Holocaust rescuer stories are more than just a new genre of courageous heroes. They are a gateway for students, parents, and community leaders to discover the foundations of building a moral society. The stories bring awareness of how rescuer altruistic behavior is developed and discussion of how it could be applied in our current society.
After the war, books were written on the Nazi war crimes, military campaign strategies, and history leading up to the Holocaust. They were not on the atrocities of the Jews, let alone the minority who went against society’s pressures to help them. “Nobody, I mean, nobody wanted to hear about what happened in the concentration camps,” recalls a Danish rescuer who was arrested and sent to one (Fogelman, 1994). The focus of academic research was on how a society could have allowed the Holocaust to happened. Social scientists who left Nazi Germany in the 1930s studied personalities after the war and defined an “Authoritarian Personality” that led people to harbor nationalist and racist attitudes. It included a “correlation between deep rooted traits of lack of independence, submission to authority, rigid moral reactions, and overt prejudice and a hierarchal authoritarian parent-child relationship” (Fogelman, 1994).
As interest in survivor testimonies grew in the 1960s and revelations of their rescuers became known, historians and researchers began to profile this unacknowledged group from the Holocaust to seek out their motivations (Baron, 1986). This preliminary research on rescuers laid the foundation for academic researchers in the 1980s to actively pursue in-depth studies to get to the core of what separated rescuers’ courageous actions from so many bystanders. Because human behavior in the context of the Holocaust is incredibly complex, the research was interdisciplinary and included the fields of history, sociology, psychology, theology, and medicine (Koepp, 2019). Yad Vashem’s historical records and testimonies became a vital source and was added to new interviews collected by the researchers.
The researchers were highly motivated to probe this untapped area of human nature, in large part to discover what could be learned and if it could be replicated. Three of the most important studies in this field are from, Samuel and Pearl Oliner, Eva Fogelman, and Nechama Tec. While they each suggest different findings, albeit with similar themes, to explain the uniqueness of the behavior of the Righteous, one commonality is that the years of childhood development are critical (Paldiel, n.d.). This finding in itself is enough to raise awareness for any modern society contemplating its future. Tec predicted, “Knowledge of the exact number [of rescuers] is less important than insights about this kind of behavior. Such insight carries a promise of positive lessons”(Tec, n.d.). The Oliners had the same sentiments and goal:
“Altruism exists. The question is whether there is something in their nature that might have predisposed rescuers to altruistic acts, something that might be called an altruistic personality. If we can understand this we might be able to deliberately cultivate and nurture it in the service of a global community.”
It is important to note that not every rescuer fit neatly into each personality trait that these researchers found. Sometimes they fit into several, sometimes none. Just because one person had one trait did not automatically imply that they could or would become a rescuer. To engage in rescue depended on additional factors such as in what country they were living, whether they met a Jew to help (rescuers uniformly did not actively seek them out), if there were small children who might not understand secrecy, if neighbors were bent on revealing Jews, if they had surplus money to buy food and proximity to buy goods, etc. If these external factors aligned with the person’s characteristics, then there could be a predisposition for rescuer action (Baron, 2019).
Sam and Pearl Oliner
Research Findings
Values
Parental Influence
Predisposition to Action
In the 1980s, researchers Samuel and Pearl Oliner of Humboldt University began the first major study on the motivation of rescuers to determine if there was a pattern in their backgrounds and personalities that would explain their actions. The Oliners were uniquely qualified to lead such a study. During the war, Mr. Oliner was a young Jew in Poland who escaped the Bolbova ghetto when he was only 12 years old. As he began to flee the single room that his family had been living in, he hesitated until his grandmother gave her blessing for him to leave. He wasn’t able to escape the ghetto before watching from a rooftop as his family and other Jews were rounded up in the town square and taken by the truckload throughout the day to a mass grave and shot.
“I couldn’t believe that I was awake or alive or dead or – it was a nightmare as I observed this.”
The young Oliner fled to the home of some Christian family friends in the country, not far from the ghetto. Fortunately, the woman took him in and did not send him back to the ghetto that she could see just over the hills.
“And so I came and I knocked on the door, and she already heard what had happened, because the forest is very close by; on a clear day down the hill you can see…see its location, the approximate location of it. And she knew what had happened, and so she took me in, and she sort of calmed me down, she said ‘Don’t worry, you must survive, you will survive,’ but she couldn’t keep me in the house for a number of reasons. I don’t know, maybe she wasn’t 1000% altruistic. Maybe she was afraid.”
Sam Oliner in 1944 (photo USHMM testimony video)
Valvena family (photo USHMM testimony video)
This benevolent woman helped Oliner to survive in this new world that changed overnight. She changed his name from a Jewish one to a Polish name, Yusef Polowski, and also taught him Catechism that he could still recite decades later. A neighbor was known to be a traitor to the Nazis so Oliner would not be safe in her house for long. The woman devised a plan for him to continue with his false identity. Many Polish farmers were looking for help, so Oliner survived by pretending to be a “pasteur”, a farmhand, to a non-Jewish family. Like many Poles, this family took over a farm from a Jewish family who had to surrender their homes and belongings. The Jewish family was also eventually killed in Bolbova. The sentiment of antisemitism was deep across eastern Europe. Oliner remembers the farmer he worked for say (Oliner, 1994),
“I feel sorry for the Jews, but, on the other hand, the Nazis cleaned Poland of Jews for us. It will be a different Poland, a better Poland for it.”
He lived day to day keeping his head low and void of suspicion among the Christian family. In his 1994 testimony, he remembers what it was like to be so young and face these circumstances:
“It’s kind of like the wisdom of the ages, you suddenly – poof – suddenly you’re mature. Necessity, I supposed, is the mother of invention or something, some people say…I grew up overnight.”
Oliner thought his stay with the non-Jews would only last eight weeks and that the Allies would invade and defeat the Nazis. He was there for three years.
After Poland was liberated, he roamed around Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Germany with some older boys realizing that he had “nothing to lose, no ties, and I could do anything I chose to” (Oliner, 1994). He met American servicemen and drove in their trucks. Like many Jews, he spent time at a displaced persons camp, ironically one that was formerly a barrack for Nazi commanders. The opportunity to move to England came about with the help of a British Jewish community organization taking in orphans. Oliner began his studies in England, and then moved to New York City in 1950 under the care of relatives who had moved there in the 1920s. He met and married Pearl in 1956, then they both moved to California and earned PhDs at UC Berkeley, then began teaching sociology at Humboldt State University (North Coast Journal Staff, 2021).
Sam Oliner, PhD (photo Humboldt University)
Pearl Oliner, PhD (photo Humboldt University)
Sam and Pearl Oliner’s groundbreaking book in 1988 was called “The Altruistic Personality Project.” They interviewed over 700 Holocaust rescuers and non-rescuers from Poland, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Denmark, Belgium, and Norway (Oliner & Oliner, 1988). Their results successfully identified traits that nurtured a humanistic moral code in nearly all Holocaust rescuers (Oliner, Wielgus, & Gruber, 2004). The most significant influences were:
Values, such as equity, fairness, empathy, and justice. Rescuers believed that innocent people should not be persecuted for no reason and that every human is equal.
Parental Influence. In childhood, they were surrounded with family figures who modeled caring about other people regardless of differences. This also extended into discipline. Rescuers were more likely to have parents who used discussion and explanation rather than physical punishment when faced with bad behavior. Non-rescuers regularly described growing up in an abusive home.
Predisposition to Action. When face-to-face with someone in need, they immediately took action, or were part of a community whose expectations were to help others (Oliner & Oliner, 1990).
These influences are prevalent when hearing the rescuers’ stories. Strobos’ values were developed from being raised in a multi-generational family of self-described Socialist Democratic Atheists, which was a common freethinker movement at that time in Amsterdam. Her family and their social circle rejected religious beliefs and sought to rid themselves of the “tyranny of the clergy.” However, this never affected their morality. Rather, for generations her family held great value for life and had a tradition of helping others.
Values
These influences are prevalent when hearing the rescuers’ stories. Strobos’ values were developed from being raised in a multi-generational family of self-described Socialist Democratic Atheists, which was a common freethinker movement at that time in Amsterdam. Her family and their social circle rejected religious beliefs and sought to rid themselves of the “tyranny of the clergy.” However, this never affected their morality. Rather, for generations her family held great value for life and had a tradition of helping others.
“My family is basically social democratic atheistic family, and I’ve been very influenced by my maternal grandfather in whose house I was born in Amsterdam, it was an old 17th century house…and the ideals that they had of education and helping other people they acted out in their lives, and they had Belgian refuges in the first world war. And as ____ came into power they had refugees in their house. And when Hitler invaded Holland in May 1940, a rater famous Jewish union leader and columnist who had his column in the paper with his picture, immediately called my grandmother if he could stay I her house. He was sure he would be one of the first to be arrested. He and his wife stayed with my grandmother from day one, and later found another address because my grandmother had a very small apartment in Amsterdam and he had a chance to stay in the country, and he was rescued.”
Knud Dyby’s strong moral values also go back for generations. His family instilled a deep sense of goodness that included taking care of family, friends, and neighbors. Like Strobos, this was not tied to the church or religion, but from his culture’s long-held belief in helping others. He joked about how little he, or anyone in Denmark, went to church, but at the same time it did not impede on their moral values:
“We’re not a very religious people. Maybe traditional, but not religious. You wouldn’t find 500 people in churches on Sunday morning in all of Denmark. Maybe I put a little extra. But, the morale, I mean the goodness of people is still there. Maybe from the old tradition of religion but it’s still there without going to churches.
I will say we went to church twice a year, or sometimes four times in a lifetime. That would be the maximum. But I would say that the tradition of religion, of goodness was in their hearts, so maybe religion had something to do with it, but we didn’t have to go and verify it in the churches. Partly because of the old traditions and very conservative churches at that time, the Lutherans in Denmark, the Protestant, were very conservative. You didn’t laugh when you get inside the church and you didn’t talk loud either. So actually, I was turned off religion by a stupid teacher in religion and by very old-fashioned priests.”
Parental Influence
Irene Gut Opdyke fondly recalls her parents’ influence as a child growing up in rural Poland:
“It was very happy family. We were at peace with God and people. My mother was saint because there were gypsies around in the forests and they were poor and my mother twice took gypsie to our home because she did have pneumonia she was very sick. My mother also encouraged us always to help no matter what. And when we were coming from school we brought the dogs and the cats and lost children and birds and whoever. My mother never said, ‘Why are you doing that, it’s too much.’ She knew how to fix. She knew how to help. And so, we grow in that type of a home.
I did have many happy times with my sisters. There were many poor people at the holidays. There was always place for poor people. And when somebody was down on their luck, my mother and my father were helping. So, I have to say that that was the important thing in my life.”
Opdyke’s parents also modeled how to be accepting of people from other races and religions. For a child, the most important thing was to have friends and play well together, which was such an important part of her development that she never heard of antisemitism:
“[Opdyke]: My father built a factory, ceramic factory. And he did have many people under study and there were Polish and Russian and Jewish and Christian and Germans and many of the, some of the people were married. So, we did have united nation with children and we played together. There was not any hate between us. We just tried to find the nicest way to have a pleasure in playing. That’s all.
[Interviewer]: So your parents always were accepting of other kinds of people?
[Opdyke]: Yes. We were wonderful. There was never, I did not know the word ‘antisemitism.’ I learned that during the war and after the war. There was not any difference in that place I lived. That’s true. There was not any ‘this is a Jew’ or ‘this is a dumb Pole’ or that this is an ‘anybody,’ you know. I didn’t hear my father or mother speaking about that. But often they just said, ‘You have to be good and play together.’ And they tried to put lots of love in us for us for ourselves and also for other people.”
Predisposition to Action
A significant rescuer trait was a predisposition to action and ability to think on their feet while under the duress of war. Strobos and her fellow university students poured their energy into underground resistance units. Tina Strobos’ work with the Dutch Underground brought new problems to solve each day. It could involve hiding someone for a day or a week in their house, or finding a new location for that afternoon. Her inclination for medical studies and problem solving suited her well for the job. Strobos’ immediate instinct was to save Jewish children. She and her sorority sisters discovered that the nearby ghetto was not heavily guarded and they could ride in and out on their bicycles:
“My sorority that I was a member of was very active in the underground, and in placing Jews, and especially Jewish children. And I would pick them out of the ghetto because if they weren’t raiding it, the ghetto was open, and you could ride in and out, you know, with a child. They were not checking. And so I took people out of there, brought them home, and then there were homes for them in the country, especially for children. It would be much better to place them in the farms. They would stay with us for a couple of days to a couple of weeks.
And we were taught in the underground how to behave when you were arrested. And always ask for an interpreter even though you speak German so that you can hear the question twice, and that you can correct the answer, and try to get in control of the interview by different ruses, you know, distractions and so forth. And I remember once, I was so afraid they had come to arrest me, and they, two guys took me by the wrist, threw me against the wall, and I was trembling, and I didn’t want to show them. Don’t show them that you’re scared, you know, then they’ll become more sadistic. So, I was trembling, and to hide it, I was crossing my legs and uncrossing my legs, and I had shorts on, and this Gestapo said to me, ‘You’re not impressing me with your legs.’ So then I stopped trembling automatically because I felt I had gained a little human control. He was, after all, just a person, a man, rather than, this devil.”
The Oliners’ research also divided the human response to others in need as either “The Ethics of Equity,” seen in bystanders, or “The Ethics of Care,” seen in rescuers. The bystanders saw societal relationships as “contractual,” “giving each person what he is entitled to on the basis of social and religious norms and accepted standards of behavior,” which fell in line with the Nazi Party and fascist expectations of society (Paldiel, 1993). Rescuers, however, held universalist views of society where all humans are born with the same rights as anyone else and that helping others is an obligation of society. Their actions uphold these ethics even if they go against accepted norms. This was particularly evident in countries such as Poland and The Netherlands where protecting Jews was seen as jeopardizing everyone else. German-controlled countries had bounties on Jews and anyone hiding them. Bystanders felt they were maintaining society’s order by giving them away as well as pocketing money for food. Betraying a Jew in The Netherlands could net 100 Guilders ($55 U.S. dollars today) (Strobos, 1992). At a time of extreme hardship, denouncing a neighbor for a pittance of reward was common. To the rescuer, being revealed meant arrest, if not execution, to themselves and their family. In some parts of occupied-Europe, the denouncement meant the destruction and murder of their entire village.
Eva Fogelman
Research Findings
The Rescuer Self
Moral Motivations
Values Developed in Early Childhood
A second influential researcher of Holocaust rescuers was Eva Fogelman. Her parents were both Polish Jews who survived the Holocaust after fleeing to the Russian territory. Her mother’s family was captured and sent to Russian labor camps and worked in freezing, abysmal conditions. Her father escaped a ghetto into a forest and was taken care of by a Russian army leader who was later awarded as Righteous Among the Nations. In 1979, Fogelman began a doctorate program in psychology at the City University of New York. One of her mentors there was Stanley Milgram. He became famous for his research into why people with typically harmless intentions dismiss personal responsibility and carry out harmful actions towards others when under the direction of an authoritarian figure. Milgram’s experiments showed that most people fail to stand up to these figures even when they see the effects of harm happening in front of their eyes. When actors in an experiment were exposed to fake doses of electrical shock and feigned pain, the subjects continued to emit the shock when ordered to by the experiment’s director (Fogelman, 1994).
Fogelman was intrigued by the people who were the outliers of Milgram’s research, those who would not follow the direction of authority, but who would stand up for what they believed is a wrongdoing towards others. This led her to learn of Holocaust rescuers and pursue research on their altruism as a social-psychological study into their behavior. Her initial “Rescuer Project” study evolved into ten years of interviews and research of over 300 rescuers in North America, Israel, and Europe. Three of her most significant findings include a “rescuer self” transformation, categories of motivation, and patterns in early childhood rearing.
Eva Fogelman, PhD (photo www.evafogelman.com)
Rescuer Self
Fogelman’s most important contribution to the study of rescuers was coining the term “rescuer self.” This described the psychological transformation rescuers underwent to rebalance the stressors of their new reality. They had to quickly manage and adapt to a world of deception, secrecy, and violence while caring for individuals who required food, shelter, and emotional energy. The rescuer self was a new identity built on strong moral foundations that allowed them to do what was necessary, to rationalize that their efforts were necessary and just. This identity was far more flexible than bystanders or those who did not pursue rescue at the same level. Their identities were solely about self-preservation of their status quo and an inability to adapt to new stresses from the war.
“[Interviewer]: Were you afraid all the time?
[Strobos]: Yes, we were terrified all the time, but, you know, you can suppress that fear if you know that it’s important, what you’re doing. I also distributed underground newspapers. I thought it was important enough to risk your life for.
I wasn’t such a daredevil that I carried a gun or made bombs, I was 100% into making passports, underground papers, and hiding people. Mostly hiding people, and taking care, and I would visit them once a month. I would be the only contact for them with their family or with, well, their old world. It was very important.
[Interviewer]: What kind of people were the rescuers that you knew about?
[Strobos]: Well, I suppose we had a strong sense of justice, and a strong sense of that the Nazis shouldn’t win, and that we should do everything to make them thwart their efforts. And that the worst thing they did was really to the Jews. They were the most victimized, and that they had very few choices, and so we should help them, and we did. And most of the people I know, did help. And most people I know were in the underground, and most of the underground people that I know were involved in this rescue work, I would say.
[Interviewer]: So, were all of you fearless?
[Strobos]: No, you could be scared to death, and do what you have to do, like I said, you know, even if it’s the last thing I do, I have to do that, I have to because else I can’t respect myself.”
This rescuer self can also be seen in the change of Gino Bartali’s identity as a cycling champion into his new, dangerous responsibility of meeting in secret with members of the Assisi Network and carrying documents through occupied Italy that would guarantee his arrest if not death. In addition to the constant threat of exposure, Bartali could not tell his wife, which constantly wore at him as he became conflicted with his moral obligation to his family versus that of saving Jewish strangers.
“The weight of it all nearly suffocated Gino. There was no question he wanted to help…but the danger involved was overwhelming. It ate at him…he grew even more restless and agitated, consumed by the fear of what might happen if he was caught…..He had two reasons more powerful than any other not to risk himself: Adriana (his wife) and son, Andrea. If he was caught helping Jews or even sheltering them, he could be imprisoned and killed by the German authorities, leaving his wife alone to fend for their two-year-old son. It was an impossible choice. The siren call of self-preservation was deafening, but a nobler impulse beckoned.”
Moral Motivations
Categories of motivation became clear during Fogelman’s research. While not all rescuers fit squarely into one or more categories, the majority did and provided incredible insight into the root of altruistic tendencies.
The most common motivation was moral, based on values developed from different sources. These could be ideological morals that encouraged justice and were common in rescuers who were more politically motivated. Strobos’ upbringing among her parents and their progressive Amsterdam social circle instilled these ideals for justice
“Why did you do it, and why did the rescuers do it? My mother said to me, ‘You know we can get killed.’ But you know, even if it’s the last thing you do, you have to do that because you can’t live with that unjustice and not do anything, and then live with yourself, and knowing you didn’t do everything you could. I wouldn’t want to live in a world where nobody cares a damn.”
Strong religious morals taught rescuers to have tolerance for others and that God made everyone equal and should be cared for equally. The holy city of Assisi in Italy was considered a sanctuary city where fugitives of any kind could not be arrested. In all its history there was no record of a Jew living there, but in 1943 when they sought safety from the Nazis, the Bishop of Assisi, Giuseppe Nicolini, arranged shelter for them in 26 monasteries around the city (Yad Vashem). One of Nicolini’s assistants in this effort was Father Rufino Niccacci of the San Damiano Monastery. Together, they organized the Franciscan monks, friars, and sisters to hide Jews safely, keep them fed, provide classrooms for the children, and also allow them to practice their faith. Convents that were typically closed to outsiders opened their doors to hide the refugees within their walls of their cloisters. There, the Jews discovered a sanctuary, and if threatened by Nazi searches, secret passageways to take them to safety. Mother Superior Giuseppina Biviglia of the San Quirico convent, and Mother Superior Ermella Brandi of the Suore Stimmatine convent were both instrumental in helping Nicolini coordinate the Jews’ safety at their convents and others. During their perilous six months in Assisi, no Jews were asked to adopt Catholicism during their stay and over 100 that were sheltered there lived. Another crucial role of Assisi and its citizens was the creation and distribution of false identification documents from the Brizi family print shop for hundreds of Jews passing through the Assisi Network’s region. These were often picked up by Father Niccacci and handed off to Bartali under the cover of night so he could tuck them safely into his bicycle frame and carry them to their new owners.
Religious morals also took form of a strong humanitarian response cultivated from growing up in a deeply religious home with parents who acted as moral role models. Gino Bartali grew up outside of Florence, Italy, in a Catholic family with a father who taught him to beware of ignorant fascists and that everyone should be treated as equals. During his time as a rescuer, Bartali frequently prayed for guidance while being fearful of being caught. His strong Catholic values defined his humanitarian actions and outweighed his fear.
“The only place that could offer any peace in a moment like this was the Ponte a Ema cemetery. As he sat by his brother’s grave, Gino could begin to contemplate the choice that stood before him. He had every reason to help. (Cardinal) Dalla Costa was his spiritual mentor – the human face of the faith that Gino had built his life around – and the man who had officiated his marriage and baptized his son…..Gino wrestled with the dilemma about what course of action to take. As a man of fervent faith, he turned to prayer for solace as he contemplated his options. He poured out his thoughts to his brother’s tomb. Finally, without speaking to his wife, he made his decision.”
Fogelman says one of the best examples of the moral rescuer was Irene Gut Opdyke from Poland who was forced to work for a Nazi leader at their headquarters in a hotel. She was left horrified, but determined to find a way to help, upon discovering a ghetto next to the headquarters and hearing the gunshots and screams. She also witnessed the roundup and shooting of Jews in a mass grave outside the town. Opdyke prayed to God to give her a responsibility to help the Jews at any cost. She was motivated by her empathy for other humans and their suffering, which was developed throughout her childhood.
“Time is very short and I overheard that soon there will be a liquidation of ghettos and this, they were talking, Gestapo open his big mouth and he was talking. Well, my friends I did have to tell them. They ask me, “Irene help. We don’t have anyone. What we will do? We don’t have place to go.” You know they were in the work barracks. And the Gestapo did have the barracks. I didn’t know what to do too. I did not have home, I did not have family. But I wanted to help. I wanted to help.”
The final category of moral rescuers was those who worked among a network. Their groups opposed to the Nazi ideology and performed acts of resistance. Their initial focus was to oppose Hitler’s agenda, but later saving Jews elevated in priority. Fogelman describes Denmark’s country-wide effort to save their Jewish population as one of the best examples of a moral network.
“Of course, first of all, it was by night, and it was probably people that you never met before, and we would all be nervous, not just the Jews, I was nervous as well. And of course they tried to have too many packages and you could just see the German patrol looking at these packages. So we had to either get some of our coworkers to take the luggage down and they might have been stopped and investigated, but if they weren’t Jews not in danger of being arrested. So we would take absolutely normal transportation down to the harbor in Copenhagen by streetcars, cars, underground railroad cars until we could meet at a spot that was close to the harbor where we would wait and then get taxicabs to the ____ where we would hide until the boat was ready to take them. And of course there would be children, women, men, old men, young men. And it was a very interesting, but of course very Dangerous but very humanitarian thing to do.
Don’t let it sound like I’m the only one when there were many, many people doing the same thing, all the way from Elsinore up north, and down to the southern part of Zealand. There were many, many people helping out and I don’t think that it took between 14 days and a month until all the Jews were safe in Sweden where they were well received by the Swedes.”
Other categories of Fogelman’s moral rescuers include Judeophiles, who had existing friendships or relationships with Jews. Bartali’s family in Florence had long been close friends with a Jewish family, the Goldenbergs. In the winter and spring of 1944 as the Italian fascists and German Nazis hunted for Jews, the Goldenbergs came to Bartali for help. He quickly found a solution to hide the family of four in a cramped, windowless apartment cellar in Florence.
“My father was a friend of Gino Bartali and he told Bartali that he was looking for a place to hide. And Bartali hid my father, my mother, my sister, to the basement of his house, in spite of knowing that the Germans were killing everybody who was killing Jews. He was risking not only his life, but also his family. Gino Bartali saved my life and the life of my family. That’s clear, because if they weren’t hidden in the cellar, they didn’t have a place to go.”
Bartali never paused to think; he knew that his friends’ lives were in immediate danger, and he found a solution despite the escalating danger to himself and his family. He also gave the Goldenberg mother false identification documents so she could leave the hiding space for food and water. They hid for almost nine months until Florence was liberated in August 1944. The young son, Giorgio Goldenberg, never spoke of how his childhood hero helped his family, but he became instrumental in testifying at Yad Vashem for Gino’s indoctrination into the Righteous Among the Nations (Yad Vashem).
The final categories of Moral rescuer identified by Fogelman include Concerned Professionals, such as doctors and social workers whose jobs were a natural extension of care, and Child rescuers who helped along with their families.
Core Values in Early Childhood
Similar to the Oliners, another significant finding by Fogelman was the development of core values in early childhood. Rescuers routinely lauded their parents and upbringing in nurturing, loving homes. Fogelman’s study reported that 89% of rescuers had a parent or other adult who acted as an altruistic role model. Either the parents or a trusted adult acted as a role model in altruistic behavior, teaching the young person about helping others regardless of differences.
“[Interviewer]: So even though you didn’t go to church a lot, you’re saying that your parents still had a good moral point of view.
[Dyby]: They had a beautiful point of morals, I mean, it was tradition at that time that you behaved, you know, well toward your neighbors and yourself and your family. I would say that my parents, my grandparents, and my great grandparents, you would call them 100% honest in everything they did.
[Interviewer]: They had a lot of integrity.
[Dyby]: Integrity. Yes honesty and integrity.
[Interviewer]: And what about this aspect of goodness?
[Dyby]: Also in Denmark you had this, whether it was families or state or local government, you always took care of old and sick in that society, whether it was in families or in the country as a whole. You took care of old and sick.
[Interviewer]: And what about your neighbors did they help too?
[Dyby]: Very much so. The old pioneers, if somebody had trouble next door you would help out.”
Additionally, the parent-child relationship emphasized the importance of learning to think independently, whether in problem solving situations or understanding the consequences of their actions on others. Rescuers’ parents provided explanations for discipline rather than physical punishment or emotional abuse. This parental guidance combined with a loving environment set the children up to care for others and understand the balance of power between those in power and those who are weak.
“I believe that you can make people better, the next generations, yes by what you’re doing, teaching, and making people aware. But also by treating your children very well. Don’t hit your children, don’t be cruel to your children. And that still happens as you know. People who have been treated cruelly will be cruel.”
Nehama Tec
Research Findings
Individuality
Independence
History of Altruism
Modesty of Acts of Rescue
Spontaneity
Universalism
As was the case with researcher Sam Oliner, Nechama Tec was also a young Polish Jew who survived the Holocaust thanks to the protection of a rescuer. For three years, she and her family lived under the care of a Polish family while using fake names and pretending to be Catholics. However, unlike the majority of rescue situations, Tec’s family had to pay for their protection. Because their rescuer was motivated by money, it is not considered altruistic and does not meet the criteria of Righteous Gentile. Unfortunately, paid protection was not unheard of, but it is believed to be in the minority. To gain protection, Jews sometimes had to hand over all cash, jewelry, and possessions to the protector. In some cases they had to make regular payments that were often increased. These “paid helpers” were often described as putting the Jews in miserable situations that included threats, starvation, and murder. Tec and others postulate that because their only motivation was money, any sense of emotion or feeling towards the Jews was left void. Tec estimates from her research that 16% of Poles asked for payment from the Jews under their protection. The larger expanse of paid rescuers through Europe will never be known because they never came forward with their stories. Their charges were often left resentful and without respect for what they did (Tec, 1986).
In 1978, Tec returned to Poland for the first time since leaving with her family for the United States after the war. Now, she was a sociology researcher from Columbia University with the intent to interview survivors and rescuers to study their motivations for rescue. Because Poland was considered the most difficult region to live as a Jew and be rescued, she wanted to keep her study group to only those living in Poland through the war. Her research included new interviews with 65 survivors and rescuers in Poland, the U.S., and Israel, as well as information from written accounts and memoirs, and unpublished testimonies. Her final study group included 189 Poles and 308 Jews. The results have contributed integral insight into rescuer behavior and motivations (Tec, 1986).
Individuality
The first characteristic that Tec defines is individuality. These rescuers either physically lived at the far ends of their community, or were emotionally distant from their community, which reduced how controlled they were by others.
Independence
The second is independence. These rescuers had strong moral convictions that were not swayed by others who might have seen them as different. This trait also led them to a strong desire to stand up for the needy and persecuted.
History of Altruism
The third is a history of altruism. This could be from a religious upbringing, political views, or family backgrounds that instilled a life-long pattern of helping anyone in need. Both Tina Strobos and Irene Opdyke grew up in families that helped others throughout their generations that shows how it is passed down and not exclusive to young or old, men or women:
“[Strobos]: Even in the 30s we had mineworkers’ children. The __ was a lot of unemployment in the German mineworker’s area, and we had German mineworkers’ children stay in our house. So it was a tradition.
[Interviewer]: So it seems like this was your grandparents were a very strong influence.
[Strobos]: Yes.
[Interviewer]: And your parents were they also in the same way?
[Strobos]: Yes, and my mother very politically active in the women’s, she was secretary of the women’s peace movement and helping German and Austrian refugees, so we had done that all along you might say.”
“[Interviewer]: Did you have neighbors who were Jewish or gypsie?
[Opdyke]: Yeah. The gypsies in the forest. We always help. And they were neighbor. But there were Jewish neighbors and Christian neighbors. I don’t remember really thinking any big thing. We were all kids together playing.
[Interviewer]: How did your mother come to know gypsies in the forest?
[Opdyke]: Well they were very close to our house because we lived out of town and we did have nice villa and you know the gypsies played music, and so many times our people did go to see, and they tell you story of your life. You give a hand and they tell you story. So my mother many times shared with them food or something, you know. And then when the gypsy was very sick and she was dying and so my mother did go and took her to our home. That I remember. And the doctor come and help. So when there were poor people we brought them food and we, on holidays there was always three to four people at our tables you know.”
Modesty About Acts of Rescue
The fourth is a modesty about acts of rescue. A repeated phrase from rescuers is that they “did not do anything extraordinary,” that “it was the right thing to do.” Their view is that it was an obvious reaction to the suffering of Jews around them and a duty that needed to be done without hesitation. Those interviewed also mentioned that given the overall fear and traumas they lived through daily because of the Nazi occupation, the dangers of rescue were a small part of their burden. Their justification was that helping the Jews was just one of countless ways to die, and one that was morally founded (Tec, 1986).
Bartali’s acts of rescue became exposed to the public when the movie, The Assisi Underground, appeared in 1985. It was based on the book written by a Polish journalist, Alexander Ramati, who was in Assisi with the Allies as it was liberated. There, he met members of the Assisi Network and later interviewed Father Niccacci and the Brizi family. This was the first record of the rescue of Jews in the holy city and Bartali’s role. The movie does not call out Bartali by name, but his identity and role are insinuated and the Italian public rushed to know more. The normally reserved, aging, Bartali reverted to his competitive, combatant nature and refused to discuss his role. When pressed by journalists later in his life, he did not deny his role, but said in a voice gravelly with age that to say anything else would overshadow those who lost their lives and suffered profoundly more than he had (McConnon & McConnon, 2012):
“I don’t want to appear to be a hero. Heroes are those who died, who were injured, who spent many months in prison.” And “If you’re good at a sport, they attach the medals to your shirts and then they shine in some museum. That which is earned by doing good deeds is attached to the soul and shines elsewhere.”
Spontaneity
The fifth characteristic is spontaneity. None of Tec’s research showed that a rescuer planned to help ahead of time. Each case was unplanned, an impulsive reaction when either someone came to them in need or they were presented with a situation to solve. They often took action without thinking, just doing what they felt needed to happen. Irene Opdyke was the manager of a laundry room and trusted housekeeper to a Nazi military leader. Opdyke had 12 Jews from the nearby labor camp assisting with her work. They became friends and she would provide them food to bring back to the camp at night. If there were raids, she quickly figured how to hide them behind blankets on the shelves of the laundry room and lock them inside. During one raid, she led them up to the bathroom of one of the Nazi leaders and hid them in the air vent of his bathroom. Another time, she took them to a renovated villa to hide, locking them in the attic and then a servant’s quarters. She and her Jewish friends discovered that the villa had been built by a Jew who cleverly constructed a secret room in the cellar by way of the coal chute. While they hid in the cellar, Opdyke still had to care for them by bringing food and water, and removing their waste with pails. None of these solutions to hiding her friends was planned. Opdyke had to be spontaneous in response to the Nazis she worked for and constantly think of how to keep her friends safe.
“[Opdyke]: At that time my friend said, ‘Irene there is no use. We will give our lives up.’ I told them, ‘My life is not much more worth than yours. We did so far stay.” I said, ‘By the night you’ll be in the villa.’ I didn’t think how I would take them to the villa. See, I was doing that because I wanted to help, but I was not smart enough. Like I say, I listened for a whisper from my God. I listen for the help but I did not have plan.
[Interviewer]: But you had the capacity to see resource when it was there and use it.
[Opdyke]: Yes. That is what was trying to do.”
Universalism
The last characteristic is universalism. The so-called “Jewishness” of the person was not a catalyst for action. Rescuers responded to the persecution and suffering of a victim regardless of race or religion. When King Christian X of Denmark was negotiating with Hitler on the level of German occupation in his country, he was told that Germany wanted to solve the “Jewish problem.” King Christian is said to have replied, “We don’t have a Jewish problem in Denmark, we’re all Danes.” (Dyby, 1991) Knud Dyby’s description of universalism is in line with these humanitarian morals that Denmark was known for:
“[Dyby]: You know I really did not know a lot of the Jewish people I took care and I didn’t know a lot of the saboteurs I sent over to Sweden. First of all, you wouldn’t have any photographs, you wouldn’t have any written material, and you did not want to know more than absolutely necessary. The only thing that was of any value was to save these people and get them off. It didn’t matter who they were but we didn’t want to see them in concentration camp.
[Interviewer]: You mention you didn’t think there was much antisemitism in Denmark as a whole, but were you aware of who was a Jew and who wasn’t a Jew, did you ever think about it?
[Dyby]: I never thought about it, we weren’t even aware of it. I only remember now, many, many years later, I remember where we even had in my hometown there was a synagogue and there were several Jews and they had their own cemetery next to one of our parks. And instead of antisemitism, I found them interesting because we are a very homogeneous society, and I think they were very interesting, very intelligent, and I like them, so as far as I’m concerned I didn’t’ know what antisemitism was. And my parents neither. I think one of my uncles married a Danish Jew in my hometown, but she was just as accepted as well as anybody else.”