tion. As is the case with Himmler. He signed every death warrant for every victim in every concentration camp and yet he himself never physically took part in the murders. He hid away his participation in the killing of millions in order to cope with his actions. Himmler cannot even face death that comes at the hands of others. When he witnesses one particular slaughter the commandant of the Einsatzgruppen makes a good point. He makes Himmler realize that if it is so difficult for him to witness death it must be so much worse for those who actually have to be the hand of death. (Griffin 433). If one can distance one’s self from a disagreeable action, one need not feel guilty for it. It seemed that although so many collaborated in the Holocaust, not one of them felt good about it and thus everyone tried to distance themselves from it. “Himmler did not partake in the actual preparations for what he called ‘the final solution.’ Nor did he attend the Wannsee Conference where the decision to annihilate millions of human beings was made. He sent his assistant Heydrich. Yet Heydrich, who was there, did not count himself entirely present. He could say that each decision he made was at the bequest of Heinrich Himmler. In this way an odd system of insulation was created. These crimes, these murders of millions, were all carried out in absentia, as if by no one in particular” (Griffin 435). When people realize what they have done or taken part of, when they stop letting it “cease to exist” it has chilling effects. “The children of Nazis and survivors alike have inherited a struggle between silence and speech” (Griffin 448). Do we continue to push it under the rug or do we bring it out in the open? The question is do we continue to take the easy way out and forget what happened and for some of us what hand we had in the matter or do we confront the issue and try to learn from it. Susan Griff...
