ipl-logo

The Tragedy Of The Scottsboro Boys By Elie Wiesel

1207 Words5 Pages

According to the National Holocaust Encyclopedia titled “Nazi Camps,” from 1933 to 1945, more than 44,000 concentration and incarceration camps were established, causing 11 million people to lose their lives, and 6 million of those were Jewish. Only a small handful of people survived. Among those who survived, Ellie Wiesel was imprisoned in camps while neutral countries only watched. Because of his experience, Wiesel believes “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim.” In other words, taking sides is a responsibility, as remaining neutral benefits the oppressor. Some agree with Wiesel that neutrality is negative because it only harms the victim, but others argue that taking sides further fuels oppression. …show more content…

To begin, Wiesel is correct that taking sides is necessary because tranquility and justice cannot proceed when neutral bystanders remain. During their trials in the 1930s, the Scottsboro Boys received harsh sentences because no one took action with the knowledge that the evidence was incorrect. According to an article written by the American Civil Liberties Union titled “The Tragedy of the Scottsboro Boys,” the author states, “despite ample evidence that they were innocent, eight of the nine were found guilty . . . and sentenced to death in the electric chair.” When neutrality and bystanders took no action, the trials became unfair and displayed injustice to the nine boys. Each of them were given harsh punishments for a crime they did not commit. The boys' fate relied on the idea that people took no action to help them, even when the accusers admitted their claims were false. Because the system was skewed due to no intervention from neutral people, justice was not able to be given correctly. Therefore, the Scottsboro Boys prove Wiesel's idea correct; neutrality allows …show more content…

Taking sides and losing neutrality allows for other sides to justify attacks, and places people in danger, harming the victims. During World War 2, Yugoslavia, a country originally neutral during the conflict, chose a side and was invaded by the Axis powers, launching one of the most brutal Holocaust campaigns during the war. According to an article titled “Axis Invasion of Yugoslavia” in the US Holocaust Encyclopedia, the Axis

Show More
Related
534 Words | 3 Pages

In Felix Opatowk's circumstance, the neutrality was the men telling him to be quiet, and him listening to them. The neutrality favors the oppressor in this situation because the people followed the rules of the nazis, and the nazis got what they

Read More
533 Words | 3 Pages

At the time of Hitler's reign six million Jews died and even more suffered, yet the world remained silent. Six million lives could have been saved by simply speaking out against these tormentors. Eli feels strong about this subject and says, "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor never the tormented"(Wiesel Acceptance Speech, pg 1). This helps the reader realize if society doesn't speak it takes the side of the tormentor.

Read More
915 Words | 4 Pages

This is evident when he states, “Neutrality helps the oppressor, not the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormentor. Sometimes we must interfere”(Wiesel). Elie promised himself never to stay silent while someone is suffering. This tracks(goes along with) how we must be held accountable because if no one speaks out against

Read More
474 Words | 2 Pages

Wiesel must take it upon himself to ensure such human suffering is not repeated, that his warning will be heard and the world will take action. As he speaks about the horrors of the Holocaust, he makes sure to establish that “the world did know and remained silent”-- it was not ignorance that cost millions of lives, but apathy; silence. He continues, telling the listener “we must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”

Read More
380 Words | 2 Pages

In seeing human beings as less than human beings, individuals were able to treat one another with a lack of dignity and voice. Wiesel 's work reminds us that anytime voice is silenced, dehumanization is the result. This becomes its own end that must be stopped at all

Read More
184 Words | 1 Pages

Scottsboro Racism Paragraph The Scottsboro trials were a long horrific eighteen-year-long trial about eight black boys in Scottsboro, Alabama. According to Anderson in the video lecture “Scottsboro Boys” a large group of people had gotten on a train to find work when a large fight broke out on the train. The fight was between eight black men and a few white men, the train stopped in Scottsboro when two white women got off the train and accused the eight black men of rape. The eight boys were brought into court and trialed. There were multiple cases of racism in the Scottsboro trials, one included that all the boys were trialed together and in only one day.

Read More
439 Words | 2 Pages

The author expresses cruelty in neutrality and how the bombardment of neutrality all around the world blocks the freedom of the Jews, “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented” (Wiesel). Wiesel tries to persuade the reader to always take sides because neutrality is just as worse as to take the side of the tormentor. He uses strong vocabulary and imagery to conclude his reasons on why no one should ever stay neutral.

Read More
108 Words | 1 Pages

In his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize, Elie Wiesel asserts the following: "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.". What Wiesel is saying, is that if we do not help the ones who are being killed, hurt, or mistreated. They will continue to cause pain too those people and will not stop. Unless us as people come to stand up against the evil.

Read More
956 Words | 4 Pages

When Elie 's time at the concentration camps is about to end, Wiesel notes, in regard to the American troops that liberated his camp, "It was decided they would evacuate us all at once" (Wiesel 114). The concentration camp is about to be liquidated, and they want everyone out. The troops also wanted to get to as many camps as possible and not waste time as they swept through Germany. Many of the occurrences in the anecdote are important in the history of World War II, as well as that of the concentration camps, and the memoir will inform readers on this topic as they study Wiesel 's

Read More
476 Words | 2 Pages

Wiesel is saying that if your silent then the oppressor thinks it’s ok to keep being mean. When you stand up for the victim it shows that someone actually cares about what really going on. If your friend is getting bullied go stand up for them and show the bully you’re not afraid.

Read More
1526 Words | 7 Pages

The truth of these feelings and their actions for Wiesel, prove that indifference is the worst action a human can elicit. Precisely because it is an inaction. When a man is upset, all kinds of things can be thought up to seek revenge. When a women feels hatred in her heart towards someone she may devise a plan to change the situation for herself. He recalled this type of response when he was liberated, the rage he saw in Americans, “Liberated a day earlier by American soldiers, he remembers their rage at what they saw…their eyes told him what he needed to know — that they too, would remember, and bear witness.”

Read More
258 Words | 2 Pages

In the face of oppression and injustice, silence is the voice of the cowards. In Elie Wiesel’s acceptance speech, he asserts that in discrimination, neutrality is as atrocious as the oppressors. Wiesel makes a call to action, conveying that people should speak up when met with other’s oppression. I am for Elie Wiesel’s call to action, because silence is a ripple and humankind depends on it. To begin with, silence is a ripple during oppression.

Read More
1259 Words | 6 Pages

Wiesel meant that when one does not choose sides, it is beneficial for the tyrant, and not the sufferer. On one hand, some claim that Wiesel is wrong, since picking sides can endanger one’s life. On the other hand, supporters of Wiesel argue that he is correct, since selecting sides helps bring justice in many circumstances. Nonetheless, Wiesel is correct when he claims that one must take sides, since not selecting sides allows the attacker to strike without backlash, and produces further agony for the

Read More
1129 Words | 5 Pages

Wiesel pinpoints the indifference of humans as the real enemy, causing further suffering and lost to those already in peril. Wiesel commenced the speech with an interesting attention getter: a story about a young Jewish from a small town that was at the end of war liberated from Nazi rule by American soldiers. This young boy was in fact himself. The first-hand experience of cruelty gave him credibility in discussing the dangers of indifference; he was a victim himself.

Read More
806 Words | 4 Pages

Wiesel’s speech shows how he worked to keep the memory of those people alive because he knows that people will continue to be guilty, to be accomplices if they forget. Furthermore, Wiesel knows that keeping the memory of those poor, innocent will avoid the repetition of the atrocity done in the future. The stories and experiences of Wiesel allowed for people to see the true horrors of what occurs when people who keep silence become “accomplices” of those who inflict pain towards humans. To conclude, Wiesel chose to use parallelism in his speech to emphasize the fault people had for keeping silence and allowing the torture of innocent

Read More

More about The Tragedy Of The Scottsboro Boys By Elie Wiesel

Related Topics

Open Document