Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil

Open Culture ^ | 1963 | Hannah Ardent

[EBH]

We’ve all heard the phrase “the banality of evil.” Some of us even know which political theorist to attribute it to, and among those, a few have even read it in context. Hannah Arendt most memorably employed it in both the subtitle and closing words of Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, her book on the trial of Nazi lieutenant-colonel Adolf Eichmann. To Arendt’s mind, Eichmann willingly did his part to organize the Holocaust — and an instrumental part it was — out of neither anti-semitism nor pure malice, but out of a non-ideological, entirely more prosaic combination of careerism and obedience. Readers have argued ever since its publication about this characterization, and those with a special interest in how Arendt arrived there can find in the New Yorker‘s online archives the original series of “Eichmann in Jerusalem” articles out of which the book grew: part one, part two, part three, part four, and part five.

[minnesota_bound]

Eichmann; Eh, it was a job, it kept me busy.
Corrupt media supporting evil: Eh, it’s a job, it keeps me busy.

[mumblypeg]

The preservation of “I” is precisely why fat egotists will blindly obey.
Refusal implies resistance, which in turn requires effort. Effort risks failure.
Far simpler to obey and risk nothing.
Thass why they’re sheeple.

[sergeantdave]

Good reply.

“The preservation of “I” is precisely why fat egotists will blindly obey.”

I disagree. Any threat to damage “I” or destroy the egoist personality will engender mounting resistance and finally complete resistance to demands to obey.

“Far simpler to obey and risk nothing.”

Blind obedience is a severe threat to the egoist because the “I” is no longer in control, representing the ultimate risk - the death of “I.”