Lessons of the Holocaust for Police Leadership: Critical Insights to Combat Hate & Prevent Brutality

This article discusses the recent death of George Floyd and how the "Lessons of the Holocaust" training for Police Leaders, offered at the National Holocaust Museum (NHM) can provide insight on how we must work together to address the root causes of extreme bias and hate to reduce police brutality and restore legitimacy and confidence in the communities we serve.

After having attended this training myself as a participant a few years ago, this past year, I embarked on an educational endeavor with my command staff and management team where we participated in this training together as a leadership development exercise. The "Lessons of the Holocaust" training, provided by an all volunteer staff, is a humbling experience that helps law enforcement leaders examine how a shift in "mindset", created the conditions for the Holocaust and how this atrocity, did not occur overnight, but instead incrementally over time, to allow it to be slowly embedded into societal culture. It also examines how these underlying conditions led to police involvement the atrocities.?

The shift in "mindset" began with a hyper-saturation of anti-Semitic and hateful political propaganda throughout multiple communication venues, intended to change the hearts and minds of the public. Then began small, incremental and almost unnoticeable structural changes in the law and public ordinances to support hateful and anti-Semitic policies and practices that over time set the foundation for heinous acts of brutality to be carried out by police agencies on behalf of Hitler’s goal to commit genocide.?

Underpinning this sinister but perfectly executed plan, was the core value of identifying certain groups of people in society, in this case the Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, and the Handicapped as sub-human, disease ridden and threats to both national security and public safety, despite no evidence to support it.?I am sure that if any politician, shortly after Hitler’s rise to power in politics had simply suggested the German police round up these groups and send them to death camps, most would have revolted and refused the order.?

But a slow and steady campaign of propaganda labeling the Jews and others as filthy, disease ridden, abominations of nature, of low moral character, criminals, fraudulent merchants, national security threats and public safety menaces was just enough convince the public that civilly seizing businesses away from the Jews, was a prudent step to protect the country.?As public servants, the police were required to execute this plan and did so.

The after effect of seizing these businesses, was dealing with all of these unemployed Jews, unable to support themselves and their large extended families. Of course, continuing with the same hateful and anti-Semitic propaganda, police action was once again justified to relocate these Jews into slums and ghettos to keep them out of sight, out of mind and “protect them” from rising anti-Semitic threats against them from the rest of the populace.

Lastly, as this continued propaganda campaign changed society's "mindset" from fear, to loathing and then hate, it should not be surprising when once again, police were used assist the Nazis in rounding up the Jews from these slums and ghettos and putting them on trains to relocate them to “work camps” that promised to rehabilitate them, teach them strong work ethics and provide them with an opportunity to make valuable contributions to overall German society.?

We all know what happened next.?

But perhaps the most important take away from the “Lessons of the Holocaust” training is that researchers to date have not identified a single documented instance where a German police officer refused an immoral order, and was punished by death, imprisonment or even loss of their position in the police department.?In fact, the direst consequence found by historians in over 75 years of research, for a police officer refusing an order to participate in the above atrocities was that he was reassigned to different area of responsibility.?

Hard to believe, but true.?

This fact, when presented by the all-volunteer training staff at the Holocaust Museum, made the police leadership attendees from my management team squirm in their chairs as I did when I first took the training; jaws dropped, visibly uncomfortable; and they should have.

Uncomfortable. You will hear this word multiple times throughout this article.

My guess, is that this reaction is at least in part, based on the fact that it attacks the roots of our ethical and moral foundation as law enforcement officers; where we presume as part of this honorable profession to protect and serve, that the police officers of that time in Germany, were also victims of the times, and must not have had a choice on whether or not they participated in the atrocities of the Holocaust, or they wouldn't have.?

But the evidence shows that they did have a choice and still chose to participate.?

The museum presenters then asked the attendees:

“Is it possible the local police forces in Nazi- Germany could have prevented or at least mitigated the Holocaust?”

The presenters then helped guide the attendees through a thoughtful conversation to explore the possibilities.?This question, was indeed very uncomfortable to discuss because it challenged the participants to evaluate what I like to call, “predispositions of character”, meaning our own biases and motives, as well as our tendencies as human beings to sometimes judge others as “different” than us, or maybe even “less than” ourselves. Predispositions, that we know can implicitly, and on occasion, even explicitly influence how we interact with the communities we serve.

This conversation also included discussions about why each of us chose this profession, and self-reflections on whether we each had “honored” our profession by our records of service; and even more importantly, if challenged with a similar immoral event, situation or order from a superior officer, Would we stand up for justice, even if it cost us something valuable? Or would we simply be passive?

When we take our oath of office as law enforcement officers, we proclaim that it is our duty to be fair, impartial, and administer police services to all people equally, no matter what their culture, religion, race, sexual orientation, or gender, etc.?These are our espoused values, and they are even written into the law and the constitution we took an oath to protect.?But history has shown, that despite our best intentions, these values are sometimes misrepresented by some among our ranks in actual practice.

I could not help but think of the unacceptable death of George Floyd at the hands of police officers this past week in Minneapolis.?Not only was I repulsed at the sight of one police officer pinning down Mr. Floyd by his neck for almost 9 minutes as he sat compliant, begging for his life, and even calling the officer “sir” as he was doing so.?

But what infuriated me even more was the passive inaction of the other three officers on the scene who just watched.?Not only did these other three officers fail to uphold their oath to protect Mr. Floyd as a member of the community, but they also failed to protect the deranged officer who was assaulting Mr. Floyd, from himself.?

This incident on its surface is an inexcusable, excessive use of force that led to the death of a man, to whom these officers took an oath to protect and serve. It is also one the worst cases of police brutality I have seen in my almost 30 year career, and will continue to have lasting negative effects on the legitimacy of the profession, and trust of the communities we serve for years to come.

Going back to the Holocaust training, the managers in my group, including myself concluded that in all likelihood, the German police would not have been able to prevent this horrible sequence of events. In reality, it was pretty obvious to all of us, that if the police had refused orders, the German SS, Gestapo or military would have easily stepped in to perform the required dirty deeds on their behalf. However, we did opine, that perhaps, if more police had stood up for justice, it might have mitigated the atrocity to some degree, reduced it to isolated areas in the country, or at least slowed it down a bit, thus saving "some" lives.

Now let me stop here for a moment, for those of you who may be reading this and are starting to get uncomfortable.

I am NOT comparing this isolated incident in Minneapolis to the Holocaust. Once again, I am NOT comparing this isolated incident to the atrocities committed by police during the Holocaust. But what I am trying to do, is draw an analogy to the similar and dangerous "mindset" that was and is likely present in police officers who engage in acts of brutality, whether in Nazi Germany, or in present times. The "mindset" that causes police officers to think other members of society are "different" and perhaps even "less" than themselves. So much so, that it may even become acceptable to them to take a life carelessly or unnecessarily.

I am also trying to draw an analogy of how the fear of consequences imposed by speaking up and taking action to stop acts of brutality, if observed at the hand of one or more of our colleagues, is perhaps unjustified. So to this point, I ask the question, could the other three officers in Minneapolis have saved Mr. Floyd's life as well as the fate of their fellow officer had they intervened without the fear of consequences?

The answer is an unconditional YES!

So once again, back to the Holocaust training. The museum staff then concluded the training with one daunting final question to the participants:

Is it possible, the atrocities by police in Nazi Germany, could happen in the United States??

After some intense dialogue, hot debate and reflection, the general consensus of the participants was, NO; certainly not in the form of a national agenda to round up a specific group of people and commit atrocities against them. But after some additional reflection, the group acknowledged that perhaps YES, in a more isolated socioeconomic or cultural context as demonstrated by the many tragic and disparate outcomes we have witnessed for decades between law enforcement, justice and the many underprivileged communities they serve.?

If so, then as today’s police leaders, the questions we must ask ourselves are:

How can we do better? Because we MUST do better!

Is the prevailing "mindset" of the Nazis during the Holocaust to see others as “different”, "loathsome" and more importantly “less” than us, the underlying foundation that at least in part contributes to hate, and in some cases police brutality in modern times?

Is this same "mindset" also to blame for the increased fears and political rhetoric we see that opines law abiding illegal immigrants are somehow a national security threat?

Does this same "mindset" also drive fears of the homeless, mentally ill and drug addicted; as unclean, weak, defunct individuals; someone else’s problem, unworthy of our help and to be hidden from the rest of society???????

If so, are we taking the necessary steps to identify officers who do not "practice" the correct values in our organizations, and either re-educating them to change their "mindset" or if that fails, removing them from their positions?

Lastly, can we do more to foster a "culture" in our departments and agencies to ensure it is aligned with our values of inclusiveness, equality, service, fairness, honor and integrity?

Now again, let me stop here for a moment for those of you who may be getting uncomfortable.

I am not trying to be the thought police here. But I am suggesting that these are questions we should be asking ourselves as leaders. That is what leaders do, they not only ask the tough questions, but the right questions. Leaders also look for the right answers, the answers that get to the root of the problem, including answers that may require being uncomfortable and taking responsibility for negative outcomes.

Let be also be clear. I don't work for the Minneapolis Police Department, so I am NOT purporting that the Minneapolis Police Department is failing to promote the many positive values listed above, nor am I saying that despite all of their efforts and our efforts overall as police leaders to foster a positive environment, there won't be a few that for one reason or another engage in incidents of brutality and corruption.

But what I am saying, is that if we are being honest, it is unlikely, that all four of these officers in Minneapolis had a spotless record of service prior to this incident.

So what is left then, is the question of whether or not these officers' actions and inaction may have been influenced by a culture and "mindset" that made them see Mr. Floyd as "different" and "less" than them.

And if so, what contributed to that mindset?

Lastly, were there any "red flags" and prior incidents throughout their careers indicating these officers had adopted this "mindset" and if so, what was done about it?

Social researchers have taught us that all human beings have innate predispositions to identify with different social groups, cultures, beliefs, and ideologies. Police officers are no different. The profession itself has a distinct culture, identity, and sense of belonging, that most would argue can only be understood by those who have served. To protect and serve, sacrifice, honor, valor, integrity and selflessness are all virtues of the profession. There are also many professional organizations like the fraternal order of police, police athletic league, emerald society, and others that represent some of the best virtues of the culture, values, and ideology of law enforcement. These organizations help officers collaborate on common issues, engage with the youth of underprivileged communities, support families of officers who suffered a line of duty death, distribute food to the homeless, share stories, discuss mutual interests, play bagpipes, build camaraderie, provide access to employee assistance programs, and more.?

But there are also some negative aspects of police culture that we rarely talk about that make it difficult to introduce meaningful reforms. Examples are the “Blue Wall of Silence” and the “Warrior Mindset”. We rarely talk about these cultural values because it is uncomfortable. But when we fail to do so, these values can take hold in our organizations and create an insular culture that is not only “distrusting” of others outside the policing profession but disconnected from needs of the communities they serve.

Although few, these negative aspects of police culture are a challenge for police leadership to deliver bold and comprehensive reforms that reduce instances of brutality and corruption and unite the police with their communities instead of pitting them against each other.?

We must also realize that in addition to the unique police culture that our officers get indoctrinated into from their recruitment, selection, training, and development throughout their careers; they also bring with them their own personal life experiences that have shaped their view of the world, and more importantly, their view of "others". Combine the wrong values, beliefs, ideologies, and cultural context that comes from this life experience with the authorities granted to officers in the policing profession and you have a recipe for disaster.?

I have seen many different screening mechanisms for recruitment and hiring over the years, but many of these methods are outdated and/or incomplete. We screen for prior drug use, criminal affiliations and criminal records, etc. We perform background investigations, psychological exams, and administer polygraphs. But what steps are we taking to screen our candidates for being culturally insensitive? Maybe even racist? Close minded and in some cases even hateful?

Is it possible that reforms should include some type of cultural intelligence assessment and training? I believe the answer to this question is an astounding YES, if we want to get to the root of the problem.

The reason I ask is because, over the last several years, we have witnessed an astounding number of cops identifying with and even participating in extreme hate groups in the United States.?Groups aligned with ideologies, beliefs and values contrary to the oath we all took to preserve life and liberty and defend the constitution.

Luckily, technology has helped identify hundreds of active and former police officers for participating in private Facebook groups and other social media venues where they expressed open support for racism, Islamophobia, and even violent, anti-government groups according to an investigation conducted by the U.S. Center for Investigative Reporting.

This investigation prompted over 50 police departments across the nation to open internal investigations.?In July 2019, 17 police officers in the Philadelphia PD were suspended for participating in this behavior.?Yet another online investigation by ProPublica last year identified over 9,500 Customs and Border Protection Officers posting xenophobic and white supremacist propaganda on Facebook.??And this has continued, even recently with multiple officers throughout the United States being terminated or resigning for getting caught making inappropriate comments about the George Floyd death and the subsequent protests.

If these officers embrace hate, don't they also ascribe to the value of believing others who are "different" are also "less"?

If this is the case, how are we to expect officers like this to perform their duties fairly, equitably and impartially?

As uncomfortable as this fact may be, police leaders must be vigilant in seeking out and eliminating this type of behavior and activity among our ranks. Not only those who support and participate in hate groups, but also those who have demonstrated the “mindset” that people who are “different” from us, are somehow “less” than us and not deserving of “equal” protection under the law.??

The recent actions of this officer in Minnesota showed no sign of judgement, empathy, or even humanity to Mr. Floyd; even while he was begging for his life.?And even worse, the officers with him, chose to look the other way and “have his six” by failing to uphold the oath they swore to protect and serve. Instead they were compliant at worst, and passive at best while Mr. Floyd took his last breaths at the hand of this officer.?

Now, let me stop here once again and make it clear. I don’t know the officers involved and I am not making an assertion that they affiliate with or belong to a hate group, or even support the ideology of a hate group. And I certainly don’t think the officer with his knee on the neck of George Floyd, left his house that fateful morning, saying to himself he was going to go to work and kill someone in the community he served.?But the outcome of this event, in my humble opinion, clearly demonstrates this group of officers, especially the one who stuck his knee in the neck of Mr. Floyd, saw this man’s life as not only “different” but “less” than their own.?

Throughout the week, I have been also hearing a few “self-proclaimed" tactics experts in the media and on social media speaking about tactics training related to this incident.?Let me make something else clear. The brutal death of this man at the hand of police officers has NOTHING to do with tactics.?I can say that with some authority having been a former firearms, use of force, and defensive tactics instructor, and founder of a SWAT team.?

Now I am the first to admit, police training tactics have changed over the years.?When I was a young officer, we were actually taught the technique of handcuffing a non-compliant suspect by bringing him/her to the ground, leveraging the arm and pining a knee between the shoulder blade and base of the head and spine (not the neck) to control the suspect, until the suspect was hand cuffed and in control!

PERIOD.?

Even if we give this officer the benefit of the doubt because of his age, and likelihood he received this type of outdated training back in the day, and had not been retrained in updated and less dangerous techniques.?What legitimate excuse did he have for pining Mr. Floyd’s neck (not shoulder) into the pavement for up to 9 minutes AFTER he was compliant and AFTER he was handcuffed?

NONE!

To be fair, let me be clear, once again for those of you who I have made uncomfortable throughout this article. I am well aware that the officers engaging in acts of brutality, corruption, and participating in hate groups, etc. are small numbers compared to the whole of the profession.?The overwhelming majority of police and law enforcement officers go to work each day, including myself, trying to make a difference, helping their communities and administering justice fairly and equitably. But unfortunately, one isolated incident like the death of George Floyd will cause the policing profession to lose at least a decades worth of effort and political capital towards building community trust and legitimacy.

We must do better!

Let me also make clear, everyone I know with a badge has unanimously demanded these officers be brought to justice. These officers were also immediately fired, and one has already been arrested. However, as police leaders we cannot sit back and wait for incidents like this to happen before we take action. Simply offering the "few bad apples" analogy every time there is an incident like this, or one close to it, and then returning to the status quo and business as usual is in my opinion, a "cop out" and failure to take responsibility.

We must study each of these incidents in great detail to identify the root cause and then respond appropriately with policy and procedural changes that make it exceedingly difficult for these behaviors to take root in and survive in our organizations. Because just like a cancer, if officers like this are not identified quickly and removed immediately from their positions, their distorted “mindset” and subsequent behaviors have the potential to spread throughout the organization, up to and including leadership, causing further damage to our agencies, departments and communities.?

I would also like to point out, that although the majority of officers, would NEVER succumb to this type of brutality, the distorted "mindset" that leads to this behavior could tempt even the most open, honest, service oriented and culturally accepting officers under the right conditions and circumstances.?

I can share a personal story with you to illustrate this point.

Shortly after 9/11 and being a first responder during that tragic day in our nation's history, I remember on the way home from work one day, stopping at at Deli to buy a coffee for the ride home. I was in my rough duty uniform when I walked into the corner deli and was greeted by the owner who was a middle aged, middle-eastern and likely Muslim. I got angry, walked out and didn't want to give him my business. After all, I had just spent a week working on the pile at ground zero. I was pissed, vulnerable, and angry that we had been attacked, and we all knew who attacked us. Right?

As I was driving to an alternative place of business to get a cup of coffee, I started to think of a few close friends I went to college with, who were Muslim and Middle Eastern. Who had been some of the first to call me to make sure I was OK because I worked for U.S. Customs at the time, and the Customs House had been destroyed. I suddenly realized that I had let my emotions from the event on 9/11, interfere with my judgement with respect to being fair, impartial etc. I immediately turned around and went back to the original store.

When I returned, I was greeted once again by the same middle aged man from behind the counter with a smile. I ordered my coffee and as I was walking out, the store owner, introduced himself as Fouad, thanked me for my service, told me he loved this country and that he hoped I would "catch the bad guys" who did this to "us" quickly and bring them to justice. He also said, they were not real Muslims. Little did I know, this was the first step in Fouad becoming an informant for the U.S. Government. I began buying my coffee there every day, and before long we were working together to identify Yemeni nationals funneling money to the middle east to support terrorism.

I often wonder, what would have happened if I had not turned back? I also wonder, what would have happened if I was working with someone that day who reinforced my initial reactions, and perhaps as a result, I continued to avoid all Middle Eastern and Muslim owned businesses, etc... Add to this some continued reinforcement of that same mindset by others around me, combined with a few additional negative life experiences? Could I perhaps have been lured into starting to see them as "different" ? Whether or not, eventually over time I could or would have seen them as "less"? I hope not but who can say for sure.

Now again, this is an analogy I am offering here on how we are all susceptible being influenced by bias and to see others as "different" and maybe even "less" under the right circumstances. I am not saying that my bias to walk out of a NY deli and refuse to buy coffee at a Middle Eastern and Muslim establishment is an equivalency to the "mindset" likely present in police brutality cases. Nor am I saying that all officers who have this distorted "mindset" are going to go out and commit acts of brutality. But I am saying, that if present, it "can" and likely "will" either implicitly or maybe even explicitly affect an officer's ability to deliver fair, impartial, and equitable police services.

One thing I know for sure, had I not turned back to get that coffee that day, a dozen or more terrorism financiers would never have been brought to justice and I would have failed to do my part, to keep the country safe and honor my oath to public service.

We all need to turn back and honestly reexamine how we view the people and communities we serve. And if we don't like what we see? We must change our "mindset".

Luckily for me, I have always had a predisposition based on how I was raised, that helped me view others that were different than me with curiosity instead of fear and suspicion? I also had the benefit of a multi-cultural college experience to reinforce this curiosity. I can not honestly answer what would have happened in the same situation had I not had these lived experiences, but I know it helped me from making the wrong decision.

I also am pretty certain, from this experience and many others I have had and witnessed throughout my life and career, as well as my academic training, that we are all susceptible under the right circumstances, of being lured into seeing others "differently" and maybe even "less" than us by not only our life experiences, but even more so from our experiences once we become law enforcement officers.

In this profession, we are often called upon when people are at their worst, and rarely when they are at their best. This weighs on you overtime and makes it difficult to remain objective over a 20-30 year career. Having also spent over ten years working internal abuse and corruption cases, despite my comments earlier in this article, I do acknowledge that there are also "some" incorrigible people, or "bad apples" as we like to say, who slip through the cracks during the recruitment process and become police officers despite all of our efforts to weed them out beforehand.

But I also think it would be na?ve of us as police leaders to think that all officers who adopt a distorted "mindset", one that leads them to seeing others as "different" and "less"; and that under the right circumstances could one day lead them to engage in abuse, acts of brutality, corruption, failure to stand up for justice, etc., started out that way.

The good news is that just like "mindsets" can be distorted by negative lived experiences; becoming open, accepting and culturally competent can be "taught".

Preventing our officers from embracing a distorted "mindset" that sees others as "different" and "less" begins with leadership’s expectation that the "guardian" mindset in combination with "warrior discipline" will be the prevailing culture of our organizations.

One that is respectful of all life, all cultures, sexual orientations and fabrics of society.?

One that manages bias, displays cultural sensitivity and recognizes differences in context when solving complex problems in the communities we serve.

The "guardian" mindset and "warrior discipline" must begin with the recruitment process and be continuously reinforced throughout the life-cycle of an officer’s career up to and including retirement to be effective.?Even when we recruit, hire and train officers to embrace the “guardian” mindset and "warrior discipline", we must also ensure they are routinely trained in bias, contextual, and cultural sensitivity throughout their careers, not just once every few years to check a box for the legal division to defend law suits.

Effective and continued training in these areas, challenges officers to view each situation they encounter from different contexts and also provides them with a self-reflective road-map to challenge their own ideologies, affiliations and cultural values to ensure that the unique challenges and rigors of police work, political rhetoric of the times, and historical events don’t lure them into a distorted “mindset” where they begin to develop an “us vs. them” mentality; which in my humble opinion, is the first step towards seeing others “differently” or “less than” ourselves.

If allowed to develop and left unchecked, this dangerous mindset will at best lead to disparate treatment; and at worst, lead to acts of brutality in the communities we serve.

We must also build incentives that reward the efficient delivery of police service using the "guardian" mindset and "warrior discipline" to make this the "culture" of our organizations. Lastly, for this training and reward system to be effective, it must be firmly anchored with clear, deliberate, and transparent agency policies and procedures; as well as a true commitment from leadership throughout ALL levels of the organization to ensure the swift identification, disciplinary action, and when appropriate termination and/or prosecution of violators.?

Despite how uncomfortable this topic, or this article for that matter makes us feel, if we fail to lead in this area, we have not only failed our departments, but failed to deliver impartiality, fairness, and justice to the communities we serve.??

So, back to the Holocaust training and to answer the question final posed to the participants of the training:

Could similar atrocities happen with policing here in the United States?

It becomes clear to me at least, that where you “stand” on this issue depends on where you “sit”.

The history of Nazism in Germany has taught us that what starts out as biases, under the right conditions and saturated with propaganda can become extreme bias, then loathing; loathing can become hate, and hate can set into motion brutality, unfairness, injustice and even atrocity.

From my point of view, if we as police leaders are not mindful of this issue as a real issue, and don’t come together across the nation and make the uncomfortable decisions to root out and eliminate employees engaging in hateful affiliations, activities and behaviors in our departments; then yes, it is possible we could find ourselves on a trajectory where these behaviors become the norm, and our agencies and departments have rejected a culture of inclusiveness and fairness and instead adopted a culture that sees certain groups in society, as “different” or “less” and therefore, deserving of disparate treatment under the law.?

How far that could potentially go? That is beyond the scope of this article.

But from the point of view of the Floyd family, their community and others like them?

Not only is it possible, but from their lived experience and cultural context, it probably feels like a reality that has already been endured for way too long.

As police leaders, this should make us all feel uncomfortable. We can do better!