For many children growing up in Europe during the Third Reich, a period from 1933-1939 filled with increased persecution of Jews in Germany and annexed Austria prior to the full-scale Holocaust, the Kindertransporte was their only hope of survival. Once arriving in England, the children and youth, ages 18 and under, had very different experiences. There were a variety of factors which influenced how they adapted to their new surroundings. Specifically, each of the children were accustomed to a certain degree of Jewish observance in their homes. Whether they had been assimilated into German culture or came from religiously observant homes, where the children were placed in England, be it in Jewish homes, private Christian homes, hostels, or schools, the degree of religious observance and level of faith varied. This analysis focuses on the different experiences that the Kindertransporte children had as it pertains to how they preserved the Jewish identity developed in their homes in Germany and explains how their primordial home experiences shaped their future Jewish identities and levels of faith as adults.

Supervisor:
Prof. Joanna B. Michlic

The death toll of Dutch Jews during the Nazi occupation is by far the highest among the Western European countries. Of the 140,000 “Volljuden”, as per Nazi criteria, only 27 percent survived the occupation, whereas in Belgium, 60 percent of the approximately 66,000 Jews, and in France, 75 percent of the approximately 320,000 Jews escaped death at the hands of the Nazis.

The question as to why such a high percentage of Dutch Jews perished, in a country where the majority of the Jews were Dutch citizens for generations, has been and still is a central theme among researchers, Dutch and others. Were there any factors specific to the Netherlands which contributed to this phenomenon? Some have been identified and debated in the literature over the last decades, such as the nature of the Nazi civil and military regime in the Netherlands, a servile and considerably obedient Dutch bureaucracy and police force, a lack of geographical places to which to escape, the late emergence of Dutch organized resistance organizations, a tradition of heeding authority by Jew and non-Jew alike, and lack of knowledge about the destination(s) of the deportations. In addition, little pre-war antisemitism, and the deep belief by Dutch Jews in being well-integrated into Dutch society, would have lessened their guard. Yet, one component has so far received only minor attention within the analysis of the low survival rate – the role played by the fear of Dutch Jews of punishment by deportation to Mauthausen which they had learned to mean certain death early on; a fear which was then manipulated by the Nazi authorities. By tracing expressions of such fear in primary sources, such as war-time diaries, and war time documentation, discussions of the Jewish Council with and without German authorities, I examine perceptions and interpretations of Dutch Jews under quickly changing circumstances and threats, seen through their own prism. This perspective or approach of histoire de mentalités has not received much attention.

My thesis argues that fear of punishment with Mauthausen became a “magical concept” to be avoided, impacting behavior of Dutch Jews. Until the deportations in the summer of 1942, under the guise of “work in the East”, compliance with each anti-Jewish decree had “livable” consequences within the Netherlands, and for the most part at home. Non-compliance on the other hand, was interpreted as Mauthausen and thus death. By means of increasing intimidation with Mauthausen, the German regime conditioned the Jews of the Netherlands into a high level of compliance up until the very moment of deportation: Jews were registered, deprived of financial means, segregated from general civil society, an easy prey for the stage of deportation. At that point even the final spelling out of the name Mauthausen as punishment no longer had the expected full and immediate compliance result. The earlier equation of death with Mauthausen versus a “somehow livable life at home” changed to death in Mauthausen versus a “harsh fate” in the unknown East, where war was raging. The latter was often considered as possibly also resulting in death. Especially when the occupation regime turned to violent measures to reach its deportation quota quickly, the threat of Mauthausen lost much of its deterrence. By that late point in time, Mauthausen had firmly tightened the web around the Jewish community, from which there was little escape.

Until such sudden change in their reality, the search for a way out, such as by seeking a hiding place, had not been perceived necessary and thus many had not taken any action to this effect. It is in this sense, therefore, that Mauthausen is an important factor to be included in any analysis of the high death toll among Dutch Jews.

Supervisors:
Prof. Dan Michman
Dr. Kobi Kabalek

At the end of World War II the Allies were left to deal with a continent in chaos. Millions of displaced persons (DPs) were scattered throughout Europe and Russia. Jewish survivors made up a very small percentage of the overall numbers of DPs. In the years following the Holocaust, about 250,000 Jewish survivors were temporarily resettled in DP camps in the American zone.

Immediately following their liberation, the Jewish survivors on a whole were in poor health and were faced with dreadful living conditions in the DP camps as they waited for the world to open immigration to Palestine and other countries. Months passed until the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) took over operation of the DP camps and political pressure forced the United States government to improve conditions and supplies in the DP camps, and create special DP camps for Jewish survivors.

While some of the larger Jewish DP camps have been the subjects of in-depth research, little research has been done on the Jewish survivors in Deggendorf DP camp in Bavaria. This camp was known to the researcher as her grandparents lived in the Deggendorf DP camp following their liberation in Poland. Research on the process of rehabilitation in Deggendorf DP camp reveals that this DP camp had a number of unique factors that influenced a rapid rehabilitation process. The factors include a large and somewhat cohesive group of Jewish survivors that arrived in Deggendorf DP camp from the concentration camp in Theresienstadt and a dynamic, experienced, and empathic UNRRA director who worked cooperatively with the Jewish DPs.

Following the path of recovery in the first year after surviving a genocide, this paper examines the self-agency of the Jewish survivors that was instrumental in their establishing a functional community of their own in Deggendorf DP camp and in their rehabilitation. In this age of worldwide dislocation, it is worthwhile to look backward at previous episodes of displacement to reveal factors that either by chance or by intention, helped facilitate a relatively rapid transition from genocide survivors to DPs reliant on external organizations to immigrants establishing new, independent lives in other countries.

Supervisor:
Prof. Keith (Kalman) Weiser

Judeopessimism can be defined as that which describes an affective, ontological, and political theory or attitude of resignation toward the longevity of anti-Jewishness through the evolution of interacting cultures over thousands of years, arguably culminating in the Holocaust – otherwise known by some as the end, or “fracturing” of modernity itself. Judeopessimism thus offers a dynamic intellectual framework which reflects the contemporary struggle to find meaning in diasporic Jewishness in the 21st century, considering the decades of institutional Holocaust memory and its hegemony in the academy and Jewish identity. This terminology outlines a powerful and provocative concept which captures the mood and mindset of many Jews in the postmodern era and reflects the historical and existential challenges that Jews face in a world that is often hostile and indifferent to their suffering. It also reflects the philosophical and ethical challenges posed to Jewish communities by Jews and the world around them by questioning the meaning and value of Jewish existence, being, and identity; it is therefore not a final or fatalistic verdict, but a critical and constructive voice which invites Jews and scholars alike to engage with their past, present, and future critically and creatively.

Supervisors:
Prof. Shaul Magid
Dr. Shmuel Lederman