I. THE BASIC FACTS OF THE ISSUE
II. THE NATIONAL WOMEN’S HOSPITAL CASE
III. SIMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TUSKEGEE PROJECT & THE NATIONAL WOMEN’S HOSPITAL CASE
I. THE BASIC FACTS OF THE ISSUECervical cancer is a fatal disease, killing so many women around the world.
the medical profession knows of the danger of cervical cancer and has instituted screening procedures.
- instead of finding Cervical cancer, doctors find CIS (carcinoma in situ)
- CIS is accepted as being a danger sign. A woman with CIS has a much higher chance of developing cervical cancer.
- if a woman’s smear test shows CIS, doctors throughout the world would take action to head off the disease.
Throughout 1960s and 1970s, Associate Professor Herbert Green did not share the information regarding CIS, at the National Women’s Hospital
- it was unnecessary for him to let women undergo surgery, because he regarded CIS as harmless, symptomless disease.
- women with CIS were monitored, but didn’t received treatments (surgery and radiotherapy), and were not told that the non- treatment was controversial
Throughout 1960s and 1970s, Associate Professor Herbert Green did not share the information regarding CIS, at the National Women’s Hospital
- arguments were voiced among the doctors at the National Women’s Hospital over Green’s treatment.
- Green was not affected by the rage of his colleagues and his project was permitted to continue
- the 1st public attack upon Green’s methods came in a paper with a harmless-sounding title: “The Invasive Potential of Carcinoma in Situ of the Cervix.” Two groups of women were compared: 1) the fate of 817 women who had normal cells (who had 1.5 % developedcancer), and 2) 131 women who had CIS (who had 22% developed cancer and 8 had died)
- over a year, there was no outcry because it was written in typical dry research language, Green was not mentioned in the paper, and the deadly implications were not spelled out until 2 feminists had puzzled out what it meant.
II. THE NATIONAL WOMEN’S HOSPITAL CASESecond case parallel to the Tuskegee Project, which took place in Auckland New Zealand (where the National Women’s Hospital has an international reputation for excellence).
The National Women’s Hospital among other things, tests and treats women for the cervical cancer.
The need for early detection of Cervical Cancer before it begins to do major harm was undertaken worldwide. The reason for this is because it is widespread, can be fatal.
- all over the world, it’s accepted that the best way to predict cervical cancer is to take a small smear of cells from the cervix and examine them under a microscope
- abnormalities in cells called CIS (carcinoma in situ) are dangerous signs.
-women with CIS is normally treated to remove the abnormal cells
But 1 small group or doctors, led by Associate Professor Herbert Green at the National Women’s Hospital did not accept that CIS was a danger sign for cervical cancer.
Dr. Green and Associates Idea of Cervical Cancer:
He regarded CIS as a benign occurrence, and posing no danger.
Over many years, he and his team monitored the women with abnormal cells, but did nothing further, because he believed that too much surgery was performed upon women.
What happened with the “fierce silent private battle” that took place between the doctors and researchers at the hospital?
Green’s opponents published an article in a medical journal arguing his method was endangering people’s lives, which caught the attention of 2 feminists (Sandra Coney and Phillida Bunkle) in 1986.
the 2 feminists wrote an article in a popular New Zealand magazine about the topic: “that a number of women (26) had died as a result of the non-treatment of CIS.
- these 2 feminists were attacked by doctors, patients and , politicians, that led to the Royal Commission.
The Royal Commission supported the criticisms of Coney and Bunkle and the Health Minister decided to hold an inquiry and appointed Judge Silvia Cartwright
- the hearing began in late 1987, and the report was presented on July 28 1988
- Judge Cartwright’s report vindicated the article by Coney and Bunkle.
III. SIMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES WITH THE TUSKEGEE PROJECTSIMILARITIES:
- people did not receive the accepted treatment for a given condition
- the people were not told about the case
- there is evidence that the people suffered
DIFFERENCES:
Nobody disputed that syphilis was a terrible disease, and that leaving it untreated will cause death
Professor Green did not accept the connection between CIS and cervical cancer; from this viewpoint, the women were not ill and required no treatment
STANLEY MILGRAMS OBEDIENCE EXPERIMENTTHE MAN WHO SHOCKED THE
WORLD“Linsly-Chittenden Hall on Yale's old campus is easy to miss—an improbable hybrid of Romanesque and neo-Gothic styles that sits in the shadow of the magnificent clock-arch straddling High Street. But in July 1961, the building hummed with an unusual amount of activity as people came and went through its doors at hourly intervals. The increased traffic was due to the arrival and departure of participants in an experiment with unexpected findings that would make it one of the most significant—and controversial—psychological studies of the 20th century.
The research was the brainchild of 28-year-old Stanley Milgram, then a recent graduate with a Ph.D. in social psychology from Harvard's department of social relations. The name Stanley Milgram may not elicit the kind of instant recognition as, say, Sigmund Freud. And though he was something of a Renaissance man, making films and writing poetry, Stanley Milgram was no Sigmund Freud: He did not attempt an all-encompassing theory of behavior; no school of thought bears his name. But what he did do—rather than probe the interior of the human psyche—was to try to expose the external social forces that, though subtle, have surprisingly powerful effects on our behavior.” - Thomas Blass
I. HISTORY and INTRODUCTORY DESCRIPTION OF THE EXPERIMENTA. HISTORY
- Stanley Milgram was a psychologist at Yale University, who conducted a study focusing on the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience.
- He examined justifications for acts of genocide offered by those accused at the World War II, Nuremberg War Criminal trials.Their defense often was based on "obedience" - that they were just following orders of their superiors.
- He 1st described his research in 1963 in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology
- He discussed his findings later in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View
- The experiments began in July 1961, three months after the start of the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised the experiments to answer this question: "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices
- Milgram summarized the experiment in his 1974 article, "The Perils of Obedience"
B. INTRODUCTORY DESCRIPTIONS OF THE EXPERIMENT
- Milgrams 1961 Obedience to Authority experiment begun with an advert placed in a local paper asking for volunteers to participate in a learning experiment at nearby Yale University.
- This was also backed up by a direct mail campaign.
- Once subjects had been selected for the experiment they were asked to come to Yale to part in the experiment which would last no more than an hour, and that they will be paid $4.50/hour.
- In the Laboratory they met - so they believed - another participant like themselves and an experimenter or scientist.
- The scientist explained that the experiment was test to the effect of punishment on learning, in essence a memory test which involved memorising and repeating sequences of word pairs.
1974 article, "The Perils of Obedience":
The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects' [participants'] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects' [participants'] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.
Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.[
- Both participants were asked to take roles:
1. The Teacher (Actual Participant), who would adminster the punishment in response to right or wrong answers.
2. The Learner (victim), who would try to learn the word pairs read out by the Teacher - and would receive a punishment for every incorrect answer.
- The punishment was an electroshock, generated by an impressive generator with rows of switches and dials.
- The Teacher was instructed by the experimenter to give the Learner increasingly severe shocks every time he made a mistake.
- The shocks started at 15 volts and increased by 15 volts in thirty levels to 450 volts.
- The learner was taken to an adjoining room, strapped to a chair with an electrode attached on his forearm.
- As the experiment begins the Learner initially, for the first few word pairs, does well.
- Then he increasingly and consistently makes mistakes - and receives a shock for each mistake.
- The shocks are adminstered by the Teacher who is told by the experimenter to depress the appropriate switch on the shock machine.
- At Level Ten - 150 volts the Learner demands to be let out of the room and that the experiment stop.
- As the voltage increases so do the Learners cries (which soon turn to agonised screams) and demands that the experiment cease.
- By Level Twenty - 300 volts the Learner is refusing to answer anymore questions and screaming in pain.
- From Level 23 - 345 volts nothing more is heard of him.
- Is he alive? Has he had a heart attack?
If at any time the subject indicated his desire to halt the experiment, he was given a succession of verbal prods by the experimenter, in this order:
1. Please continue.
2. The experiment requires that you continue.
3. It is absolutely essential that you continue.
4. You have no other choice, you must go on.
The Learner was very much alive and an actor. The shocks were not real and the Learner's screams were prerecorded, and broadcast back into the laboratory. The experimenter was also an actor and the selection - where the Learner apparently randomnly selected his role was fixed.
Down to the last detail Milgram's experiment was an extraordinary illusion entirely designed to put the real volunteer - the Teacher, in a position where he or she had to decide whether to obey the experimenter carrying on with experiment shocking the Learner. Or refuse to continue with the experimenters instructions, persuaded by the agonised screams of the Learner.
Over a period of three years Milgram performed many extraordinary variants of this experiment. This variant called Condition 02, voice feedback, will be the template upon which the Reenactment is based.
II. RESULTS
Before conducting the experiment, Milgram polled fourteen Yale University senior-year psychology majors as to what they thought would be the results.
All of the poll respondents believed that only a few (average 1.2%) would be prepared to inflict the maximum voltage.
Milgram also informally polled his colleagues and found that they, too, believed very few subjects would progress beyond a very strong shock.
In Milgram's first set of experiments,
65 % (26 of 40) of experiment participants administered the experiment's final 450-volt shock, though many were very uncomfortable doing so;
- at some point, every participant paused and questioned the experiment
- some said they would refund the money they were paid for participating in the experiment.
Only one participant steadfastly refused to administer shocks before the 300-volt level.
Later, Prof. Milgram and other psychologists performed variations of the experiment throughout the world, with similar results although unlike the Yale experiment, resistance to the experimenter was reported anecdotally elsewhere
Dr. Thomas Blass of the University of Maryland, Baltimore County performed a meta-analysis on the results of repeated performances of the experiment. - He found that the percentage of participants who are prepared to inflict fatal voltages remains remarkably constant, 61–66 percent, regardless of time or place
Milgram's obedience experiment was replicated by other researchers. The experiments spanned a 25-year period from 1961 to 1985 and have been repeated in Australia, South Africa and in several European countries. The percentage of participants who are prepared to inflict fatal voltages remains remarkably constant, 61–66 percent, regardless of time or place.
The following table shows the number of subjects who break off at each shock level:
No.of
Level: Volts subjects male female
First Level 15
Second Level 30
Third Level 45
Fourth Level 60
Fifth Level 75
Sixth Level 90
Seventh Level 105
Eighth Level 120
Ninth Level 135 1
Tenth Level 150 5 4
Eleventh Level 165 1 1
Twelfth Level 180 1 2
Thirteenth Level 195
Fourteenth Level 210 1
Fifteenth Level 225
Sixteenth Level 240
Seventeenth Level255
Eighteenth Level 270 2
Level: Volts No. of male female
subjects
Nineteenth Level 285 1
Twentieth Level 300 1 1
Twenty-first Level 315 3 2
Twenty-second Level 330 1
Twenty-third Level 345 1
Twenty-fourth Level 360 1
Twenty-fifth Level 375
Twenty-sixth Level 390
Twenty-seventh Level 405
Twenty-eighth Level 420
Twenty-ninth Level 435
Thirtieth Level 450 25 26
pecentage of obedience 65% 66%
III. INTERPRETATIONSProfessor Milgram elaborated two theories explaining his results:
The first is the theory of conformism, based on Solomon Asch's work, describing the fundamental relationship between the group of reference and the individual person.
A subject who has neither ability nor expertise to make decisions, especially in a crisis, will leave decision making to the group and it
hierarchy.
The group is the person's behavioral model.
The second is the agentic state theory, wherein, per Milgram, the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person's wishes, and he therefore no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions.
Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow.
Alternative Interpretations
In his book Irrational Exuberance Yale Finance Professor Robert Shiller argues that other factors may be partially able to explain the Milgram Experiments.
"[P]eople have learned that when experts tell them something is all right, it probably is, even if it does not seem so. (In fact, it is worth noting that in this case the experimenter was indeed correct: it was all right to continue giving the 'shocks' - even though most of the subjects did not suspect the reason.)“.
Milgram himself provides some anecdotal evidence to support this position.
"In his book, he quotes an exchange between a subject (Mr. Rensaleer) and the experimenter.
The subject had just stopped at 255 V, and the experimenter tried to prod him on by saying “There is no permanent tissue damage.”
Mr. Rensaleer answers, “Yes, but I know what shocks do to you. I’m an electrical engineer, and I have had shocks . . . and you get real shook up by them-especially if you know the next one is coming. I’m sorry” (Milgram, 1974a, p. 51).".
IV. Milgram's variationsIn Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View,
Milgram describes 19 variations of his experiment.
Generally, when the victim's physical immediacy was increased, the participant's compliance decreased.
The participant's compliance also decreased when the authority's physical immediacy decreased (Experiments 1–4).
Experiment 2, where participants received telephonic instructions from the experimenter, compliance decreased to 21 percent.
- some participants deceived the experimenter by pretending to continue the experiment.
- In the variation where the "learner's" physical immediacy was closest, where participants had to physically hold the "learner's" arm onto a shock plate, compliance decreased.
- Under that condition, 30 percent of participants completed the experiment.
Experiment 8, women were the participants; previously, all participants had been men.
- Obedience did not significantly differ, though the women communicated experiencing higher levels of stress.
V. REAL LIFE EXAMPLEFrom April 1995 until June 30, 2004, there was a series of hoaxes, known as the strip search prank call scam, upon fast food workers in popular fast food chains in America in which a phone caller, claiming to be a police officer, persuaded authority figures to strip and sexually abuse workers.
The perpetrator achieved a high level of success in persuading workers to perform acts which they would not have done under normal circumstances. (The chief suspect, David R. Stewart, was found not guilty in the only case that has gone to trial so far)
THE NAZISQUESTIONS:
What were Hitler’s reasons in doing the project?
What was the purpose/s of Hitler for the Nazi project?
Was Hitler right in pursuing the project?
Who were the persons involved in the project?
What were the experiments done?
Who were the specimens or the subjects?
“That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.” -Adolus Huxley
“The disadvantage of men not knowing the past is that they do now know the present. History if a hill or high point of vantage, from which alone men see the town in which they love or the age in which they are living. “-C.K. Chesterton
“To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born, one has to remain always a child.” -Cicero
“We can chart our future clearly and wisely only when we know the path which has led to the present.” -Adlai Stevenson
“History becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophy.” -H.G. Wells
“The only lesson history has taught is that man has not learned anything from history.” -Anonymous
“History repeats itself, and that's one of the things that's wrong with history.” -Clarence Darrow
Fifteen years prior to Adolf Hitler’s dictatorship (1933), he was an unknown, bitter corporal in the German army.
How did his meteoric rise happen?
- When it was clear World War I was a lost cause, Germans were left in a humiliated, chaotic country that became entrenched in a Civil War.
- Right wing members of the Freikorps fought with the left wing and lost, and the unstable democratic Weimar Republic gained control of the country.
- World War I was "settled" with the Treaty of Versailles, leaving Germany responsible for war reparations and branding it an embarrassing guilt clause.
- Enter Adolf Hitler, failed artist and now one of the leading members of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, or the Nazis.
- Born in Austria, Hitler's hero as a young boy was the mayor of Vienna, Karl Lueger.
- Lueger blamed Jew's for Austria's economic problems.
- Hitler's views on the Jews and antisemitic tactics were shaped by Lueger.
- Hitler claimed that Germany had been subverted by a Jewish/Communist conspiracy and that therefore World War I had never really been lost. Germany in 1922 was in a poor economic state- high inflation and low value of the German mark (money) left waiting in breadlines for scant food. By 1923 the Nazi party numbered 50,000 and Hitler launched a failed coup in Munich against the Weimar Republic. He was put to trial for treason but only sentenced to five years and became a celebrity in the process. It was during this stay that his plan for the future was put to paper in Mein Kampf, his radical agenda for future social change.
Ordinary voters give power to Nazis
It is important to point out that Hitler and the Nazis came to power by the votes of ordinary people.
The stock market crash of 1929 sent Germany spiralling back down. The Nazi message appealed more than ever, and the country's hunger, unemployment, and despair left the people looking for something to cling to- and the Nazi party was it.
The parties of the left wing were too divided to gather the support they needed despite their large size. The largest party, the Social Democrats, had no effective leaders.
The Nazi party's propaganda was easy to accept: its certainty offered hope, and its provision of a scapegoat (Jews, Communists, and the Treaty of Versailles "conspiracy") was pleasing.
Once in a position of power, Hitler tightened his grip. Using the Nazi majority he had a national state of emergency declared.
Germany became a one-party police state as all non-Nazis were forced out of office and individual freedoms were taken away. The government could read mail, tap phones, and search homes without a warrant.
All opposing parties were banned, and their leaders jailed. The Enabling Act of March 23, 1933 was easily forced through a Reichstag of few political opponents and gave Hitler dictatorial powers.
Brownshirts, young jobless men attracted by the belonging and power, marched the streets, beating and even killing enemies of the Nazi party.
Hitler's terror tactics were highly effective; the fear of the SA led many Germans to remain silent even though they did not support the Nazi party.
WHY DID IT HAPPEN?
"racism, combined with centuries-old bigotry, renewed by a nationalistic fervor which emerged in Europe in the latter half of the 19th century, fueled by Germany's defeat in World War I and its national humiliation following the Treaty of Versailles, exacerbated by worldwide economic hard times, the ineffectiveness of the Weimar Republic, and international indifference, and catalyzed by the political charisma, militaristic inclusiveness, and manipulative propaganda of Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime, contributed to the eventuality of the Holocaust."
An old prejudice rears its ugly head
Jews were historically persecuted as excellent scapegoats.
In the medieval times they were blamed for the plague, depicted as having horns and cloven feet as well as sacrificing Christian babies.
During the Crusades Jews were killed by pillaging Christians on the way to "reclaim the Holy Land."
Jews were often subjected to prejudice, boycotts, exclusion, restrictive laws, attacks, and killings. Some Christains felt that Jews were Satanic because they killed their Messiah. The Spanish Inquisition of the 1400's forced Jews to convert, leave Spain or be burned at the stake. Jews became increasingly distant from Christians following physical separation during the first century, the waxing of Christianity and the waning of Judaism, and the preservation of practices by Jews that were adopted by Christians. For example, the Saturday Sabbath, circumcision, not eating pork, and reading Hebrew. Medieval Jews were kept out of guilds and forced into the job of moneylending. There was a popular myth that Jews killed Christian children to make unleavened bread that led to persecution. The fact that the Jews of the diaspora was often wandering about without clear roots made them even more alien.
A new level of hate and blame
Hitler, perverting the ideas of Social Darwinism, felt that the Jews were an evil that was at the root of Germany's problems and must be therefore must be eliminated.
Hitler claimed that Germany never really lost World War I but was stabbed in the back by a Jewish/Communist conspiracy.
The discovery of a scapegoat gave the Germans something to work toward eliminating.
The anger and humiliation was now directed away from themselves, Germans could focus all of their negativity on the Jews.
Nazism became widespread and its oppression of the Jews grew into the genocide that was the Holocaust.
Beyond the mere definition: HOLOCAUST
The Holocaust is generally regarded as the systematic slaughter of not only 6 million Jews, (two-thirds of the total European Jewish population), the primary victims, but also 5 million others, approximately 11 million individuals wiped off the Earth by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. It is hard to grasp the idea that it isn't just 11 million deaths, but 11 million people whose lives were cut off because of racism and hate, all in a period of 11 years (1933-1945).
The two main phases to the Holocaust:
1. the period between 1933 and 1939, the Nazi rise
2. the period between 1939 and 1945, the period of World War II.
the Holocaust represents 11 million lives that abruptly ended
- it was the extermination of people not for who they were but for what they were.
- Groups such as handicaps, Gypsies, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, Catholics, Poles, Soviet prisoners of war, political dissidents and others were persecuted by the Nazis because of their religious/political beliefs, physical defects, or failure to fall into the "Aryan" ideal.
THE PERIOD BETWEEN 1933 TO 1939
Once firmly in power, Hitler's plans for the ending of the struggle between the Aryan race and the "inferior races" was set to work. These races were feared as a biological threat to the "master race" purity.
The Jewish population of Germany hovered around 600,000, less than 1 % of the entire German population.
Nazi propaganda identified them as a "race" (incorrect) and an inferior one, the source of all the economic depression and defeat in World War I
The Jews of Germany still had some prejudices held against them but they were becoming more and more accepted. Interfaith marriages were on the rise and many Jews were prominent citizens.
- This was changed for the worse.
- Laws were instituted against Jews forcing them out of public life, i.e. civil service jobs, law court and university positions, etc
- Jews were forced to label all exterior clothing with a yellow Star of David with the word Juden, (Jew).
The "Nuremberg Laws" proclaimed Jews second-class citizens.
- one's Jewishness, according to the Nuremberg Laws, was dependent on that of a person's grandparents, not that person's beliefs or identity.
- More laws passed between 1937 and 1939
- Jews were more and more segregated and life was made much harder; Jews could not go to public schools, theaters, cinemas, or resorts, and furthermore, they were banned from living, or sometimes even walking, in certain parts of Germany. The Jewish population was less persecuted during the Olympics (Hitler wouldn't want to lose the Games to another city) of Berlin in 1936, however, no German Jewish athletes were allowed to compete.
THE PERIOD BETWEEN 1939 AND 1945
World War II erupted on September 1, 1939, when Germany invaded Poland.
the Nazis began to enslave the Poles and destroy their culture, deemed "subhuman." The first step was to eliminate the leaders. Nazis massacred many university professors, artists, writers, politicians, and Catholic priests.
Large group of the Polish people were resettled to make room for the "superior" Germans. German families began to move in to the newly annexed land.
Thousands of Poles and Polish Jews were imprisoned in concentration camps. (The model concentration camp was Dachau, which was established March 20, 1933 in an abandoned munitions factory.)
Fifty-thousand " Aryan-looking" Polish children were kidnapped and taken to be adopted by German families. Many were later rejected as incapable of "Germanization" and send to special children's camps, where death by starvation, lethal injection, and disease was all very possible.
During the beginning of the war, Hitler authorized an order to kill institutionalized, handicapped patients deemed "incurable." State hospitals filled out questionnaires on their patients, which were then reviewed by a special commission of physicians who would simply decide if the subject lived or died. Those marked for death were sent to one of six death camps in Germany and Austria, where special gas chambers killed them.
Public protests in 1941 forced the Nazis to continue this "euthanasia" program in secret. Babies, small children, and others were killed afterwards by lethal injection, pills, or forced starvation. Their bodies were burned in crematoria.
The mass murder of the European Jewry and other persecuted groups was thus preceded by the "euthanasia" program, which had all the elements needed for the later genocides in the Nazi death camps: an express decision to kill, specially trained personnel, the equipment for the deadly gas, and the use of the euphemistic terms like "euthanasia" which psychologically distance the killers from their victims and hid the criminal character of the killings from the public.
In the months following the invasion of the Soviet Union, Jews, political leaders, Communists, and Gypsies were killed in mass executions, the vast majority of the victims being Jewish. Mobile killing squads, Einsatzgruppen, carried out these murders at improvised sites throughout the Soviet Union, following behind the advancing German army.
The most famous (or infamous, as the case may be), is Babi Yar, near Kiev, where an estimated 33,000 persons, mostly Jewish, were murdered.
The killers used language to distance themselves, referring to these executions as "special actions," or "special treatments," so that they could distance themselves from it; many drank to help ease their minds. Keep in mind that these killing squads were not angry rioters, nor gangs of street thugs, but ordinary people who were "just following orders," indeed, Nazi training taught that this was a task of eliminating enemies of the state, not a racist plot.
Entire communities were literally erased. Towns disappeared.
German execution of the handicapped and institutionalized made its way into the Soviet Union as well. As a result, more than three million Soviet prisoners of war were murdered.
In God We Trust
