Logus asked in Arts & HumanitiesHistory · 1 month ago

Why do no concentration camp survivors in ww2 show children?

Did they just kill the children just so they couldn't be saved?

9 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago
    Favorite Answer

    The people who survived the concentration camps did so because they were used as slave labor.  The Nazis kept alive people who they thought could do some useful labor for them.  Those are the people who we imagine when we think of "concentration camp inmates".  People who the Nazis couldn't use were sent to the gas chambers pretty much right away.  Since kids aren't as capable of work as adults, many of them were executed. 

    • Logus1 month agoReport

      Sad but true.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • PAMELA
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    There is film of a lot of children in the camps, there is film of a lot of children running up to the fence of a camp.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Lôn
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    The survivors probably WERE children at the time, they are old now.The adults saved then are probably dead by now.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Huh?
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    Anyone who couldn't do useful work was normally gassed on arrival at the camps, at most within a few days.  Obviously this included pretty much all young children.  

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 month ago

    You're learning the wrong side of history. Contrary to what some people still believe, there were all kinds of children that survived.

    You bring an interesting observation to the debate, though.

    At one time, it was believed that the Jews were being turned into lampshades, soap, and shrunken heads - a widely accepted belief. Until it was proven wrong.

    Your question reflects yet another misconception of what happened.

    There are so many inaccurate claims made of things that have later been proven wrong - and all of these claims add up to something that is supposed to be true.

    How can anything called the "Holocaust" be true when it is comprised of so many inaccurate claims?

    There's a saying that if you tell the truth you don't need to create stories to back it up. This most certainly holds true here. The general context of the "Holocaust" is repeated as if it was a carefully-written script: "6 million Jews, extermination" - and even the 6 million number doesn't stay 6 million because everyone has their own understanding of how many were "killed".

    Not many people know that the "6 million exterminated Jews being threatened with extermination" theme began around 1915. It was Zionist propaganda to raise support and money to establish a political state in Palestine (it was sold to the world as "establish a homeland for the Jews").

    These same Zionists accused Hitler of exterminating Jews just 6 months after becoming Chancellor. This is obviously not true, but the "Holocaust" peddlers ignore it as if there is no connection. It doesn't fit their narrative.

    But, like everything else, it's another inaccuracy that "supports" the mainstream promoted narrative.

    This is a photo of Auschwitz on the day of liberation. Note not just the number of children that *weren't* exterminated, but at the way they appear to be well-fed. This goes against the intentional "starvation" claims.

    Obviously, the prisoners were eating, although food was often in short supply. The photos that show emaciated people are showing the effects of typhus - which was exacerbated by the shortage of food and medical supplies in the final months of the war.

    https://archbishopcranmer.com/wp-content/uploads/2...

  • Speed
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    I follow the Twitter account run by Auschwitz Memorial. It's both fascinating and heartbreaking. Nearly all the children, from infants to teens, were murdered within days of their arrival. They could not do anything to help the German war effort and therefore were not worth keeping alive.

    Typically a post shows a picture of a young person and gives the date and place of their birth, then proceeds something like this one I picked at random: "...arrived 9 August 1942 in a transport of 1069 Jews deported from Pithiviers and Beaune-la-Rolande. He was among 794 people murdered in a gas chamber. He was 10."

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 month ago

    Yes. If a person was under or over a certain age they were sent off for extermination. If I can remember right, I think if they were under the age of 15 and over the age of 50 they were exterminated. Those between the ages of 15 and 50 were sent to work, unless some other 'restriction' constitued them being sent to extermination.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    Generally speaking, when the Jews got off the train, they were directed to their destination which was death or work camp. How much work can you get f/ a kid?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    Living in bunkhouses provides little privacy and opportunity for sex.

    There are some survivors, the ones on TV now were born in the the camps.

    Source(s): "Born Survivors: Three Young Mothers and Their Extraordinary Story of Courage, Defiance, and Hope" by Wendy Holden
    • Logus1 month agoReport

      Troll.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.