced with open resistance they were forced to re-evaluate their actions and stance, thus changing their minds. Furthermore, the Nazis who were involved in the extermination of Jews also claimed that their superiors had exploited their best qualities, thus further ascertaining the claim that their actions were informed by the need to conform to the needs of the Nazi leadership in power.

3.Political situation that can productively be responded to in a nonviolent mannerArendt writes about, “ the enormous power potential inherent in non-violent action and in resistance to an opponent possessing vastly superior means of violence“ (Arendt, 2006, pp. 498). This section focuses on gun control, which is a recent political situation in which the government or group of people could productively respond in a nonviolent manner. One of the recent political situations in which a group of people could productively respond in a non-violent manner is gun control in the United States. Guns are deeply entrenched in American society and the country’s political debates. This is because the second amendment gives Americans the right to bear arms resulting in over a third of US adults owning a gun. There is division in the political realm about gun control with Republicans being primarily opposed to gun control and Democrats being split (Schaeffer, 2021). Gun control remains a highly politicized issue despite an increase in school shootings as well as gun violence. This results in a violation of people’s right to life.Large-scale protests can be useful in convincing legislators to put in place legislation that controls the purchase and use of guns. Such protests would entail people organizing themselves on a large scale. These protests should be accompanied by public petitions calling for stricter measures on gun ownership and the use of guns. These should include psychological examination of gun owners on a regular basis, gun owners should be required to pass background checks and pass written and practical exams (Jowit et al., 2016). Furthermore, it appears that people in the United States have become more desensitized to gun violence. This has led people to perceive gun violence as a way of life. Social media can also be used to call for action by having people share their personal experiences with gun violence in a bid to sensitize people on gun violence leading to a call for action

References

Arendt, H. (2006).Eichmann in Jerusalem: A report on the banality of evil. Penguin.

Felicia, C. & Banke, S. (2013). Copenhagen – Refugees and Rescue: The Ambivalence of Danish Holocaust History. Available at: https://humanityinaction.org/knowledge_detail/copenhagen-refugees

and-rescue-the-ambivalence-of-danish-holocaust-history/(Accessed 28 May 2023).

Jowit, J. et al. (2016). Four countries with gun control and what America could learn from them. Available at : https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/15/so-america-this-is-how-you-do-gun

control(Accessed 28 May 2023).

Schaeffer, K. (2021). Key facts about Americans and guns. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/(Accessed 28 May 2023).

• Narrative and Discussion
• Organic Chemistry 1 Lab
• Human Genetics Introductory
• Values that Represents Me
• ENGLISH 203: Informative Speech Outline
• Casual Analysis
• The Scarlet Letter
• Week 9 Clinical Study Cross-Sectional Anatomy 02-13
• Application Letter - Peer Reviews (2)
• Peer Response