Charlie Brown and his B-17 Bomber.

[Vulcan59]

I received this story in my email the other day and I went searching to verify that the story is true. It turns out that this is a true story. The entire story can be read here.

After flying the B-17 over an enemy airfield, a German pilot named Franz Steigler was ordered to take off and shoot down the B-17. When he got near the B-17, he could not believe his eyes. In his words, he ‘had never seen a plane in such a bad state’. The tail and rear section was severely damaged, and the tail gunner wounded. The top gunner was all over the top of the fuselage. The nose was smashed and there were holes everywhere.

Despite having ammunition, Franz flew to the side of the B-17 and looked at Charlie Brown, the pilot. Brown was scared and struggling to control his damaged and blood-stained plane.

Aware that they had no idea where they were going, Franz waved at Charlie to turn 180 degrees. Franz escorted and guided the stricken plane to, and slightly over, the North Sea towards England. He then saluted Charlie Brown and turned away, back to Europe. When Franz landed he told the CO that the plane had been shot down over the sea, and never told the truth to anybody. Charlie Brown and the remains of his crew told all at their briefing, but were ordered never to talk about it.

More than 40 years later, Charlie Brown wanted to find the Luftwaffe pilot who saved the crew. After years of research, Franz was found. He had never talked about the incident, not even at post-war reunions.

They met in the USA at a 379th Bomber Group reunion, together with 25 people who are alive now – all because Franz never fired his guns that day.

my emphasis

Below is a painting of a B-17 and the German ME-109 fighter done by an artist from the description of both pilots many years later.

 

[Alana]

I was getting emotional reading the story, up until this part:

They met in the USA at a 379th Bomber Group reunion, together with 25 people who are alive now – all because Franz never fired his guns that day.

which reminded me of the bigger picture: there were other days, it was war time, they each killed others from the opposite camp because their commanders told them to.

Those were my thoughts at least, fwtaw.

 

[Vulcan59]

I agree and yet I also understand how normal human beings have been programmed to obey authority but when they see the horror for themselves, they hesitate carrying out those orders. In that respect, what SOTT does daily, is truly a great service to normal humans; showing the horrors to them. Those that have eyes to see will see. :)

 

[Possibility of Being]

That's a beautiful and elevating story, thank you Vulcan! :) It brings back my faith in humanity.

For me, the story is an excellent illustration of this Laura's post:

Go out into your environment and study other people for what you can do for them without any expectation of reward. Remember that the true value of a person is what they will do or not do if nobody is looking and there is no chance of anybody finding out. How much good have you done for others that you did NOT talk about and didn't expect to get something for?

[my emphasis]

* *

I was getting emotional reading the story, up until this part:

They met in the USA at a 379th Bomber Group reunion, together with 25 people who are alive now – all because Franz never fired his guns that day.

which reminded me of the bigger picture: there were other days, it was war time, they each killed others from the opposite camp because their commanders told them to.

Well, I think it's much easier to be human in times of peace and general happiness (for lack of a better word). Such a behavior in the midst of a war and everyday drill and horror, remaining human even there, seeing a human being in one's "enemy" is even more adorable. And we do not know, on how many occasions Franz did something like that, how many other survivors owe him their lives but they never tried to find him. It seems less likely that it was the only situation when this man with conscience end empathy acted upon his values.

On the other hand, thinking in this context about "the bigger picture: there were other days, it was war time, they each killed others from the opposite camp because their commanders told them to" reminds me my mom's (and very common for many parents) attitude, when for example after getting some good marks at school I could only hear something like "but you hadn't cleaned your room." But then, maybe that's because your comment disturbed my idealism which I know I have to keep on a tight leash but not always "like" it...

 

[mada85]

Well, I think it's much easier to be human in times of peace and general happiness (for lack of a better word).

I agree with you here, PoB. However, in times of war, even on the battlefield, only 15 – 20% of soldiers will fire their weapons, let alone shoot to kill. This type of behaviour was not at all uncommon until the Korean and Vietnam Wars. I found an article called Hope on the Battlefield by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. Grossman discusses how conscience prevents normal human beings from shooting to kill. Indeed it was found that most soldiers up to World War II aimed high in order to avoid shooting the 'enemy', or simply did not fire at all. In his article Grossman does not mention psychopathy. If we consider that 6% of the population are genetic psychopaths, and that a higher percentage of soldiers may be psychopaths, plus those with other genetic psychological abnormalities, that could well account for the figure of 15 – 20%. After World War II 'better' methods for training soldiers and desensitizing them to killing were developed, with the result that the firing rate during the Korean War was 55%, and during the Vietnam War had risen to 90 – 95%.

 

[Nienna]

Well, I think it's much easier to be human in times of peace and general happiness (for lack of a better word).

I agree with you here, PoB. However, in times of war, even on the battlefield, only 15 – 20% of soldiers will fire their weapons, let alone shoot to kill. This type of behaviour was not at all uncommon until the Korean and Vietnam Wars. I found an article called Hope on the Battlefield by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. Grossman discusses how conscience prevents normal human beings from shooting to kill. Indeed it was found that most soldiers up to World War II aimed high in order to avoid shooting the 'enemy', or simply did not fire at all. In his article Grossman does not mention psychopathy. If we consider that 6% of the population are genetic psychopaths, and that a higher percentage of soldiers may be psychopaths, plus those with other genetic psychological abnormalities, that could well account for the figure of 15 – 20%. After World War II 'better' methods for training soldiers and desensitizing them to killing were developed, with the result that the firing rate during the Korean War was 55%, and during the Vietnam War had risen to 90 – 95%.

Yes, once the psychopaths realized what the "problem" was with the kill rate, they developed better brainwashing techniques. So now we have more and more soldiers with PTSD and not knowing how to deal with problems at home except violence and killing. All the while, the VA does nothing to alleviate the horrors and torments from these people's lives. They "broke" them, but have no intentions of trying to "fix" them. In this society of disposable products, the human being is also disposable to the psychopathic way of thinking. We are all just cannon fodder/useless feeders to them.

In this time of low conscientiousness and hysterical drive to kill those "others", it is like a breath of fresh air to read about Franz and his conscientious decision to help someone to live instead of killing them. Or so I think.

 

[Laurentien2]

It remind me of this movie that I saw last year;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joyeux_No%C3%ABl

 

[Possibility of Being]

Grossman discusses how conscience prevents normal human beings from shooting to kill. Indeed it was found that most soldiers up to World War II aimed high in order to avoid shooting the 'enemy', or simply did not fire at all.

Ok, maybe that's true. Maybe that's true that only 15 – 20% of soldiers will fire their weapons. But notice what Grossman says:

Those who would not fire did not run or hide—in many cases they were willing to risk greater danger to rescue comrades, get ammunition, or run messages. They simply would not fire their weapons at the enemy...

That means they still supported the ones who would fire their weapons. How much "better" were they? That's a long way from here to actively save an "enemy".

Then we have that disturbing Milgram experiment where

65 percent of experiment participants followed [orders even] though many were very uncomfortable doing so. Only one participant steadfastly refused to administer shocks below the 300-volt level.[...]

There is a little-known coda to the Milgram Experiment, reported by Philip Zimbardo: none of the participants who refused to administer the final shocks insisted that the experiment itself be terminated, nor left the room to check the health of the victim without requesting permission to leave, as per Milgram's notes and recollections, when Zimbardo asked him about that point.

In 2006, ABC News replicated Milgram's experiment to find that:

Milgram's original experiment tested just a handful of women, but "Primetime's" sampling was approximately half men and half women. Would the "gentler" sex be more reluctant to shock someone? And what about the people who refused to continue to shock the subject after hearing his demand to be released? What made them choose to stand up to authority?

'The Results'

In ABC News' version of the Milgram experiment, we tested 18 men, and found that 65 percent of them agreed to administer increasingly painful electric shocks when ordered by an authority figure.

22 women signed up for our experiment. Even though most people said that women would be less likely to inflict pain on the learner, a surprising 73 percent yielded to the orders of the experimenter.

Out of the 30 people we tested with an additional accomplice acting as a moral guide, 63 percent still inflicted electric shocks, even though the accomplice refused to go on.

That would mean it doesn't necessarily need genetic psychopaths or other pathological individuals to actively take part in extreme violence. All it takes is following orders and this appears to be much more common for current human condition than we would like to believe.

So I'd like to say again: all my respect to Franz Steigler for what he did in that situation.

For those interested, a few videos:

BBC: Milgram Electric Shock Experiment three-part video
http://www.personalgrowthcourses.net/video/milgram_2009-3

ABC Documentary on The Milgram Experiment: A Touch of Evil
http://vodpod.com/watch/2121497-abc-documentary-on-the-milgram-experiment-a-touch-of-evil

About the Milgram experiment with excerpts from his original documentary Obedience (taken down by Pennsylvania State University due to copyrights abuse):
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=1798620933

There is another one interesting for different reason; that's the only one available free (as far as I know) where you can watch a piece of Obedience that Jacob Needleman discusses in his book Why We Can't Be Good:
Asch Conformity and Milgram Obedience Experiments
http://www.livevideo.com/video/A92A4490084A497085C8830FC728B2B7/asch-conformity-and-milgram-ob.aspx

However, that's a different issue and going into details would be hijacking Vulcan's thread that I don't want to do by any means. :)

 

[Al Today]

Although war exists, there are cannon fodder that have empathy, souls... I have read and do not doubt there are many instances of someone with heart who "feels" the other "soul" and let them live.

For some reason I dunno, I think not all here wanna be of the STS persuasion.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

I think it's important to remember some of the points that PoB has made about the capacity for normal people to commit atrocities. Before Milgram did his experiment he asked a large group of academics and professionals how many subjects they thought would deliver a 'fatal' shock (in reality no shocks were given, but the subjects thought they had been). The 'experts' thought it would be less than 1%. The results were a shock, to say the least (pun intended!).

If we think about how easily we are influenced by authority (psychopathic induction, in Lobaczewski's terms), then how many of us have actually committed such acts, if not in this life, then in past lives? Probably all of us. So even with this history of evil - the evil of conformity, fear, depersonalization, dehumanization - the fact that acts such as Franz's occur gives me hope. Perhaps both these men had killed in the war, but if that single situation was enough to give them both a new perspective on life in 'the world inside the devil', I think it was worth it.

 

[wanderer33]

"In the cruel and terrible time in which our generation has been condemned to live on this earth, we must never make peace with evil. We must never become indifferent to others or undemanding of ourselves."
— Vasily Grossman

Approaching Infinity: Is this the Grossman you mean? I have read "Life and Fate" and "Forever Flowing". He was purportedly at Stalingrad, so must have seen the worst of war. Some say he was not there at all.

It seems to me that the knightly spirit exemplified in Vulcan's post is sadly lacking in these times. I am reading a book by Arkady Babchenko at present. He tells a different tale of the Chechen War. The followers of Allah are consistently offering human sacrifices to their god. The gods of this world are truly terrifying.

I think that comparing Milgram's 'clinical' experiment to a battlefield situation is probably not a good comparison. Human nature suffers tremendous stresses on a battlefield which cannot really be compared to a lab situation whatever the psychology involved. If you have not read it already, 'War on the Mind' by Peter Watson may be of interest to you. Subtitled 'the military uses and abuses of psychology'.

 

[Alana]

Well, I think it's much easier to be human in times of peace and general happiness (for lack of a better word). Such a behavior in the midst of a war and everyday drill and horror, remaining human even there, seeing a human being in one's "enemy" is even more adorable. And we do not know, on how many occasions Franz did something like that, how many other survivors owe him their lives but they never tried to find him. It seems less likely that it was the only situation when this man with conscience end empathy acted upon his values.

You have a point there, POB and thank you, and all, who shared your own thoughts. The fact that he felt the unevenness of the situation, that he was in control and could shoot a broken-down Charlie and his plane but chose not to, does speak of conscience.

And i certainly didn't mean to sound like your (or anyone's) mother I was in a negative state of mind about the world in general as i was sharing my thoughts. I mean, why do people with conscience go to war in the first place? But Milgram's experiments and other studies do show that one needs no be in war to act against one's conscience. I remember when (years ago) i read about Milgram's experiment, i immediately thought, "No way i would be one of those pushing the button!" As with everything else, life showed me what a jerk i can be in certain situations out of fear and internal considering/self-importance. And depressing as this is, knowing about it can only aid us in become more conscious about our actions and behaviors towards the people in our environment, on a daily basis. Like people who knows they are addicted to alcohol, and want to free themselves from the self/other destructive habit. As long as they remain in denial, harming others and their own self, will continue.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Approaching Infinity: Is this the Grossman you mean? I have read "Life and Fate" and "Forever Flowing". He was purportedly at Stalingrad, so must have seen the worst of war. Some say he was not there at all.

Nope, PoB was talking about this Grossman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Grossman_%28author%29

Author of "On Killing".

 

[msante]

I can only say that the story has "touched my heart" . Data as Endymion gives us

[quote author=Endymion]
... only 15 – 20% of soldiers will fire their weapons, let alone shoot to kill. ...
[/quote]

are interesting but do not detract so wonderfully generous acts such as Franz Steigler. As said PoB

[quote author=Possibility of Being]
And we do not know, on how many occasions Franz did something like that, how many other survivors owe him their lives but they never tried to find him.
[/quote]

I have the impression (or perhaps hope) that in all wars there have been several "Franz Steigler" that have helped many people.

Vulcan59, thanks for this refreshing story.