Goldhagen rejected conformity explanations of Nazi perpetrators as illogical

Evidence

Goldhagen (1996), however, argued that appealing to conformity pressures to account for perpetrator behavior is not only wrong but actually illogical. The reasoning used to reach that conclusion was very simple. In his own words, The notion that peer pressure, namely the desire not to let down one’s comrades or not incur their censure, could move individuals to undertake actions that they oppose, even abhor, is plausible even for the German perpetrators, but only as an account of the participation of some individuals in the perpetration of the Holocaust. — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 324

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Goldhagen’s theory reduces genocide to individual anti-Semitic attitudes driving behavior — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 312; Goldhagen claims anti-Semitism alone explains individual perpetrator motives, not the Holocaust’s occurrence. — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 380; Goldhagen claimed anti-Semitism alone but sufficiently explains the Holocaust at every level — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 314 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Goldhagen argued antisemitic belief, not social pressure or conformity, drove perpetrator behavior. #expands (0.93) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 896
• Goldhagen claims anti-Semitism alone explains individual perpetrator motives, not the Holocaust’s occurrence. #expands (0.82) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 380
• Goldhagen claimed anti-Semitism alone but sufficiently explains the Holocaust at every level #expands (0.78) — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 314
• Popular hatred was insufficient to drive the Holocaust #corroborates (0.72) — Zygmunt Bauman, Modernity and the Holocaust, 212