The Nazi hero was honored less for his deeds, than for having suffered a sacrificial death
(Sabrine Behrenbeck--click this link) |
The German term Opfer does not differentiate between “sacrifice” as a cultural ritual and “victim” as the passive sufferer of an injury or loss. The term Opfer thus designates both the ritual as well as its object.
In sacrifice, doing, and suffering, offering and receiving flow into one another.
The level of meaning behind ritual sacrifice thus plays a special role. The
victim of a battle may be on the losing side; yet according to the ritualistic
understanding of sacrifice, his status as a victim is an honor. To be worthy of
sacrifice is proof of his impeccable and even immaculate quality. In a. violent
struggle, moreover, the victim is at first glance in the morally integral position.
Whoever is prepared to sacrifice himself is then no longer seen as a
perpetrator and receives a quasi-automatic absolution for that which he has done
to others before his own death.
The Nazi hero was honored less for his deeds, which in the early years were basically acts of violence, than for his having suffered a sacrificial death. Nonetheless, the dead victims called on those who survived to become victimizers/perpetrators. The Nazi heroic myths contended that the dead were not victims in the sense of losers, but instead were heroes and future victors. |
 |
|
|
|