In conclusion, to answer the question “was the Holocaust an example of how human behaviour can be taken to extremes of evil in pursuit of an inhuman objective?”, it can be argued that the history of prejudicial attitudes towards the Jewish community which had been implanted into the minds of the then current German population allowed the Holocaust to take place. Despite this seeming justified and rational in their minds, as something the country could benefit from, it was most certainly inhuman. Furthermore, due to the Jewish community being seen as inferior, this promotes a solution to eradicate the weakness in society to allow the strong to prosper, regardless of human rights which legitimises the fulfilment of the inhuman objective of the Holocaust. However, as these assumptions are taken from scientific explanations, it can be argued that the Holocaust was not an example of human behaviour having been taken to an extreme of evil, but is in fact only a part of natural survival instincts. With regards to the removal of human rights, it can be argued that this alone is an example of an inhuman objective from the Jewish point of view. However, it can be argued that with the belief that the Jews were sub-human these actions were not an example of human behaviour being taken to extremes in pursuit of an inhuman objective from the German point of view. Despite this argument, it is obvious that the Nazis were aware that their actions were inhuman as they deliberately toned down their Anti-Jewish regime when it suited them to prevent criticism from other countries. The case of Stella Goldschlag can be argued to accuse her as the criminal acting to obtain personal gain, it can also be argued that actually it is the authority from above who is carrying out the inhuman evil, as they are holding Stella’s family’s wellbeing as blackmail her into complicity.
It is most likely that the Nazis acknowledged their complicity in their inhuman objective as they installed crematoriums in the camps to cope with the dead which is undeniable as the death camps were responsible for over 3 million deaths, despite Dachau’s original purpose of re-educating Nazi ideology. In relation to punishments and experiments, the guards perhaps they assumed that those higher up would take the responsibility for their actions as they had given the orders however the SS guards were still complicit in completing an inhuman objective which required destructive behaviour, with very few showing any signs of objection. I would argue that Diffusion of Responsibility did occur, resulting in a stalemate of no outside countries assisting the prisoners in need, also due to the cost/reward system that was obviously a danger. However, the Diffusion of Responsibility can be disputed on a smaller scale, as although whole countries did not necessarily prevent the Holocaust, individuals such as Oscar Schindler were clearly opposed, disproving the argument that the Holocaust was an example of how human behaviour can be taken to extremes in pursuit of an inhuman objective, as Schindler is a strong example of kindness and helping behaviour even though his own life would have been at risk for doing so. This would suggest that the Holocaust is not an example of how human behaviour can be taken to extremes in pursuit of an inhuman objective, but more of a test on morality within humans based on a belief in human rights and equality being perceived as more important than the prejudiced laws of the government that they would be disobeying. Overall, I would argue that the Holocaust was an example of an inhuman objective in which human behaviour was taken to extremes of evil to achieve. However I would argue that it was also a question of morality, and as there are strong cases of resistance towards these acts, it is hard to rightly generalise this conclusion of evil behaviour, however these instances of objection are in the minority. Despite this conclusion, it is hard to identify who is actually to blame for this evil, especially regarding cases such as Stella Goldschlag who was blackmailed into complicity on a life/death situation.