• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Lesson 9
• 127
Obedience
 ?
WHY
teach this material?
Rationale
In previous lessons, students considered how Germany became a totalitarian state.Beginning with this lesson, students engage with material that will help them answer thequestion, “Once the Nazis came to power, why did most Germans follow the policies dic-tated by Hitler and the Nazi Party?” Students begin to answer this question by examiningthe human tendency to obey authority. Through analyzing two historical examples (onescenario describes the experiences of students at a school in California in the late 1960sand the other comes from 1935 Nazi Germany), students have the opportunity to under-stand obedience not as a distinctive German trait, but as an aspect of human behaviorthat is relevant to their decisions as individuals living in a larger society. In this lesson,students learn how to differentiate between obedience and blind obedience—obeyingauthority without question—and they practice the habit of distinguishing between situa-tions when it is important and appropriate to obey authority and situations that call forresistance to authority.
LEARNING GOALS
The purpose of this lesson is to help students
:• Reflect on these
guiding questions:
•What is obedience? What factors encourage obedience to authority? •What is resistance? What factors encourage resistance to authority? •What are some reasons why Germans obeyed authority in Nazi Germany? •What is the difference between obedience and blind obedience? •Under what circumstances do you think it is appropriate to obey authority? Why? •Under what circumstances do you think it is appropriate to resist authority? Why? 
• Practice these
interdisciplinary skills
:
•Defining abstract concepts •Interpreting historical narratives •Defending ideas with evidence •Sharing ideas in writing and speaking 
• Deepen understanding of these
key terms
:
•Obedience •Blind obedience/unconditional obedience •Authority •Resistance •Oath •Fear •Conformity/peer pressure 
To deepen your understanding of the ideas in this lesson, read Chapter Five in
FacingHistory and Ourselves: Holocaust and Human Behavior.
Lesson 9
 
(See the main glossary in the unit’s “Introduction” for definitions of these key terms.)
 ?
WHAT
is this lesson about?
 When Paul von Hindenburg died on August 2, 1934, Hitler combined the positions of chancellor and president. He was now the Führer and Reich Chancellor, the Head of State, and the Chief of Armed Forces. During the Weimar Republic, German soldiers hadtaken this oath: “I swear by almighty God this sacred oath: I will at all times loyally andhonestly serve my people and country and, as a brave soldier, I will be ready at any timeto stake my life for this oath.” Now Hitler created a new oath. “I swear by almighty Godthis sacred oath: I will render unconditional obedience to the Führer of the GermanReich and people, Adolf Hitler, Supreme Commander of the Wehrmacht [armed forces],and as a brave soldier will be ready at any time to stake my life for this oath.”
1
 While inthe earlier oath German soldiers swore allegiance to the country, under Hitler’s oathGerman soldiers, and eventually all government workers, swore their “unconditional obe-dience” to Hitler himself. Soldiers recalled how taking this oath allowed them to commithorrible crimes in Hitler’s name. Historian William L. Shirer, author of the book 
The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich 
, said the new oath distanced perpetrators from responsi-bility for the crimes they were committing, enabling officers “to excuse themselves fromany personal responsibility for the unspeakable crimes which they carried out on theorders of the Supreme Commander. . . .”
2
 A culture of obedience pervaded not only the military, but all aspects of German society.German children who grew up in the 1930s, such as Hede von Nagel, describe how obe-dience was a central part of their upbringing and schooling. “Our parents taught us toraise our arms and say, ‘Heil Hitler’ before we said ‘Mama,’” she recalls.
3
Under theNazis, students did not call their instructors by the title
Lehrer 
, meaning teacher, butinstead they referred to their teachers as Erzieher. “The word [Erzieher] suggests an irondisciplinarian who does not instruct but commands, and whose orders are backed up with force if necessary,” explains Gregor Ziemer, a teacher and journalist who lived inGermany when the Nazis came to power.
4
 Alfons Heck, a teenager in the 1930s, remem-bers how the constant messages to obey influenced his behavior. “Never did we question what our teachers said,” Heck said. “We simply believed what was crammed into us.”
5
This included believing the idea that some groups, especially Jews, were racially inferior,and that their very presence could harm the health and prosperity of the German people.These beliefs ultimately allowed Germans to make choices that resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters. After the Holocaust, many observers and scholars wondered if there was something dis-tinctive about German identity that made Germans more prone to obedient behaviorthan individuals from other cultures. Stanley Milgram, a professor at Yale University,decided to find out by recruiting college students to take part in what he called “a study of the effects of punishment on learning.” Working with pairs, Milgram designated onevolunteer as “teacher” and the other as “learner.” As the “teacher” watched, the “learner” was strapped into a chair with an electrode attached to each wrist. The “learner” was thentold to memorize word pairs for a test and warned that wrong answers would result inelectric shocks. The “learner” was, in fact, a member of Milgram’s team. The real focus of the experiment was the “teacher.” Each was taken to a separate room and seated before a
Lesson 9
• 128
 
“shock generator” with switches ranging from 15 volts labeled “slight shock” to 450 voltslabeled “danger—severe shock.” Each “teacher” was told to administer a “shock” for each wrong answer. The shock was to increase by 15 volts every time the “learner” respondedincorrectly. The volunteer received a practice shock before the test began to get an idea of the pain involved. In Milgram’s words, “The point of the experiment is to see how far aperson will proceed in a concrete and measurable situation in which he is ordered toinflict increasing pain on a protesting victim. At what point will the subject refuse toobey the experimenter?”
6
Milgram’s hypothesis was that Germans would be more obedient than United States sub- jects and that most volunteers would refuse to give electric shocks of more than 150volts. A group of psychologists and psychiatrists predicted that less than one-tenth of 1%of the volunteers would administer all 450 volts. To everyone’s amazement, 65% gave thefull 450 volts! Philip Zimbardo, a psychologist at Stanford University, made the followingcomments about Milgram’s study:
The question to ask of Milgram’s research is not why the majority of normal, averagesubjects behave in evil (felonious) ways, but what did the disobeying minority do afterthey refused to continue to shock the poor soul, who was so obviously in pain? Didthey intervene, go to his aid, did they denounce the researcher, protest to higherauthorities, etc.? No, even their disobedience was within the framework of “acceptabil-ity,” they stayed in their seats, “in their assigned place,” politely, psychologically demurred, and they waited to be dismissed by the authority.
7
In this lesson, students will read about an experiment conducted by Ron Jones, a history teacher in California in the 1960s, whose findings also reveal how obedience is a domi-nant facet of human behavior.* While teaching a unit on Nazi Germany, he asked his stu-dents to obey specific commands about how to sit, answer questions, and salute him. Jones was shocked to find that nearly all of his students willingly, and even enthusiasti-cally, obeyed his every command. Within several days, Jones orchestrated a series of rulesfor “Third Wave” members to follow, including reporting infractions of classmates who were not obeying these commands. Again, an overwhelming majority of students fol-lowed Jones’s plans, even threatening to beat up the minority of students who were skep-tical of the Third Wave. Worried parents of these students called Jones to find out what was happening in school. “I was hoping he would come in with a tremendous amount of rage,” say Jones, referring to his conversation with a concerned father. Instead of beingangry, the parent accepted Jones’s explanation.
8
 At this point, Jones was looking for an excuse to stop the Third Wave, such as interven-tion on the part of parents or school administrators. But, this was not to be. After abouta week, when Jones recognized that the experiment had gotten out of control, he knew he had to take steps to end it. At an assembly, he told his students, “There is no Third Wave movement. . . . You and I are no better or worse than the citizens of the ThirdReich. We would have worked in the defense plants. We will watch our neighbors be
Lesson 9
• 129
* Facing History uses the “Third Wave” experiment to reveal how obedience is a natural aspect of human behavior. FacingHistory does not condone the use of simulations and experiments used on students. Simulations like this one have unin-tended consequences. Some of Mr. Jones’s students were emotionally disturbed by their involvement in the Third Wave.One student remarked how it hurt to have been fooled like that by a teacher. A respectful, safe classroom environment isbased on trust among students and teacher. Simulations, like the one carried out by Mr. Jones, can violate that trust, notonly between the students and one particular teacher, but they also have the power to cause students to distrust teachers ingeneral.
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...