Good people can cause severe harm if their motives are influenced by the values shared in a public corporation or are a result of manipulation controlled by the law. Bob Henderson’s ability to satisfy his interests to obtain success by dismissing social responsibility and contributing to the rise in obesity is wrong. Hannah Arendt founded the theory “The banality evil’ through analyzing Adolf Eichmann’s case during the time of the Holocaust. Eichmann and Henderson share similarities of both being ordinary men who influenced large scale harm. The intent of this essay will be to compare and contrast the perception of evil and discuss at which point radical evil may be mistaken for banal evil. Hannah Arendt discovered a concept known as “The …show more content…
Hitler cultivated his own army to destroy selective demographics, he wanted to create a world where his concept of ideal was the only one that existed. As a dictator he was able to constitute laws, anyone who chose to disobey these laws would be executed. The laws that are put into place can define success through evil acts. The Holocaust is a direct example; Hitler knew he would be able to brainwash human beings to obey his commands contributing to the success of his dehumanizing scheme. Hannah Arendt’s essay suggests she believes that the motives steered by Adolf Eichmann to commit monstrous acts, where “once banal to all human” ( Arendt, Cp). Eichmann was viewed as a demonic monster for his immoral and corrupted mind. Banal evil shares similarities with Radical evil, such that they can both result in extraordinary evil. Unlike radical evil, banal evil can be committed by ordinary people. Eichmann lacked the ability to reflect and he seemed to think in terms of clichés as his goal was to follow Hitler’s orders to undo God’s creation and complete his job successfully and efficiently. Arendt argues that Eichmann was thoughtless and that possessing the trait of thoughtlessness contributes to evil
“To what extent is Adolf Eichmann just a bureaucratic businessman doing his job, or were his motivations composed of pure evil and murderous intent?”
Adolf Eichmann was a remorseless perpetrator who conducted the death of an innumerable amount of Jewish people. The information provided in quote one explains what unethical actions Eichmann pursued. Eichmann did his part during the Holocaust by going to different locations in order to massacre them. “Eichmann played his central role in the deportation of over 1.5 million Jews from all over Europe killing centers and killings cities in occupied Poland and in parts of the occupied Soviet Union” (“Adolf Eichmann” ushmm.org.) This quotation from Eichmann’s biography explains what he did to the Jews while serving as a Nazi soldier. He went to the extent of hunting them in different locations like wild animals. Eichmann was aware of his wrong doings, yet he still pursued with all of the Jews’ execution. Therefore, he is nonetheless a
In The Perils of Obedience, Stanley Milgram introduces us to his experimental studies on the conflict between one’s own conscience and obedience to authority. From these experiments, Milgram discovered that a lot of people will obey a figure in authority; irrespective of the task given - even if it goes against their own moral belief and values. Milgram’s decision to conduct these experiments was to investigate the role of Adolf Eichmann (who played a major part in the Holocaust) and ascertain if his actions were based on the fact that he was just following orders; as most Germans accused of being guilty for war crimes commonly explained that they were only being obedient to persons in higher authority.
Hitler had shown unwillingness to tolerate the Jews and once he was appointed Chancellor, he started to take elimination measures like deportation, forced emigration, and isolation to enforce his belief. He took advantage of Germany’s weakness in World War One, then used it as an opportunity to blame the Jews for Germany’s defeat. Hitler’s political party was the largest political party in Germany thus allowing them to draw very large crowds to gatherings. He had very good oratory speeches with hand gestures that easily manipulated people to adhere to his views. Hitler constantly targeted the Jews because he knew people believed in these speeches. People in Germany were already anti-semitic but Hitler made it worse by constantly consuming them in his speeches. From the way he spoke about the Jews, we could clearly see the possibility of genocide. Hitler wanted Germany to be free of any humans that anyone other than his ideal master race so he personally selected bodyguards to be part of a group called the SS. Hitler was responsible for ordering the SS to carry out the extermination of anyone who did not fit this ideal. The SS handled oppositions using force and as a result of which people were forced to give into the idea of violence. Sometimes people purposely went along with this Holocaust ideal due to the fear of getting killed. These terrors allowed the holocaust occur
Victor Frankl once said, “Any person, regardless of the circumstances, can decide what shall become of them – mentally and spiritually.” This is true for Oskar Schindler and Amon Goeth, who both had very different reactions to World War II. Human goodness is when one sees the truth, accepts it, and makes rational decisions based on the truth. Human evil is irrational decision-making, and when a person sees and understands the truth but choses to defy it. In Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List, philosophers Kant and Rahner would agree that Schindler is a representation of human goodness, and Goeth represents human evil.
When Adolf Hitler first came to power in pre-WWII Germany, all of Germany was ready for a new Fuhrer to lead them into success and overcome the recent depression. Among his supporters was Adolf Eichmann, who began as just another German citizen, but transformed into something even he could not have imagined. “On trial are his deeds, not the sufferings of the Jews, not the German people or mankind, not even anti-Semitism and racism” (Arendt 5). Eichmann was tried for crimes against humanity, but before deciding for oneself whether he was guilty of this charge, we must question whether he was acting out of service to his country or out of his own self-interest. After reading deeper into the results and proceedings of the trial, it is only logical for one to conclude that although he may have joined forces with the Nazi party as a patriot, his motives for continuing to assist in carrying out genocide on an unimaginable scale was largely self-interest.
The Holocaust can be seen as one of the most devastating genocide that occurred in history and that is well known in many places worldwide. One may assume that those who played a part in the acts done by the Nazis in Germany may have been mentally disturbed and/or sick, evil people. However, the novel Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland by Christopher R. Browning provides another alternative to this statement. Browning provides the reader with the idea that anyone is capable of becoming a murderer, especially when the opportunity presents itself. In his book he attempts to prove this statement through multiple ideas and theories and also provides events which took place to analyze some of those ideas.
Arendt explains that the ultimate power of a totalitarian government is the acceptance of the ideology being propagated. The laws that are put into place in totalitarian government are not to empower the people and protect their rights. Instead, the laws tell the people what they must do, not what they must not do. Arendt tells how the law of nature is the foundation for Hitler's Nazis, and the law of history for Russia's communist regimes. According to Arendt, both the Nazi and communist regimes maintained that those laws gave them justification for their cruelty. These laws of nature and history are not permanent or stable. They are in motion to keep history and nature moving, so that it progresses without ever stopping. <p>Arendt claims that these laws of motion sustain the terror fueling the totalitarian government. Arendt says that terror is the realization and execution of these laws with nothing standing in its way. Throughout the selection, Arendt speaks of terror. Terror is essential for the state to keep its power, or else it will fall. According to Arendt, in a totalitarian state terror terminates individuality among the people. Individual men become a mass of humankind, in the eyes of the state. "Terror exists neither for nor against men", claims Arendt, "it substitutes for the boundaries and channels of communication between individual men a band of iron which holds them so tightly
Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party used nationalism to great effect in Germany that spured the Second World World. After WWI, many Germans blamed the new government for accepting the unfair treaty as conditions became miserable. People who could not find jobs began to drift into the Communist and National Socialist parties established by Hitler. They decided that it was the necessary solution. In 1933, Hitler came to power as dictator of Germany and preached a racist brand of fascism. He promised to end the humiliating conditions caused by the German defeat in WWI. He knew how to win people's obedience and trust, through their fears and insecurities. He almost immediately got Germany back into the factories and began secretly building up army and weapons. His real motives were to expand German territory and dominate Europe and the whole world that became the prelude to another war.
In the book Ordinary Men, Christopher Browning tackles the question of why German citizens engaged in nefarious behavior that led to the deaths of millions of Jewish and other minorities throughout Europe. The question of what drove Germans to commit acts of genocide has been investigated by numerous historians, but unfortunately, no overarching answer for the crimes has yet been decided upon. However, certain theories are more popular than others. Daniel Goldhagen in his book, Hitler’s Willing Executioners, has expounded that the nature of the German culture before the Second World War was deeply embedded in anti-Semitic fervor, which in turn, acted as the catalyst for the events that would unfold into the Holocaust. It is at this
Thesis: A key concept to understanding Hannah Arendt’s “Total Domination” is the essence of terror and the importance of concentration camps in maintaining the Nazi totalitarian state.
In her book, Eichmann in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt uses the life and trial of Adolf Eichmann to explore man's responsibility for evils committed under orders or as a result of the law. Due to the fact that she believed that Eichmann was neither anti-Semitic, nor a psychopath, Arendt was widely criticized for treating Eichmann too sympathetically. Still, her work on the Eichmann trial is among the most respected works on the issue to date.
According to Rosenfeld Arendt “famously gets a lot of her past wrong” (Rosenfeld 220). However, Rosenfeld’s study of Arendt’s work is not to find error rather depict the history of the writing of the French enlightenment. The “Truth in Politics” written by Arendt “provides a tour of various ancient and early modern thinkers, from Herodotus to Spinoza to James Madison, and of events in the profound and recent past to name a few” (qtd. in Rosenfeld 221).
This complete absence of thinking is what attracted the philosopher’s interest and that is how she started to question the problem of the eventual inner connection between the ability or inability to think and the problem of evil. Hannah Arendt elaborated on the notion of banality of evil through the case of Eichmann. She argues in Eichmann in Jerusalem that Eichmann, far from being a monster, was nothing less than a thoughtless bureaucrat, passionate only in his desire to please his superiors. She describes him in these words: “the unthinking functionary capable of enormous evil” who revealed “the dark potential of modern bureaucratic men”. According to Hannah Arendt, evil would not come from wicked individuals, but from the “nobodies”, from those who do not have the ability to think, and thus cannot tell what is wrong and what is right. As she was influenced by the sociologist Max Weber, who wrote concerning bureaucracies that “It is horrible to think that the world could one day be filled with nothing but those little cogs, little men clinging to their jobs and striving towards bigger ones”, she elaborates on the danger of bureaucracy and its possible responsibility when it comes to evil. Bureaucracies assign very specific tasks to each individual and these specific tasks cannot be seen as right or wrong by the ones accomplishing them, it is when they are all together that they can be examined this way. Eichmann was simply obeying the rules,
The capture and trial of Adolf Eichmann, which evoked legal and moral controversy across all nations, ended in his hanging over four decades ago. The verdict dealing with Eichmann's involvement with the Final Solution has never been in question; this aspect was an open-and-shut case which was put to death with Eichmann in 1962. The deliberation surrounding the issues of Eichmann's motives, however, are still in question, bringing forth in-depth analyses of the aspects of evil.