The Psychological Effects
of Starvation in the Holocaust:
The Dehumanization and
Deterioration of its Victims
Kelly Young
National Collegiate Honors Council
Student Interdisciplinary Research
March 6, 2013
Young
1
Introduction
The many aspects of physical torture experienced by the victims of the Holocaust
together reflect the tactics of dehumanization endured by the prisoners within the concentration
camps of Germany during World War II. There is an inherent link between this physical and
psychological warfare, relating many victims’ visible symptoms to the underlying detrimental
psychological state that they represent, and suggesting a psychological reasoning behind the
general lack of resistance and stoic submission of the prisoners. Of the numerous tactics of Nazi
dehumanization methods, I will focus most specifically upon starvation as a seemingly physical
device that caused devastating psychological deterioration for its victims.
I will observe that beyond the somatic results, widespread and intense malnutrition
among the prisoners led to cognitive decay such as comprehension complications and loss of
concentration (including a shift in focus). I will also examine the cognitive and psychological
processes that led to acts of desperation such as cannibalism as well as the specifically
psychological effects of starvation, including depression, anxiety, apathy or loss of motivation,
and feelings of lessening self-worth. I will explore starvation’s role in the Nazi goal of mass
extermination and its place in the camp structure, and I will analyze the complications that
starvation places upon the formation and maintenance of prisoner relationships. A close study of
this method of Nazi dehumanization will directly expose the link between the physical and
psychological factors of the concentration camp system and the connection to the lack of
resistance and general sense of submission among the prisoners.
Throughout my analysis I will often reference The Great Starvation Experiment: Ancel
Keys and the Men Who Starved for Science by Todd Tucker. This book details the span of
Doctor Ancel Keys’ experiment with men who volunteered to participate in controlled starvation
Young
2
at the University of Minnesota Memorial Football Stadium in 1944. Doctor Keys conducted the
experiment in hopes of obtaining detailed scientific data on the effects of starvation, as
information in this field was lacking in the 1940s. Keys’ goal was to obtain information that
could be used to create a scientific approach for the planning of hunger relief programs for the
starving people of war devastated countries (Tucker 82). Thus, one might even view this
experiment as a response to the Holocaust, which occurred during World War II. If nothing else,
the nature of Keys’ experiment suggests recognition of the extremity and severity of starvation’s
toll on human life in certain areas under Nazi control, if not a direct response to extermination
within the camps themselves. Apart from starvation, aspects of psychological trauma
experienced by concentration camp victims were not experienced by the men participating in
Doctor Keys’ experiment; unlike Holocaust victims, the subjects of the experiment participated
voluntarily and were treated very humanely. I reference this study because it mirrors solely the
psychological results of hunger and sheds light on the effects of the starvation endured by
Holocaust victims.
The concentration camps are infamous for their dire conditions and the effects this
environment had upon its victims. The victim’s inability of self-protection and the threats from
dangerous and difficult life conditions inevitably lead to feelings of depression, passivity, and
helplessness, as well as a shift in “motive hierarchies” that cause self-related goals and
preservation to rise above concern for others (Staub 164, 38). This process is the general effect
of the concentration camp system upon its victims. Included in this system is starvation.
However, the psychological effects of starvation that will be explored in this study overlap with
other sources of psychological stress. For example, the numbered tattoos assigned to the
concentration camp prisoners caused dehumanization and a decrease in self-esteem. Self-
Young
3
perception suffers in humans when one is lumped in with a group and is not able to discriminate
as effectively, while deprivation of individuality leads to feelings of passivity (Staub 42, 164165). Additionally, uncertainty faced by prisoners in regards to their fate and Nazi intention will
be analyzed later in this study as pertaining to increased submission to the authority of the camp
system. It is also logical to infer that victims would have suffered severe psychological
deterioration due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the face of rape and the witness of death
and brutality. There are obviously psychological implications derived from areas other than
starvation.
This study does not attribute all psychological traumas of the victims to starvation, nor
does it pretend that starvation was the sole cause of every psychological effect herein depicted.
Rather, I aim to analyze the psychological effects of starvation with full acknowledgement that
these effects could also be caused by other acts of Nazi brutality and dehumanization, and in fact
were probably the results of a combination of many sources of stress and cruelty. Each could be
explored in detail to uncover and explain the psychological decay that takes place in the face of
these situations – but I will not do that here. For the sake of conciseness, in this study I will
generally attempt to isolate the analysis to starvation. Starvation is a tactic of dehumanization
that would have been experienced by every concentration camp prisoner, therefore a study of this
aspect of the brutal camp system will be sure to illuminate the psychological plight of its victims.
I will, however, broaden the argument at times to include topics such as the role of starvation in
the camp system, mass extermination versus prisoner labor supply, and the production of the
survivor interview in order to illuminate some of the complications in this study and portray the
connections starvation shares with other components of the camp system and the individual.
Young
4
Physical Effects of Starvation
In addition to the more obvious emaciated appearance of the victims of starvation in the
Holocaust, there were numerous other physical effects. Primarily, rations were extremely small.
Dorian Kurz, a survivor of Belsen, remembers her ration of “three-quarters of a liter of watery
soup…And three and a half centimeters of bread a day and… some kind of an ersatz coffee” (US
Holocaust Memorial Museum). Likewise, Elie Wiesel, a survivor of Buna and Auschwitz,
records in his autobiography that he received black coffee in the morning, soup at noon, and
“bread and something” in the evening (Wiesel 40). Obviously, this sudden drop in calories,
vitamins, and proteins caused extreme weight loss. Doctor Keys’ experimental tests also show
that starvation causes the victim’s heart rates and temperatures to drop (Tucker 135). Thus,
starvation causes excessive weight loss, malnutrition, and a decrease in pulse and temperature.
Additionally, Marasmus Kwashiorkor is another prominent effect of starvation.
Marasmas Kwashiorkor is “a condition in which there is a deficiency of both calories and
protein, with severe tissue wasting, loss of subcutaneous fat, and usually dehydration”
(Dorland’s Medical Dictionary). This extreme malnutrition occurred in Holocaust victims due to
lack of protein in the diet. The condition caused fatigue, decreased muscle mass, and increased
chance of disease due to a decaying immune system (A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia).
Starvation is also linked to countless other diseases, including amenorrhea, or a loss of
menstruation in females (Tucker 191), typhus, and dysentery (Robbin 237). In spite of fatigue,
weakness, and a decaying immune system, Keys believed that the human body is extremely
resilient in the face of starvation (Tucker 182). However, the question remains: is the mind as
resilient as the body? As Edith P. states in her testimony, “Physical pain you can stand, but how
can you bear the emotional pain?” (Langer 102).
Young
5
Cognitive Effects of Starvation
Malnutrition has greatly detrimental effects on general cognition. The U.S. National
Library of Medicine defines malnutrition as, “the condition that occurs when your body does not
get enough nutrients” and refers to starvation as “a form of malnutrition” (A.D.A.M. Medical
Encyclopedia). Dr. Ancel Keys, in examining his starving subjects, determined that the
intellective performance of the subjects on their specially designed tests did not change during
starvation, but that calculations took a longer amount of time to complete (Tucker 150, 180). A
reason for the longer time necessary for calculations can be explained by Nevin S. Scrimshaw,
Director of Food and Nutrition Programme for Human and Social Development of the United
Nations, Tokyo, who states that iron deficiency is to blame for cognitive deterioration
(Scrimshaw 8). Additionally, a deprivation of the B-12 vitamin can also cause “cognitive
impairment” (C Durand, 2). A lack of B-12 Vitamin absorption can cause pernicious anemia (C
Durand 1), which is a decrease in red blood cells. The symptoms of this disease include
problems concentrating and confusion (A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia).
Perhaps one of the most obvious results of this cognitive impairment during the
starvation process is a shift in concentration and focus toward food. Doctor Keys’ starvation
experiment shows a drop in sex drive, mental alertness, concentration, and comprehension
during the starvation phase, while appetite and hunger drive increased rapidly (Tucker 125).
Diminishing concentration gives way to thoughts of food, which become the dominant priority
and almost exclusive focus of the starving subject’s mind. In Doctor Keys’ experiment, one of
the subjects collected cookbooks and stared at pictures of food “with almost pornographic
fascination” (Tucker 123), while another subject describes his actions as determined by an
“overbearing perversion to food” (Tucker 139). In the testimony of Dorian Kurz, a prisoner of
Young
6
Belsen, the effect of this cognitive shift on the Holocaust victim is illuminated as Kurz
remembers how her conversation revolved around food. “Most of our time during the day…was
spent talking about food because there was not very much to eat and we were hungry much of
the time, almost all the time” (US Holocaust Memorial Museum). Food was the dominant focus
of the Holocaust victim’s internal life; starvation shifted focus and rearranged priority so that
survival could be the dominant goal.
This shift also explains why, in Wiesel’s account, a man crawled for food from the
cauldron of soup while the camp was being bombed and all prisoners were commanded to stay in
the barracks. According to Wiesel, this man illegally crawled toward the cauldron, risking his
life from the bombs and the SS guards who were commanded to shoot any prisoners spotted
outside the barracks. (In his account Wiesel explains that this strict order was not meant to
protect the prisoners from the bombing, but rather to discourage them from running away: “As it
was relatively easy to escape during the bombing – the guards left their lookout posts and the
electric current was cut off in the barbed-wire fences – the SS had orders to kill anyone found
outside the blocks” (Wiesel 56). I suggest that perhaps the order additionally served to prevent
the enemy from seeing the state of the prisoners and thus was a way for the Nazis to keep the
brutality and conditions of the camps a secret from the enemy for as long as possible.) Wiesel
states that the rest of the men did not attempt to steal food because “terror was stronger than
hunger”, but seen through the lens of this argument, we might assume that the crawling man’s
starvation was so severe that his priority to avoid hunger overcame his priority to avoid being
shot due to the cognitive shift of focus prevalent in starvation victims (Weisel 58-59).
This shift in priority became extremely prominent for some. Amery, a prisoner in
Auschwitz observes, “I was my body and nothing else: in hunger” (Langer 89). Thus, whereas
Young
7
one usually identifies oneself by one’s ideals, thoughts, or personality, (all things involving the
mind), with this statement Amery suggests that his identity shifted with his priorities, and that his
dominant identity became his body– more specifically, the hunger that consumed his body. Elie
Wiesel’s experiences further illuminate this shift when he recalls that he and many men in his
barracks decided not to fast for Yom Kippur (Wiesel 66). Therefore, even religion became
second to food in this shift of priority.
Additionally, the subjects of Doctor Keys’ experiment showed a shift away from concern
of world issues such as starving war refugees to the world inside the Memorial Stadium (Tucker
161). This shrinking world proves to be an added complication for victims of the Holocaust,
because in some cases their will to survive hinged upon it. For example, one report on the issues
of the Holocaust states, “A number of inmates were aided in their survival through a belief in
someone or something which existed outside of their immediate circumstances. Although the
inmate could not be expected to focus upon his belief with any consistency, it still provided a
measure of support” (Robbin 239). A shrinking world or apathy would decrease the support or
aid that an outside ideology inspired in the victims. Elie Wiesel recalls a case in which he
witnessed this outside belief or focus. A relative named Stein told Wiesel that the only thing that
kept him alive inside the camp was the knowledge that his wife and children (whom he knew to
be outside the camp) were alive. Stein says, “If it wasn’t for them, I couldn’t keep going”
(Wiesel 42). However, the cognitive shift we have explored shows that perhaps not every
prisoner was able to direct his concentration as Stein did. The focus with which a prisoner could
provide an outside ideal is limited by the diminishing concentration on things other than food
caused by the malnutrition intricately connected to hunger.
Young
8
Cannibalism in the Holocaust
This shift also resulted in acts of cannibalism, as hunger and the priority of survival
became more eminent than qualms about civilization. For example, during Doctor Keys’
starvation experiment, the subjects began to have cannibalistic dreams at a point in the starvation
stage when the output of energy became greater than the input, or food intake (Tucker 99-100).
However, cannibalism doesn’t always stay within the realm of dreams; sometimes hunger drives
it toward reality. For example, during the siege of Leningrad in 1941, the people within were
starving and turned to human corpses and then living people for food. In some cases, Leningrad
citizens cut off and consumed pieces of their own bodies to survive (Tucker 7-9).
Cannibalism was present during the Holocaust, as well. Moses S., a prisoner of the
concentration camps in Germany, recalls a particular bombing that led to acts of cannibalism,
“…we found a hand from the bombing…a human hand…Five of us. Divided. And we were
eating it. And somebody died, we cut out a piece – we were eating…human flesh” (Langer 117).
Outside of the camp system and starvation few people would consider acts of cannibalism. We
can look at this change through the previous argument that hunger affects the cognitive processes
of the mind. Focus that might have been placed on social customs or morals would have
lessened as focus on food became dominant. It is possible that the dominant focus of food that
results from starvation would at least be partially responsible for the victims’ resorting to
cannibalism. I suggest that the victims’ participation in cannibalism is partly a result of a shift in
concentration, focus, and priority due to malnutrition, deprivation of B-12 Vitamin and iron, and
the effects of this deficiency on the cognitive mind. However, there is another shift that helps to
explain the adoption of cannibalism, one that is in nature more psychological than cognitive.
Young
9
General Psychological Effects of Starvation
The path to adopting cannibalism in extreme circumstances is part of a psychological
process of a shifting motive hierarchy. The motive hierarchy is a concept adopted and analyzed
by Ervin Staub, Professor of Psychology Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst
and author of numerous works on genocidal psychology. Staub explains that motivational
sources of human behavior include biological needs, social customs or standards, self-related
goals (which can include biological needs), and other-related goals (Staub 36-37). All needs are
originally main motivational sources for human behavior, but when faced with deprivation of
these needs, biological needs will often become a stronger drive in the motive hierarchy, causing
diminution in the relative importance of other motives (Staub 37). When biological needs
increase, social customs or standards will decrease accordingly. As Staub states, “When a
custom or rule is strongly established, people will deviate from it only when another strong
motivation requires deviation” (Staub 37). We can surmise that the increasing drive to fulfill
biological needs dominates social customs or standards that would discourage victims of
starvation from cannibalistic acts.
A shift in hierarchal motives when life conditions are continuously threatening and
grotesque causes self-related goals of preservation and protection (both physical and
psychological) to become greater than such other-related goals as concern for moral values and
other human beings, which in turn often decrease under threat (Staub 37). “Under persistently
difficult life conditions, lasting changes often occur in motive hierarchies. Self-protective and
self-related goals become more important, and people become less open to others’ needs” (Staub
38). Holocaust victims were likely concerned with moral or social standards against cannibalism
and afraid of desecrating the memories of people by consuming their bodies. The increase in
Young 10
self-related goals and biological needs over social standards and the needs of others helps explain
the psychological process that allowed the victims of starvation to participate in cannibalism,
however unwillingly the act was performed. Once the act was completed and the victim deviated
from the social standard, the victim would face the psychological effects of this deviation: guilt,
anxiety, and fear (Staub 37). Due to shifts in concentration and shifts in the motive hierarchy, it
is evident that hunger has extreme effects on cognitive and psychological impairment.
Apart from acts of desperation, starvation has gastronomical effects on the psychological
and emotional state of its victims. Malnutrition is a prominent cause in psychological issues,
including depression and anxiety. B-12 Vitamin and Vitamin C deficiency are known to cause
“psychological abnormalities” including depression, anxiety, mood swings, and personality
disorders (C Durand; Depression Linked). In addition to B-12 Vitamin and Vitamin C, other
general psychological disorders are caused by deficiencies in iron, protein, calories, and thiamine
(Scrimshaw 2,15). One subject of Doctor Keys’ experiment was already prone to psychotic
tendencies before being admitted, and once subjected to starvation his neurotic scores soared,
signifying greater psychiatric distress (Tucker 181). Doctor Keys noted the “psychological
deterioration of the men” as he saw traits of anger and compulsion grow as starvation continued
(Tucker 124-125). In fact, two of the volunteers had to be checked into psychiatric wards after
cheating during the experiment and being expelled from the program. Once rehabilitated and
nourished, their psychotic symptoms disappeared (Tucker 102 and 160). Thus, it is evident that
malnutrition causes a serious decay in psychological health.
Young 11
Submission of Holocaust Victims
There is also a deep connection between these psychological impairments and the
discouragement to resist the Nazi oppression within the camps. Submission is an effect of
uncertainty and starvation. First we will explore uncertainty’s role in this resignation. The
victims were encouraged into submission as a result of the uncertainty they faced in regard to
their fate in the concentration camps. As Staub observes, “The Jews’ definition of the situation
was crucial in determining their response…Resistance required accurate perception of Nazi
intentions…” (Staub 158). Thus, knowledge of the victims’ future inside the camps was a
necessary precondition for any effective opposition to the camp system. However, the prisoners
were kept in ignorance about their situation. Nazis “did everything possible to camouflage the
ultimate fate of Jewish victims…using all possible means to mislead” (Staub 160). In Elie
Wiesel’s account, the prisoners deported to Auschwitz didn’t know where they were arriving and
had never heard the name of the camp before (Wiesel 24). According to Staub, this uncertainty
explains why the victims did not rebel while transported on the cattle trains, or in other instances
in which the prisoners were kept in ignorance.
1
Submission is also caused by starvation because the psychological effects of malnutrition
include apathy, the enemy of all organized resistance. For example, early in the starvation phase
of the experiment, Doctor Keys noted that after physical collapse during a somatically strenuous
test a subject showed no signs of anger, frustration, or relief that the test was over. Instead, his
expression showed “pure resignation” which Doctor Keys referred to as “pure muscular
1TherewereprisoneruprisingsinTreblinkaandSobiborinAugustandOctober1943,
respectively(JewishResistance).However,resistancewasnotcommoninthecamp
systemanddoesnotassistthepurposeofthisstudy,inwhichIwillfocusinsteadonthe
morecommonandwidespreadsubmissionoftheprisonersasitpertainstothe
psychologicaleffectsofstarvation.
Young 12
weakness” (Tucker 105). The experiment illuminated a loss of ambition, self-discipline,
motivation, and will power among the men once starvation commenced (Tucker 125). Thus, in
the absence of all other emotions, Doctor Keys observed the resignation that hunger promotes.
This symptom might be explained partially by Marasmus Kwashiorkor, the disease
previously mentioned which results from protein deficiency. This disease causes symptoms of
apathy and the reduction of voluntary movement. Other conditions of severe malnutrition result
in a “decrease…in the level of self-initiated intellectual activities, reflecting a profound change
in motivation” (Brozec 166, 170). Additional symptoms of malnutrition include numbness
(A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia), being less active (Scrimshaw 6), and a loss of interest
(Tucker 141). All of these symptoms are in direct opposition to the motivation and passion
needed to incite resistance within the camps. However, according to Doctor Keys’ experiment, as
soon as the rehabilitation stage began and the subjects began to receive normal meals, energy,
anger, and dissent became visible among the men, and they began petitioning to change the
conditions within the stadium that they thought unfair. (Tucker 174-175, 177) This account
supports the idea that “hungry people mindlessly follow orders. You feed them enough and right
away they demand self-government” (Tucker 178). Therefore, submission is connected to
starvation due to the psychological and emotional effects of malnutrition.
Dehumanization of Victims and Nazi Awareness
The connection of submission to starvation complicates the role that the Nazis played in
this submission. Did the Nazis know about the submissive symptoms of the psychological
trauma they inflicted by starving their victims and keeping them in ignorance? Staub states that
the Nazis were aware of this effect. “The Nazis recognized the importance of making victims
Young 13
seem less than human. Inmates were kept hungry and helpless…One purpose was to reduce the
will to resist by weakening them physically and destroying their former identity and sense of
dignity” (Staub 137). However, Nazis might have had other reasons for inflicting this physical
and psychological trauma.
Dehumanization of prisoners also psychologically affected the Nazi guards by enabling
them to rationalize the killings of the victims. One reason the Nazis kept the prisoners in a state
of dehumanization was to “diminish the victims and ‘help’ the SS distance themselves from
them” (Staub 137). When a commandant of Treblinka was asked why the victims were
humiliated and treated cruelly when they were going to be killed anyway, he replied, “ ‘To
condition those who actually had to carry out the policies – to make it possible for them to do
what they did’ ” (Staub 137). Dehumanization works through devaluing the victim so that the
subject, (the one dehumanizing the victim), feels a sense of superiority. In this process the
victim is often identified as a scapegoat and blamed for the hardships of the subject. This
enables the brutal harming of the victim to become “retaliation” for the subject, although in
reality the victim may or may not have done any harm. This process of devaluation enabled a
feeling of justification in the Nazis and created a psychological rationalization for the cruelty
with which they treated the camp prisoners (Staub 48-49).
However, although the Nazis might have sensed the growing moral ease with which they
inflicted pain on the victims, universally they were not necessarily aware of their participation in
this process of devaluation: “…devaluation and scapegoating are often non-reflective
psychological processes that arise without awareness” although they “make moral equilibrium
easier” (Staub148). Thus, even if the Nazis were devaluating prisoners in order to kill them with
less moral conflict, they may have been individually unaware that they did so. However, it is
Young 14
likely that even if this was not a purposeful Nazi goal in the camps, it was a direct effect of the
overall goal of the camp system – namely, extermination. I propose that the motive of
dehumanization was to inflict sufficient psychological trauma on the prisoners as to insure their
submission, and a psychological means to enable Nazi guards to rationalize the killings of the
prisoners, whether consciously or unconsciously developed on an individual level. Thus, the
dehumanization of the prisoners was inflicted as much for the psychological state of the Nazis as
it was for the psychological state of the prisoners. Regardless of the consciousness of the
psychological effects, starvation did cause feelings of dehumanization in its victims.
In fact, the feeling of dehumanization is perhaps the most potent psychological effect of
starvation. Leon H., a former prisoner of Auschwitz, states, “Human life was like a fly” (Langer
93). But why did the victims feel this way? One answer is linked to malnutrition. The loss of
self-worth and the denatured self are interconnected with malnutrition, starvation, and
submission. In general, iron deficiency and B-12 Vitamins are linked to “devaluation
impressions” (C Durand 1). The “poor physical conditions of the inmates” (including
malnutrition) “contributed for many to a lack of self-care or self-worth” (Robbins 237).
Furthermore, the acts that hunger inspires, such as cannibalism, “sometimes led to a diminished
self-perception” (Langer 82). Therefore, malnutrition, poor conditions, and acts of desperation
all led to feelings of dehumanization within the victims.
While exploring these psychological implications, we must also recognize that normal
logic does not always apply to the internal workings of the concentration camps. It can become
contradictory to calculate the will to survive within a system in which the overall purpose and
eventual – even seemingly inevitable – goal was mass death. In fact, we might recognize the
loss of the will to survive as a dominant Nazi goal supported by the psychological makeup of the
Young 15
camps and ghettos. This loss of will can be examined in the inhabitants of the Jewish ghettos
during the Holocaust who suffered similar hardships and persecution as the camp victims. Hersh
Wasser, a refugee and forced resident of the Warsaw Ghetto during World War II, made a
written entry on May 26th, 1942 in which he records the condition of his fellow refugees and
victims: “The attitude towards death is quite casual. I venture to say that the dead are objects of
envy. Nobody really has the courage to die, but the general opinion is that the dead have already
passed through their vale of tears…The living envy the dead” (Wasser). As Wasser observes,
the will to live began to diminish while death appeared more tempting in light of such extreme
conditions. One might deduce that any will to survive came not from a desire to live as life was
therein depicted, yet instead was founded at least partially by a fear of death, or as Wasser puts
it, lack of the “courage to die”. In labor camps, only a victim who performed a function was kept
alive. Value was determined by output and not by any intrinsic value of being human. Chaim E,
a former prisoner of Sobibor, described the situation as making him feel like a robot and not a
human, because his worth depended solely on his function (Langer 178). This means of
measuring value might be considered the greatest cause of feelings of dehumanization in
Holocaust victims. It also introduces the question of starvation’s place in the much larger
context of mass extermination and the structure and categories of the concentration camp system.
Starvation’s Role in Mass Extermination
Mass murder began outside the camps. Falk Pingel, expert on the Nazi and Holocaust era
(Falk Pingel), states, “The murder of the mentally ill, of Soviet prisoners of war, and of the
Jewish population began outside the concentration camps. The concentration camps were turned
into instruments of mass extermination only when the murder had reached such proportions that
Young 16
earlier methods were no longer adequate” (Pingel 15). A surplus of prisoners and overcrowding
is one reason mass extermination became dominant within the camp system. The mass roundups
of Jews during the pogroms of 1938 (Kristallnacht The November 1938 Pogroms) and the intake
of foreign prisoners from conquered areas caused a new influx of people to be sent to the camps,
causing extreme overcrowding which resulted in dire conditions for the prisoners, whom the
camps could not accommodate. This overcrowding led to the early development of methods of
mass killing. These methods included “ ‘euthanasia,’ ‘extermination through work’…mass
shooting,” and “means of starving…prisoners” (Pingel 5). Thus, from an early point, starvation
was a key factor in killing the prisoners. Aharon Weiss, advisor at the Tkuma Center for
Holocaust Studies (Accolades), explains that extermination was not the first Nazi approach to
ridding Germany of Jews. At first Jews were arrested and sent to camps to encourage Jewish
emigration from Germany (Weiss 118). However, after 1939 this attitude changed and the new
approach aimed to “solve the Jewish question” by pursuing mass extermination within the camps
(Weiss 120). Weiss states that “mass extermination began in the Chelmo camp in December
1941. The concepts and methods that were tested and consolidated at this time were carried out
on a wider scale…almost until the end of the war” (Weiss 126). Methods developed at Chelmno
quickly spread throughout the larger camp system.
Various kinds of camps were transformed “into principal instruments in the execution of
the ‘final solution’ ” (Weiss 126), and “Auschwitz and Lublin-Majdanek…became the focus of
the mass extermination of the Jewish population” (Pingel 6). Other specific death camps soon
included: Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibor, and Treblinka (Weiss 131). These death camps were
important for the Nazi approach to the “final solution of the Jewish question” and were
established solely for the purpose of mass death (Weiss 131). In the methods of death, prisoners
Young 17
were not always left to starve slowly. In many cases, the system “worked methodically and
efficiently and in no way allowed the millions who were sent to their deaths to consider what
was in store for them or to prepare to resist” (Weiss 131-132). As previously explored,
starvation causes psychological effects that inspire submission in the victims. However, even in
sudden deaths prisoners were not given time to consider a response or contemplate resistance. In
this way, the camp system worked efficiently in ensuring submission and mass extermination.
Starvation as a means of mass extermination was not always anticipated by the Nazi
regime. For example, in 1944 the Economic and Administrative Main Office of the camps
became unable to continue providing the insufficient raw materials that they had sent the camps
up to that point. The office no longer allowed the camps to order prisoner supplies and there
were serious supply shortages in camps that had never allotted sufficient materials to begin with
(Weiss 15). Although in most cases starvation was a tactic deployed by the Nazis to promote
mass extermination and dehumanization, in this case severe starvation was not planned by the
camp officials. Regardless, starvation struck the prisoners and contributed to mass
extermination. Furthermore, mass extermination of the Jews as a Nazi priority leads to an
interesting question about the purpose of the camps.
Mass Extermination Versus Prisoner Labor Supply
The existence of both labor camps and extermination camps within the system seems to
suggest an intrinsic paradox. If some prisoners were used for forced labor and not immediately
killed, how does this relate to the main purpose of the camp system and the question of the “final
solution”, or mass extermination of the Jews? Additionally, why were the prisoners kept in a
state of starvation if they were valuable to the war effort? Labor supply became an issue in the
Young 18
beginning of World War II. The camps’ intake of new prisoners was now meant to expand the
work force in the camps. Pingel explains, “the continuation of essential weapon production
could only be achieved if the flow of production and deployment of labor were more closely
regulated. With the implementation of forced-labor conditions…the concentration camps
assumed an important role” (Pingel 5). Therefore, the concentration camps, in addition to
exterminating Jews and enemies of the Nazi state, gained an economic role in the war effort. In
response, preparation for war included the expansion of the concentration camp system (Pingel
17). This seems to intimate a shift in the purpose of the camp system from extermination to
labor supply.
One answer to the questions posed above is that even in the face of war, the main goal of
the concentration camp system remained mass extermination. In 1942, in response to arguments
concerning the need of man power, “an agreement was reached between the heads of the police
and the SS in the General Government and the Armaments Ministry that workers who were
needed to produce essential goods for the war effort would be concentrated in camps by the SS”
(Weiss 128). Himmler, chief of German police (Pingel 5), approved this agreement but insisted
that it was temporary and demanded “that the extermination of the Jews in the General
Government must be completed by the end of that year” (Weiss 128). Therefore, while labor
supply was a temporary arrangement for prisoners, mass extermination remained the final goal of
the concentration camp system. The decisions the Nazis made in response to the war further
illuminate their dominant priority of mass extermination as a part of their goal of racial
domination. Even in the face of defeat, when using all economic assets for the war effort
became a necessity, the Nazis did not relinquish their ultimate goal of Rassenherrschaft, or racial
domination. Pingel says that “only with the dismantling of the concentration camps themselves
Young 19
did the gassing of Jews cease” (Pingel 6). Weiss also stresses that “economic considerations
were of secondary importance, and the Germans’ main goal was to humiliate and mistreat the
prisoners and to liquidate them by means of hard labor” (Weiss 119). This mistreatment and
humiliation is established through the means of starvation used against the victims, and explains
why victims were starved while still being used as labor for the war effort.
Testimonies support Weiss’s insistence that the Nazi regime still held mass extermination
as the top priority in the camp system. For example, Holocaust survivor Erich Kulka recalls a
time in which this Nazi priority was exemplified. Kulka explains that the 80 Jews in the camp
Hamburg-Neuengamme were ordered to Auschwitz, but five of these prisoners were part of a
team manufacturing submarines for the war and were allowed to stay. However, as soon as
Aryan prisoners arrived at the camp, they took the five Jews’ places and the Jews were sent
along to Auschwitz. Kulka explains that the transfer of these Jews as soon as Aryans were
available to take their place “should be taken as evidence that in every phase the extermination of
Jews took precedence in the plans of the Nazis” (Kulka 32). Additionally, Seweryna
Szmaglewska, also a Holocaust survivor, remembers an SS commandant who visited Auschwitz
and was angered by the sight of veteran prisoners. The commandant insisted that “a prisoner
should not survive more than six weeks in a concentration camp” (Karai 35). The commandant’s
insistence on a short life span for prisoners of the camps exemplifies the priority of mass
extermination within the camps.
Starvation was meant to enhance mass extermination, not the exploitation of labor. Even
while performing labor of economic value, the ultimate purpose was death, and if the prisoners
died from starvation and other extreme conditions while employed in this forced labor, the
purpose of the camp system was being efficiently served. The camp continued to develop in two
Young 20
ways: “exploitation of labor” and “mass killing of Jews” (Weiss 127). While mass extermination
of concentration camp victims was the final goal of Nazi policy, prisoners were temporarily
exploited to supply labor to the war effort. Conditions remained dire and prisoners were
continuously starved throughout this double objective. In observing the double objective of
extermination and labor supply and the role that starvation played in the camp system, we must
also recognize the individual categories of concentration camps and the potential difference
between labor camps and extermination camps.
Categories of Camps
Labor camps were specifically designed to exploit the prisoners’ labor power, while
extermination camps were designed for death. Some camps, like Auschwitz and Majdanek, were
identified as both labor and extermination camps, (a parallelism allowed by the double objective
we have just explored). However, in labor camps the conditions were so poor that they also led
to mass death (Weiss 116, 124). Specific classification of the camps is difficult when one
considers that “they all operated under conditions and a form of regime which resulted in large
numbers of victims, despite the names and roles assigned to them” (Weiss 116). Starvation, one
of the poor conditions that often resulted in death and made this classification difficult, is one
reason why labor camps and extermination camps are not clearly distinctive.
Shlomo Aronson, Political Science professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (The
Hebrew University of Jerusalem), states that once Theodor Eicke, an SS leader before and during
the Holocaust (Theodor Eicke), drew up a pronouncement called “Revolutionary Logic” for
implementation in Dachau in 1934 which determined that humans could be judged, hanged, and
executed with the final authority resting with himself: “there was really no difference to which
Young 21
type of camp people were sent” (Aronson 44). Aronson recognizes that because the SS had the
authority to kill prisoners for any reason and did not have to go through a judicial execution
system, murder became convenient, and eventually all camps essentially resembled death camps.
I suggest that there is no substantial distinction between camps that causes any substantial
psychological difference in victims of various areas, as they were all faced with starvation and
unavoidable extermination. Altogether, exploration of mass extermination, the double objectives
of exploiting labor and extermination, and the categories of the concentration camps help to
illuminate the role starvation and its psychological effects played within the camp system.
In addition to exploring the calculations of the will to survive in a camp system in which
simple logic does not suffice, another observation concerning the perception of death must also
be made here: what is life if it is no longer distinguishable from death? As previously
mentioned, the physical symptoms of starvation include a slower pulse and drop in temperature
(Tucker 135), two signs closely resembling death. This problem is illuminated in Wiesel’s
account. For example, while being transported to a new location, the men were forced to sleep
outside in extreme wintry conditions, and in the morning Wiesel declares, “I tried to distinguish
those who were still alive from those who were gone. But there was no difference” (Wiesel 93).
In driving the prisoners to states of near-death, the Nazis were in fact making them resemble
death more than life. Thus, the illogical gains morbid logic: life may have lost meaning to some
when it was indistinguishable from death. However, in the face of the overwhelmingly numerous
reasons to die, many prisoners searched their surroundings for reasons to live. Often, prisoners
would form interpersonal relationships in order to gain support and motivation. These
relationships are complicated by our study of starvation and its implications.
Young 22
Starvation’s Effects on Interpersonal Prisoner Relationships
Because starvation psychologically affected prisoners on an individual level, it follows
that starvation would also affect prisoner relationships within the camps. To understand this, we
must first explore the significance of interpersonal relationships. Henry Krystal, clinical
psychoanalyst certified in adult analysis and Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at Michigan State
University (Henry Krystal, MD), survivor of the Holocaust (Henry Krystal), and student of the
psychological trauma of the Holocaust (Davidson 7), offers psychological analyses that
illuminate the psychological decay in prisoners. Krystal has developed the stages of the process
of “catastrophic trauma” which often results when psychological defenses are overpowered. He
breaks them down into four parts: I. confrontation with death, II. affective blocking and
numbing, III. constriction of cognitive and executive function, and IV. defeat and surrender.
This last stage, which often leads to death, references the previously explored apathy and
submission that often consumed victims. This final stage was identified among prisoners within
the camp system as the “Muselmann state” (Davidson 7).
Shamai Davidson, the late head of the Elie Wiesel Chair for the Study of the PsychoSocial Trauma of the Holocaust and Associate Clinical Professor at the School of Medicine of
Tel-Aviv University until his death in 1986 (Minski), emphasizes the need for interpersonal
relationships among prisoners to mitigate Krystal’s fourth stage. Davidson states,
“…interpersonal support, by buffering and protecting the psyche in the face of even catastrophic
stress situations, can mitigate the traumatic process, and the progression to the final state of
apathetic resignation and surrender may be prevented or even averted” (Davidson 9). Davidson
expresses that the will to fight and survive in extreme conditions hinges on social bonding and
interpersonal exchange. He believes that “interpersonal bonding, reciprocity and sharing were an
Young 23
essential source of strength for ‘adaption’ and survival in many of the victims” (Davidson 2).
Davidson develops these thoughts into a general conclusion in which he claims human
reciprocity helped avoid death. He states, “human reciprocity in the group and dyadic relations,
by sustaining the morale and the motivation to struggle to live on in the Nazi concentration
camps, increased the chances of eventual survival” (Davidson 4-5).
Testimonies of victims of the Holocaust support Davidson’s conclusion. For example,
Helena Birenbaum, survivor of Majdanek, Auschwitz, and Ravensbrueck, expresses that if it
were not for the relationship she shared with her sister-in-law, Hela, she would not have
survived. Birenbaum says,
“Had it not been for Hela, her boundless devotion and constant care, I would have
perished after a few days…she shared every bite she acquired with me…she…did
everything in her power to make easier my life in the camp…For a long time I could not
rouse myself from a state of listlessness. Had it not been for Hela’s efforts I would not
have roused myself from my apathy…thanks to her help, I finally joined the fight for life
in the camp of death” (Davidson 14).
Therefore, Helena attributes her survival to the interpersonal bond she shared with her
sister-in-law. An additional point is made in Elie Wiesel’s account. Wiesel recalls two brothers,
Yossi and Tibi, whom Wiesel states “lived, body and soul, for each other” (Night 48). Yossi and
Tibi lived for each other, or survived because of their interpersonal bond. The study of these
personal bonds seems to inaccurately simplify survival within the camps: if forming personal
bonds substantially increased chances of survival, why didn’t every prisoner take this approach?
This is where our study of starvation complicates the idea of interpersonal relationships:
starvation greatly limited the relationships that could be formed or sustained and the ability of
these relationships to mitigate Krystal’s fourth stage of defeat and surrender.
As previously mentioned, “sharing” is included with interpersonal bonding and identified
as an essential source of strength for adaption (Davidson 2). However, starvation greatly limits
Young 24
the opportunities to share with someone else because there is already insufficient nutrition for
even one person. Physically, sharing food within these relationships in order to sustain another
would have caused the “sharer”, (who was already starving to death), to lose more strength. For
example, in Helena Birenbaum’s testimony, she states that Hela’s support increased Helena’s
chances of survival. But nothing is said about how Hela’s chances of survival are effected
through this transaction in which Hela shared “every bite she acquired” with Helena (Davidson
14). It is obvious that Hela’s sacrifice in this relationship would have decreased her physical
strength, increased malnutrition, and possibly encouraged even more of the psychological effects
of starvation that we have herein explored. Additionally, Wiesel recalls how at times he wished
that he could be free of his father so that he wouldn’t have to take care of him. In regards to his
father Wiesel thought, “If only I could get rid of this dead weight, so that I could use all my
strength to struggle for my own survival, and only worry about myself” (Night 101). Both
examples illuminate that in relationships where one prisoner obtained the role of main caregiver,
the caregiver’s chance of survival may have actually decreased or at least gained new
difficulties. Consequently, there were many instances in which prisoners broke relationships in
order to pursue personal nutrition and survival.
As previously observed, the motivational hierarchy causes shifts to occur in situations
where certain needs take precedence over others (Staub 37). If personal “self-related goals”,
(such as hunger), increase, “other-related goals” will decrease. This means that starvation – or
the self-related need to gain nutrition, can become priority over the needs of other members of
the personal bonds. This shift might cause actions that will lead to the decay of these
interpersonal bonds. For example, in Wiesel’s account he recalls a son who kills his father in
order to steal and eat his father’s scrap of bread (Night 96). This is a clear example of a situation
Young 25
in which a relationship cannot be sustained because the self-related goal of survival via nutrition
takes priority over the other-related goal of supporting and sharing with a partner. Wiesel also
recalls the head of the prisoner’s block in Buchenwald advising Wiesel against caring for his sick
father. The head of the block says,
“Don’t forget that you’re in a concentration camp. Here, every man has to fight for
himself and not think of anyone else…Here there are no fathers, no brothers, no friends.
Everyone lives and dies for himself alone…don’t give your ration of bread and soup to
your old father…you’re killing yourself. Instead, you ought to be having two rations of
bread, two rations of soup…” (Night 105).
This advice is reminiscent of Wiesel’s desire to break free from the bond with his father
and focus on his own survival. This man’s advice also reveals something chilling about the
concentration camp system: that it was structured through the implications of starvation to
discourage interpersonal bonding and that in order to gain enough nutrition to survive, sharing
was extremely difficult.
This complication extends beyond individual relationships and includes groups of
prisoners. For example, Wiesel recalls that when being transported to Buchenwald by cattle
train, some German bystanders threw bread into the wagon of starving prisoners who had not
been fed for days. He says, “Dozens of starving men fought each other to the death for a few
crumbs…Men threw themselves on top of each other, stamping on each other, tearing at each
other, biting each other” (Night 95). The effects of starvation and the urgent need for nutrition
made food a higher priority than solidarity or the needs of others. Wiesel also recalls an event in
which the SS displayed the hanging of a boy. Wiesel explains that when a guard attempted to
seize the boy, “two prisoners helped him [the guard] in his task – for two plates of soup” (Night
59). Therefore, some prisoners were willing to assist in the death of another prisoner so that they
Young 26
might obtain nutrition for survival. These examples display starvation’s role in the decay of
solidarity among prisoners.
According to Shamai Davidson, interpersonal relationships increase the possibility of
survival. However, an opposing argument can also be made: relationships might actually have
the opposite effect in that they complicate a prisoner’s chance of survival. For example, if one
prisoner is living for another (as in the case of Yossi and Tibi), and his fate becomes
psychologically entwined with his partner, then there are now two people who must live – the
prisoner and his partner – in order for the one prisoner to maintain the psychological will to
survive. In regard to the motive hierarchy, this poses an interesting question: when do “otherrelated goals” become “self-related goals”? If this equation is possible, it means that at stages in
a prisoner’s relationship, in order to meet his self-related needs he must additionally meet the
other-related needs of his partner. Davidson illuminates this complication when he explores the
relationship between Anne Frank and her sister, Margot. Davidson states, “Women who met
Anne Frank in Bergen-Belsen in the month before she died believed that neither the hunger nor
the typhus killed her but the death of her sister, Margot. One of these women said: ‘It was
frightening to see how easy it was to die for someone who had been left all alone in a
concentration camp’ ” (Davidson 5). It is possible that if Margot’s needs were a part of Anne’s
self-related needs, Anne’s inability to provide for Margot resulted in the insufficient fulfillment
of Anne’s needs. This situation suggests that relationships enhance the chance of survival, but if
the partner in one of these relationships succumbs to death, the other partner’s chance of death
seems to be significantly increased. Overall, starvation seems to complicate relationships within
the concentration camp system in that starvation is the cause for the need of relationships, but it
is also one reason that forming and maintaining these relationships becomes extremely difficult.
Young 27
However, starvation is not the only factor that went into the complications of
relationships in the camp system. Other physical and psychological factors also affected bonds.
When general survival conditions worsened, relationships seemed to diminish. For example,
Davidson states, “When survival conditions became even more extreme…as on the ‘death
marches’ after the evacuation of the camps, it became increasingly difficult to maintain
interpersonal bonds in the desperate struggle not to fall behind and be shot” (Davidson 6). One
Holocaust survivor, Solomon G, says that during the death march, “we were in such a state that
all that mattered is to remain alive. Even about your own brother, one did not think…at the time
I wanted to survive myself” (Hass 4). Solomon G illuminates the difficulty of maintaining otherrelated goals during the death march and thus suggests that Davidson is correct when he claims
that the harsh conditions of the death march made the maintenance of relationships more
difficult.
Holocaust survivor Eli Pfefferkorn also validates Davidson’s statement when he recalls
that during the death march, “the relationships that I developed in the last camp…rapidly
dissolved in the course of the ‘death march’ as the survival conditions became more extreme”
(Davidson 6). However, in his testimony, Pfefferkorn also reveals that the relationships he
formed at the last camp were “of an expedient nature” (Davidson 6). Although Pfefferkorn does
not elaborate on this description of his relationships in the last camp, his point is a powerful one.
Even in his brief statement on relationships, Pfefferkorn mentions the extreme survival
conditions that affected the relationship as well as the “expedient” nature of the relationship
itself. All these factors must be taken into consideration in addition to the effects of starvation
on the relationship dynamic. During the death marches, there were other factors such as
exhaustion and weakness that would also impact relationships. In some cases, the nature of the
Young 28
relationship itself may have impacted its resilience. In the camp system, the natures of
relationships varied and starvation was not the only dire condition that prisoners faced; because
of this, there is no way to define starvation’s exact and total role in the diminution of prisoner
relationships. Other than the extreme conditions and nature of the relationships, there is another
factor we should consider when studying the Holocaust, as this factor directly influences the
information we analyze: the production of the interview. I would like to make a brief departure
from the general argument to address this issue.
Production of the Interview
By speaking of the “production” of the interview, I do not suggest that the information
offered by survivors is not valid, but rather I aim to recognize the factors that influence an
interview and testimony so that we might be aware of the effects this might have on the
information analyzed throughout this study. For example, Shamai Davidson, whose writings we
analyzed earlier when addressing interpersonal prisoner relationships, identifies some of the
factors that influence the survivor interview. Davidson recognizes that what events the survivor
chooses to tell is affected by the natural tendency to stress the traumatic experiences that most
personally affected him or her (Davidson 10). He also explains that when speaking of life in the
concentration camps, “survivors stress the negative side of concentration camp existence because
their accounts are governed by an obsessive need to ‘tell the world’ of the terrible things they
have seen. This determines not only the kind of material they select to record, but also the
emphasis they give it” (Davidson 3). Davidson here suggests that other factors, such as the need
to convey certain things to people who did not experience the same trauma as the survivor, affect
the survivor’s choice of what information is shared.
Young 29
He identifies other factors as influential to the survivor’s testimony when he observes that
each victim saw only a small part of the collective whole of the camp system, the perception of
the survivor’s surroundings hinge upon his psychological and physical state at the time of the
trauma, and the events in the survivor’s life after the Holocaust will shape the way in which he
looks back upon the traumatic events within the camps and the way in which he synthesizes the
experiences (Davidson 10). Each of these factors accounts for the diversity of testimonies and
the rhetoric the survivors use to tell them. The pain a survivor might feel in recalling these
traumatic experiences also affects the interview. In his analysis, Davidson addresses both “the
difficulty involved in recalling and verbalizing the many elements in each individual experience”
and “the complexity and pain involved in the process of interviewing” (Davidson 10).
Therefore, the difficulty of recalling individual occurrences and the pain involved in
remembrance also affect what the survivor tells or how he tells it. This pain often involves
survivor guilt.
According to Aaron Hass, Professor of Psychology at California State University and
author of multiple books and essays on the Holocaust (Professor Explores Holocaust’s Effects),
“’survivor guilt’ is the term used to describe the feelings of those who…emerge from disaster
which mortally engulfs others. On an irrational level, these individuals wince at their privileged
escape from death’s clutches” (Hass 2). Survivors fit into this description because they survived
the concentration camp system, which claimed millions of other lives. Consequently, some of
the effects of survivor guilt might impact their testimonies. Survivor guilt can impact the
survivor by motivating him to commemorate the dead by bearing witness to the stories of the
deceased (Hass 2). Guilt may cause survivors to stress a commemoration and memory of the
dead in their testimonies; this explains why certain survivors will emphasize different aspects or
Young 30
details of their experience. For example, we might consider that in Birenbaum’s testimony,
emphasis is given to Hela’s sharing of food because Helena might wish to commemorate the
memory of Hela by recalling this act which celebrates a selfless image of Hela.
Survivors also feel guilt or shame about the things they did or felt in the extreme
conditions of the camps, and the retelling can cause the interviewee grief that discourages talking
about his experiences. For example, survivor Solomon G says, “It is difficult to say, [to] talk
about feelings. First of all, we were reduced to such an animal level that actually now that I
remember those things, I feel more horrible than I felt at the time…It bothers me very much if I
was the only one that felt that way, or is that normal in such circumstances to be that way” (Hass
5). Here Solomon explains that it is hard for him to talk about his feelings in regard to the
Holocaust. (Whether Solomon’s difficulty is linguistic or emotional is not important in this
discussion; our interest is in the difficulty itself.) He also expresses fear that he might be the
only one who feels a certain way, and whether or not his feelings are “normal”. I suggest that
these factors of fear and difficulty might potentially discourage victims from sharing certain
aspects of their testimony, whether consciously or subconsciously.
In addition to these elements of the interview, survivors have also been known to exercise
“secretiveness”, or avoid speaking of the family members killed in the camps. Hass explains,
“When survivors do speak about their Holocaust years with their new families,
many fail to mention that they had a previous family, children or a spouse, who
were murdered in the Holocaust. To speak of them might have implied albeit
irrationally, a question of one’s total devotion or loyalty to one’s present family.
The quality of ‘secretiveness’, a word which some members of the second
generation have used to describe the atmosphere in their homes while they were
growing up, can often be traced back to this issue. Typically, members of the
second generation do not discover the existence of a predecessor family until
adolescence or young adulthood” (Hass 6).
Young 31
Here Hass explains that survivors leave out information for the interest of their
relationship with their present families. Hass’ analysis leads us to conclude that there are times
in which outside factors encourage survivors to leave out parts of their experiences when giving
their testimony. Altogether, we might deduce that survivor guilt and other factors influencing
the survivor can impact the production of the interview and thus some of the information we
analyze. However, the information from the testimonies and interviews that we do have are still
vital sources and are not invalidated or diminished by these factors. Rather, it is important to be
aware of these influences so that we might analyze the information we are given with a greater
awareness and insight.
Conclusion
Altogether, the physical methods of Nazi dehumanization during the Holocaust had
extensive psychological effects on the victims. As a dominant Nazi tactic, starvation played a
significant role in the “final solution” of mass extermination within the concentration camp
system which remained the priority of the Nazi mission even while utilizing prisoners for labor
supply. Malnutrition caused psychological impairment and deterioration to abound while
inspiring acts of desperation within victims. The apathy and feelings of dehumanization or loss
of self-worth that resulted from this deterioration allowed and encouraged victims to submit to
their oppressors. Dehumanization of the victims also enabled psychological changes in the Nazis
and conditioned them in such a way that they carried out brutalities with increasing moral ease.
Victims also experienced depression and a cognitive decay most identifiable as a shift in
concentration. Starvation even complicated and challenged the possibility of prisoner
relationships to provide hope or motivation for survival. The psychological effects of starvation
Young 32
via malnutrition are numerous and provide a new understanding of the Holocaust victims’
situation and response.
Young 33
Works Cited
"Accolades for Dr. Aharon Weiss." Inside JDC's Global Humanitarian Assistance Work: No
Passports Required. American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, 23 July 2010. Web.
07 Apr. 2012. <http://nopassportrequired.wordpress.com/tag/aharon-weiss/>.
A.D.A.M. Medical Encylopedia. "Causes, Incidence, and Risk Factors." Pernicious Anemia.
U.S. National Library of Medicine, 18 Nov. 0000. Web. 16 Feb. 2012.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001595/>.
Aronson, Shlomo. "SS-Police-Concentration Camp From Dachau to Auschwitz." The Nazi
Concentration Camps: Structure and Aims; the Image of the Prisoner; the Jews in the
Camps: Proceedings of the Fourth Yad Vashem International Historical Conference,
Jerusalem January 1980. Ed. Yisrael Gutman and Avital Saf. Jerusalem: Yad Vashem,
1984. 19-30. Print.
Davidson, Shamai. "Human Reciprocity Among the Jewish Prisoners in the Nazi Concentration
Camps", The Nazi Concentration Camps, Yad Vashem 1984.
C, Durand, Mary S, Brazo P, and Dollfus S. "Psychiatric Manifestations of Vitamin B12
Deficiency: A Case Report." National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S.
National Library of Medicine, 29 Nov. 2003. Web. 14 Feb. 2012.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15029091>.
"Depression Linked to Vitamin C Deficiency." The Depression Forums. Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,
Sept. 2010. Web. 14 Feb. 2012. <http://www.takethislife.com/depressionnews/depression-linked-vitamin-c-deficiency-48315/>.
Young 34
Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers. "Kwashiorkor." TheFreeDictionary.com.
Saunders, 2007. Web. 16 Mar. 2012. <http://medicaldictionary.thefreedictionary.com/kwashiorkor>.
"Falk Pingel." Georg-Eckert-Institut Fur Internationale Schulbuchforschung. Georg Eckert
Institute for International Textbook Research, 2012. Web. 07 Apr. 2012.
<http://www.gei.de/en/fellows-and-staff/affiliated-faculty/dr-pingel.html>.
Hass, Aaron. "Survivor Guilt in Holocaust ..." Holocaust Education Resources for Teachers.
Holocaust Teacher Resource Center. Web. 23 Apr. 2012. <http://www.holocausttrc.org/glbsurv.htm>. "The Hebrew University of Jerusalem - Faculty Research
Interests." ‫בירושלים העברית האוניברסיטה‬. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Web. 07 Apr.
2012. <http://www.huji.ac.il/dataj/controller/ihoker/MOP-STAFF_LINK?sno=352815>.
"Henry Krystal." Voice/Vision Holocaust Survivor Oral History Archive. Board of Regents
University of Michigan-Dearborn, 19 Sept. 1996. Web. 07 Apr. 2012.
<http://holocaust.umd.umich.edu/krystal/>.
"Henry Krystal, M.D." Michigan Psychoanalytic Institute and Society. Michigan Psychoanalytic
Institute and Society, 2003-2011. Web. 07 Apr. 2012. <http://www.mpimps.org/main/directory/krystal.shtml>.
Hopler, Whitney. "Psychological Effects of a Vitamin B-12 Deficiency." LIVESTRONG.COM.
Demand Media, Inc., 19 Oct. 2010. Web. 14 Feb. 2012.
<http://www.livestrong.com/article/284019-psychological-effects-of-a-vitamin-b-12deficiency/>.
Young 35
"Jewish Resistance." Jewish Resistance. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 6 Jan.
2011. Web. 24 Apr. 2012.
<http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005213>.
Karai, Felicia. "Discussion." The Nazi Concentration Camps: Structure and Aims; the Image of
the Prisoner; the Jews in the Camps: Proceedings of the Fourth Yad Vashem
International Historical Conference, Jerusalem January 1980. Ed. Yisrael Gutman and
Avital Saf. Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1984. 35-36. Print.
"Kristallnacht The November 1938 Pogroms." United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Web. 22 Apr. 2012.
<http://www.ushmm.org/museum/exhibit/online/kristallnacht/frame.htm>.
Kulka, Erich. "Discussion." The Nazi Concentration Camps: Structure and Aims; the Image of
the Prisoner; the Jews in the Camps: Proceedings of the Fourth Yad Vashem
International Historical Conference, Jerusalem January 1980. Ed. Yisrael Gutman and
Avital Saf. Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1984. 31-32. Print.
Kurz, Doriane. "Personal History." Interview. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Web. 12 Jan. 2012.
<http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/media_oi.php?MediaId=1117>.
Langer, Lawrence L. Holocaust Testimonies: The Ruins of Memory. New Haven: Yale UP, 1991.
Print.
Minski, Louis. "The Psychiatrist." The Psychiatric Bulletin Feb. 1987, Volume II sec. RC Psych.
Royal College of Psychiatrists. Web. 7 Apr. 2012.
<http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/11/2/73.2.full.pdf>.
Young 36
Pingel, Falk. "The Concentration Camps as Part of the Nationalist-Socialist System of
Domination." The Nazi Concentration Camps: Structure and Aims; the Image of the
Prisoner; the Jews in the Camps: Proceedings of the Fourth Yad Vashem International
Historical Conference, Jerusalem January 1980. Ed. Yisrael Gutman and Avital Saf.
Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1984. 3-17. Print.
"Professor Explores Holocaust's Effect on Children of Survivors : Psychology: Aaron Hass'
Book and Class Discussions Reflect a Personal, Intimate Knowledge of the Legacy." Los
Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 23 July 1991. Web. 24 Apr. 2012.
<http://articles.latimes.com/1991-07-23/local/me-283_1_aaron-hass>.
Robbin, Sheryl. "Life in the Camps: The Psychological Dimension." Genocide, Critical Issues of
the Holocaust: A Companion to the Film, Genocide. Ed. Alex Grobman and Daniel
Landes. New Jersey: Simon Wiesenthal Center and Rossel, 1983. 236-41. Google Books.
Google and Behrman House, Inc. Web. 10 Jan. 2012.
<http://books.google.com/books?id=DcdiVs9lwvcC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q
&f=false>.
Scrimshaw, Nevin S. "Malnutrition, Brain Development, Learning, and Behavior." Nutrition
Research 18.2 (1998): 351-79. Science Direct. Elsevier, Inc., 27 Apr. 1998. Web. 16 Jan.
2012. <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027153179800027X>.
Staub, Ervin. "Ervinstaub.com." Ervinstaub.com. Web. 15 Mar. 2012.
<http://www.ervinstaub.com/>.
Staub, Ervin. The Roots of Evil: The Origins of Genocide and Other Group Violence. Cambridge
[England: Cambridge UP, 1989. Print.
Young 37
"Theodor Eicke." Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team. H. E. A. R. T., 2012. Web.
07 Apr. 2012. <http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/othercamps/eicke.html>.
Tucker, Todd. The Great Starvation Experiment: Ancel Keys and the Men Who Starved for
Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2007. Emerson College Ebrary Reader.
Web. 10 Jan. 2012.
<http://site.ebrary.com/lib/emerson/docDetail.action?docID=10215796>.
Vogel, Michael. "Personal Histories." Interview. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Web. 12 Jan. 2012.
<http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/media_oi.php?ModuleId=10006287&MediaId=1188>.
Wasser, Hersh. "Hersh Wasser on Rumors of Extermination of the Jews (1)."
Www.yadvashem.org. Yad Vashem the Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance
Authority. Web. 16 Mar. 2012.
<http://www1.yadvashem.org/yv/en/holocaust/resource_center/item.asp?GATE=Z&list_t
ype=41&TYPE_ID=1&TOTAL=N&pn=3&title=Excerpts%20from%20Diaries,%20Memoirs,
%20and%20Letters>.
Weiss, Aharon. "Categories of Camps-Their Character and Role in the Execution of the 'Final
Solution of the Jewish Question'." The Nazi Concentration Camps: Structure and Aims;
the Image of the Prisoner; the Jews in the Camps: Proceedings of the Fourth Yad
Vashem International Historical Conference, Jerusalem January 1980. Ed. Yisrael
Gutman and Avital Saf. Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1984. 115-132. Print.
Wiesel, Elie. Night. Toronto: Bantam, 1986. Print.