Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian Perspective
The link between Stanley Milgram's experimental study of obedience in 1963 and the explanation of the Holocaust during the Second World War has been the subject of controversy for the past five decades. Russell and Gregory (2015) offer the latest reflections on this relationship. Hannah Arendt&...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Pluto Journals
2016-09-01
|
| Series: | State Crime |
| Online Access: | https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.13169/statecrime.5.2.0287 |
| _version_ | 1797833850245611520 |
|---|---|
| author | Augustine Brannigan Gina Perry |
| author_facet | Augustine Brannigan Gina Perry |
| author_sort | Augustine Brannigan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The link between Stanley Milgram's experimental study of obedience in 1963 and the explanation of the Holocaust during the Second World War has been the subject of controversy for the past five decades. Russell and Gregory (2015) offer the latest reflections on this relationship. Hannah Arendt's analysis of Eichmann centred on the image of desk murderers mindlessly processing military orders. Milgram invoked pervasive evidence of compliance to morally reprehensible commands in his experimental study of obedience. The joint Arendt–Milgram perspective has recently fallen into disrespect as a result of voluntarism evidenced in recent studies of ordinary Germans in participation in mass murder. Russell and Gregory's contribution advances an essentially Weberian explanation for the behaviour of perpetrators. Their analysis of the obedience experiments concludes that all the participants were constrained by a normative structure that led them to ignore harm to subjects as a result of the larger bureaucratic mindset that allowed Milgram's assistants, his funders and his subjects to suppress acknowledgement of injury. They argue that this recapitulates key features of the Holocaust. The recent historiography of the Holocaust points to a post-Weberian understanding of the bureaucracies at the heart of the genocide – the slave labour program in Germany and German-occupied territory, and the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front, where evidence points to a conscious and enthusiastic endorsement of the homicidal objectives of the Nazi regime. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T14:29:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a8d3a6976c714a5682f2e3cd350249ee |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2046-6056 2046-6064 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T14:29:38Z |
| publishDate | 2016-09-01 |
| publisher | Pluto Journals |
| record_format | Article |
| series | State Crime |
| spelling | doaj.art-a8d3a6976c714a5682f2e3cd350249ee2023-05-03T16:16:00ZengPluto JournalsState Crime2046-60562046-60642016-09-015228730510.13169/statecrime.5.2.0287Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian PerspectiveAugustine Brannigan0Gina Perry1University of CalgaryUniversity of MelbourneThe link between Stanley Milgram's experimental study of obedience in 1963 and the explanation of the Holocaust during the Second World War has been the subject of controversy for the past five decades. Russell and Gregory (2015) offer the latest reflections on this relationship. Hannah Arendt's analysis of Eichmann centred on the image of desk murderers mindlessly processing military orders. Milgram invoked pervasive evidence of compliance to morally reprehensible commands in his experimental study of obedience. The joint Arendt–Milgram perspective has recently fallen into disrespect as a result of voluntarism evidenced in recent studies of ordinary Germans in participation in mass murder. Russell and Gregory's contribution advances an essentially Weberian explanation for the behaviour of perpetrators. Their analysis of the obedience experiments concludes that all the participants were constrained by a normative structure that led them to ignore harm to subjects as a result of the larger bureaucratic mindset that allowed Milgram's assistants, his funders and his subjects to suppress acknowledgement of injury. They argue that this recapitulates key features of the Holocaust. The recent historiography of the Holocaust points to a post-Weberian understanding of the bureaucracies at the heart of the genocide – the slave labour program in Germany and German-occupied territory, and the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front, where evidence points to a conscious and enthusiastic endorsement of the homicidal objectives of the Nazi regime.https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.13169/statecrime.5.2.0287 |
| spellingShingle | Augustine Brannigan Gina Perry Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian Perspective State Crime |
| title | Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian Perspective |
| title_full | Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian Perspective |
| title_fullStr | Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian Perspective |
| title_full_unstemmed | Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian Perspective |
| title_short | Milgram, Genocide and Bureaucracy: A Post-Weberian Perspective |
| title_sort | milgram genocide and bureaucracy a post weberian perspective |
| url | https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.13169/statecrime.5.2.0287 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT augustinebrannigan milgramgenocideandbureaucracyapostweberianperspective AT ginaperry milgramgenocideandbureaucracyapostweberianperspective |