Holocaust social psychology requires both ideological attraction and conformity obedience
Evidence
It is important to note that a comprehensive social-psychological approach to the Holocaust must take account of both popular attraction to Nazi ideology in Germany dur ing the 1930s and 1940s and the role of conformity and obedience. Far from being mutu ally exclusive explanations, the combination of the two seems necessary for any understanding of the social psychology of the Holocaust. Without significant support for the Nazis, Hitler could never have attained the position of authority that he occupied, and conformity pressures upon any would-be dissidents were no doubt increased by Hitler’s popular support. Nevertheless, the relative role of the “pull” of Nazi anti-Semitism and the “push” of obedience and conformity pressures is at the center of debates about the origins of the Holocaust—currently embodied by the contrast between Goldhagen’s (1997) “willing executioners” and Browning’s (1998) “ordinary men.”
— Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide, 851
Categorization
XREF: Connects the ideological-scapegoating model to dispositional/situational debates (Goldhagen vs. Browning, Milgram-style conformity). — connects to: Holocaust debates centered on perpetrator psychology without living social psychologists — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 8; 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’s Holocaust study is fundamentally a social-psychological analysis — Leonard S. Newman and Ralph Erber (eds.), Understanding Genocide: The Social…, 308 (+8 more)