Can questions like "What could a jew do, when he arrived with a train in Auschwitz?" really be answered? Do such questions have a place in philosophy? What about analytic philosophy? Works of continental philosophy like Minimal Moralia apparently deal with such questions, but statements like "There is no right life in the wrong one." don't feel like sufficient answers to me.
There is however a grain of truth in such an answer, because it is already too late to do anything at the moment where you arrive at the death camp. There were certainly enough signs that things got worse before, while it was still possible to leave the country. But leaving is not easy, temporary shelter might be easy to find, but what about the long term future? And what about the friends and family you leave behind, they might have to pay a high price for you leaving. Assume people get arrested for what they think (not for what they did or planed to do), certain groups of people are no longer allowed to leave the country, and those abroad are called back with the justification that one might want to arrest them for who they liked or disliked. Wouldn't that be enough justification for leaving the country, or at least not return if you are currently abroad?
That short digression indicates that one main problem with such questions is that they cannot be answered in isolation. And because of that, they also don't have correct answers. And the partial answers that they do have imply uncomfortable political conclusions. Does philosophy deal with those issues? Is there a difference between analytic and continental philosophy in this respect?