I think the type of resistance that would have been the most effective against the growing power of the Nazi government is discreet subversive resistance. This is because if one were to outspokenly in clear daylight help a Jew or show dissent in any way, the Nazis would have dealt the person with severe punishment, probably death. In this case, yes, that person is helping a Jew and is doing a good deed, but it would most probably result in death as soon as the Nazis found out which would be a short period of time. Therefore, although a type of resistance where one is outspoken and shows dissent publicly should be used in certain circumstances, such as to raise public awareness at the start of revolutions, this type of resistance was not effective in Nazi Germany as one would be put to death swiftly and brutally, thereby limiting the time period where one could help the Jews.
On that note, I believe the type of resistance that would be most effective would be resistance that is shown through small, almost unnoticeable ways by the authorities but that have substantial impact. Examples are hiding a Jew in your house, slipping them food discreetly, encouraging them, providing comfort, and telling your family members about you disagreement with Nazi policies. Granted, all these acts of rebellion still carry the punishment of capture and death but the chances of getting caught are significantly less compared to open rebellion for everyone to see. It might be argued that this is immoral because if one were to employ a discreet use of rebellion, fewer Jews would be helped but I think that a single life should not just be another number. It is better to help just a single person through small, ‘insignificant’ deeds than to not save anyone because the type of resistance used was too public and resulted in a quick death before any significant help could be given.
On the issue of what I would have done if I had been living in Germany in the 1930’s, it is hard to...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document