“Having developed along parallel lines in many areas, the Nordic countries appear as an entity instead of as separate, sovereign countries. The differences of the nations, however, show up clearly when one investigates the fates of the Jewish populations in the respective countries during World War II.” It is easy to group the countries of Scandinavia into a single mass based solely on location, but it is imperative to realize that each faced its own unique set of circumstances during the Second World War. What differentiates them is their response to the very thing which united them during these difficult years—the German occupation and their reactions to the radically different levels of German influence within their borders. This paper aims to examine the reasons for these differences, the work of the Danish and Norwegian undergrounds and resistance movements and how the German occupation of each country ultimately affected their respective Jewish populations. In addition, the attitudes of each country's non-Jewish population will be analyzed as to the effect it had on the outcome of the Nazi party's goal of making Europe Judenrein.
[...] Leif Ragnvald Konstad, chief officer in charge of States Utlendingskontor (Norwegian Immigration and Naturalization Authority), stated that a single Jew would be admitted into Norway no matter what the pretext,” and he regarded the Jews as a foreign element “which we ought not to admit into the country;” a view which he felt was “probably shared by the entire Norwegian people.”[18] As for the Norwegian people themselves, Odd Nansen expressed their sentiments well. are guilty of a disgraceful action. We are accepting the German division of mankind into two classes, Jews and scoundrels in one, the rest, in the other.”[19] Apparently not all Norwegians felt as their government did. [...]
[...] Jewish identity cards, while previously devoid of markings, were now stamped with a and in the fall, Jews were required to register with local police as part of a new census. Quisling did all he could to abide by the guidelines of the Nuremberg laws. Widespread arrests began in earnest in August and September of 1942. Tipped off by members of the Norwegian police, close to half of Norway's eighteen-hundred Jews were able to make the dangerous journey over the mountains in the winter and escape into Sweden. [...]
[...] Because of the resistance movements in each country, both Denmark and Norway were able to save many otherwise doomed victims of the Holocaust. However, because of their initial resistance to the German forces and the general apathy at first of the government and citizens to the plight of the Jews, Norway lost almost half of her Jewish population, while Denmark, due in part to her immense national conscience, saved almost every single Jewish life within her borders, eventually smuggling thousands of Jews into neutral Sweden. [...]
[...] Rather than wage a defensive battle which may well have had devastating outcomes for the small nation, the Danish government surrendered itself on April It did so in order to “preserve its internal independence and protect its land and population.”[8] The German occupation of Denmark and Norway was very different. In Norway, Vidkun Quisling, the leader of Norway's National Socialists, never had the opportunity to administer what he saw as his country. Rather the Nazi government left the administration of Norway to Reichskommissar Josef Terbovan. [...]
[...] (Not to let previous descriptions give the impression that life was all fun and games in Denmark; rioting and labor strikes angered the Germans into declaring a state of military emergency within the country, and plans for the deportation of Denmark's Jews were begun.) In Norway, individual citizens took it upon themselves to smuggle Jews over the border and into Sweden. These individuals took great risks as the border was guarded with German troops and being caught meant a certain death. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
