After reading Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt (a report on the banality of evil and the trial of German Nazi leader, Adolf Eichmann) I have gained lots of insight on how the Nazi’s could live with all the terrorization and killing that they did. I have come to the conclusion that many were able to live with the evil they caused and were surrounded by because they willingly chose to be ignorant to the suffering of others. Furthermore, committing acts against humanity both didn’t affect them personally and affected their daily lives in positive and negative ways. Hannah Arendt shows this willful ignorance that the Nazi’s had when she writes, As for his motives, he was perfectly sure that he was not what he called an innerer Schweinehund, a dirty bastard in the depths of his heart; and as for his conscience, he remembered …show more content…
Over and over again Eichmann addresses his following of orders and need to do so. Could it be that Eichmann felt like any other German, that he needed to follow orders because Nazi’s stressed that certain laws that go against humanity be followed? Possibly, but it is for the simple fact that Eichmann chose at the time and still chooses at the trial not to see his following orders to lead Jews to their deaths as wrong or murderous that proves the Banality of evil. Eichmann chose not to think about his actions and how they affected the Jews but oppositely, reflected solely on his orders which where to lead people on trains and send them on their way. This was not a case of thinking; in fact, it was a case of giving up his moral obligations. Because laws were unjust and people knew wrong from right as Arendt emphasizes this in earlier quotes, it does not justify Eichmann’s actions to follow orders in a system that would kill millions of