Levi And Arendt Banality Of Evil Analysis

1835 Words 7 Pages
Levi and Arendt: Banality Of Evil
During 1941 to 1945 Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich tried to eliminate all Jews. What they did was a systematic, organized genocide. Some people shared the ideology of the Führer and believed that the Jews were the cause of Germany’s problems and therefore should be punished. Some people believed that what was happening in Germany was horrible and there were those that believed that what they were doing was not bad because they were only doing their job. Some soldiers didn’t have much of a choice. Either you joined Hitler or were killed. The tried to rationalize their actions and would say that they had a job that required them to contribute to the genocide of Jews, but it was in accordance with the law so it was
…show more content…
Arendt argues that although Eichmann’s actions were contributing to the extermination of the Jewish people she believed that Eichmann was the “banality of evil”. This means that although Eichmann was in charge in organizing the mass deportation of Jews he himself was a fairly normal person. Eichmann didn 't really think about what he was doing, he was more interested in being efficient in his job and not thinking of the consequences. She believes that Eichmann was interested in personal investment and being part of something important rather than just wanting to eliminate Jews. Arendt’s argument basically claimed that he was ignorant to the situation and didn 't have a bad conscience because he didn’t kill the Jews directly he only rounded them up. These statements caused a lot of controversy. Many people believed that she was saying that he wasn 't responsible for his actions and he didn 't set out to do evil. Making him a monster made it easier to understand how someone could do something like this. It separated him from the rest of society, but saying he was a normal person was like us was saying that we could do something like that as …show more content…
In the case with Eichmann, it was interesting to see how someone can “indirectly” affect the lives of others and still feel little blame. Eichmann claimed to be a paper pusher and not having a direct hand in the deaths of millions of people. To him his actions did not seem bad but when you look at the big picture you can see how he was part of a much bigger plot. Eichmann was not a horrible person but he played a role in Nazi Germany he was not obligated to play. And although the actions of many others had a greater impact that lead to the death of Jews more than his actions did, it is the collective actions of many people that created this oppression and lead to collaboration in one of the biggest genocide in the

Related Documents