Question

HELP ASAP

Respond clearly to each component of the prompt. Your paper of 400-500 words (strict limit) is due into Canvas by the end of the day indicated. Papers will be evaluated based on your insights and the connections you draw from the relevant assigned material.

Review the Wannsee Conference Film. Identify a particular point of debate/disagreement. Summarize the arguments. Describe, characterize and critique the arguments.

Answer 1

When reviewing the Wannsee Conference Film, one point of debate or disagreement is the manner in which the Holocaust was discussed. One argument is that the Holocaust was discussed in a way that was too matter-of-fact, with little to no emotion or acknowledgement of the human toll. Another argument is that the discussion of the Holocaust was too euphemistic and did not express the full gravity of the situation. A third argument is that the Holocaust was discussed as a “technical” solution rather than a moral one.

The first argument is that the Holocaust was discussed in a way that was too matter-of-fact, with little to no emotion or acknowledgement of the human toll. This argument suggests that the participants at the Wannsee Conference did not take the time to reflect on the consequences of their actions and instead simply discussed the logistics of the Holocaust in a detached, clinical manner.

The second argument is that the discussion of the Holocaust was too euphemistic and did not express the full gravity of the situation. This argument suggests that the participants at the Wannsee Conference used language that was too soft and indirect when discussing the Holocaust, instead of using words that would more accurately reflect the reality of the situation.

The third argument is that the Holocaust was discussed as a “technical” solution rather than a moral one. This argument suggests that the participants at the Wannsee Conference viewed the Holocaust as a problem to be solved, without considering the moral implications of their actions.

When evaluating these arguments, it is important to consider the context in which the conference took place. It is clear that the participants of the Wannsee Conference had a vested interest in the success of the Holocaust and therefore had a vested interest in discussing it in a way that minimized its human cost. Considering this context, it is easy to see why the participants would have chosen to discuss the Holocaust in a matter-of-fact manner and use euphemistic language, and why they would have viewed the Holocaust as a technical solution rather than a moral one.