A horrific, most horrific plight engineered, orchestrated by many evil people. I feel that Arndt was splitting hairs in her analysis. Does it really matter the level of complicity in these atrocities. And as for those perpetrators Jews or non Jews, I understand the horrific situations, families and men and women who were under duress and I pray for their souls.
I totally agree. There was almost always a sense of saving some, through cooperation. I think there must have been internal guilt, if not at the time, after, if they survived.
I’m just sad that her ultimate interpretations have been so widely accepted when they are the exact opposite of what is helpful in understanding, I don’t know, totalitarianism! She blames those who had less power and no good options and then excuses those who were, unquestionably, backed up by mounds of evidence, cruel and ill-intended. She herself seemed aware of N*zi duplicity, but not when it came to Eichmann. She took his word in court and to his interrogators and in his memoirs over what he did, what he said to fellow N*zis, both during and after the war. She didn’t believe (or seem to listen to) many witnesses and laughed at their trauma. They were there. She was not. Their takes are supported by the facts x1000. Hers are not. But I suppose it is human nature to believe the abuser. It’s just, that’s one reason this whole thing HAPPENED. Because everyone underestimated the dedication and drive to plan and execute the most pointless and horrific of acts. That would be too much, yes? That’s what they hoped! And I am talking about the masterminds and worst of the worst, not the people who genuinely were hoodwinked.
Thank you very much for upload this interesting documentary!!! I admire the wonderful and courageous Hannah Arendt, I began to read her books when I was 15 years old.
I was assigned a report on Adolf Eichmann back in 1968, when I was 13 years old, and I took Eichmann in Jerusalem out of the library. At the time I only read the chapters on Eichmann’s bio and trial, but it set off a life-long fascination on the Holocaust. About 45 years later I bought a copy of the book and read it with great interest for Arendt’s observations on how European countries reacted to Nazi occupation and philosophy on “the banality of evil.” In subsequent years I think there’s a connection between sociopathic personalities and how the Nazis developed their principles. About 5% of the population have sociopathic tendencies and they tend to be overrepresented at top political levels. They weed out colleagues who aren’t ruthless enough so the very worst survive politically and gain power. In totalitarian societies this creates the Hitlers and Stalin’s.
@@wildflowerred6323 And the Donald Trumps as well. Trump would be a Hitler if he could just pull it off, with help from the likes of Bannon, Miller and others.
People in life or death situations will comply with almost anything if they harbor the hope, however irrational or unlikely, that such compliance will keep them alive. And they can't, and shouldn't, be blamed for that.
Her point is that the perpetrators were not in life/death situations, but that they were simply indifferent to the plight of fellow human beings whom they had dehumanized and that this was the key to the extent of the shoah
I don't think the lessons from her book have been absorbed into our culture even today. So many people and so much of our cultural pains would be helped by approaching the problem of evil and the problem of conformity in the way she did. The point that people miss, the many are missed, is that she is not saying that evil is only banal, hopefully that it is most often and perhaps most horrifically banal. No one is denying the sadists of the world and the psychopaths, but accepting that this makes up for a small portion of the evil done in the world is not only true, but necessary in the prevention of future atrocities and injustice.
Thanks for uploading! That smart looking historian talks about incarnate evil as if evil was some sort of an otherworldly mythical entity. Actually, everyone were just regular folks doing what regular folks want to do when the circumstances are right. That's the big warning from history.
Idk how her statements were controversial. The “obedience to authority” effect is well documented and is one of the most prominent findings of psychology.
AE, was a small cog inside a massive machine. The evil crime was carried out by folk who never considered themselves to be guilty. The guilt could be spread across so many that when looked at the scale was massive.
Aaah, there is an immense truth in this. Evil carried out by folk who push every responsibility of their own wrong doing as far away from themselves as possible. It also seems that they really do think they can spread out the guilt as an effective way of minimizing the crime.
To call evil banal means to deny the fact that evil may have aspects which transcend our understanding by means of rationality. For me therefore evil is by no means banal, although one can understand aggressive behaviour to some extend.
She never meant to say, that all evil is banal, but very often the execution of evil acts is very banal itself. Organising trains to send people like goods to extermination camps is itself a very banal act, with huge effects.
Good People will try to save themselves and their families no matter what. So who is this ridiculous journalist asking offensive questions to people who were nothing short of brave and courageous Jews.
When did he flee, running away because he knew he was guilty? How long was he allowed to live a normal life, leaving behind all the horror he caused? How could he sleep? Did he ever have nightmares about what he did? Every day he was a free man he should not have been allowed to be a free man.
I bet he had sleepless nights .he was the logistical brain behind the hollacast .the master race .5 .6 inches tall .bow legged with a hook nose .tea right .
@@dm5129Eichmann showed no remorse for any of his actions and therefore probably didn’t have any nightmares about what he had done. Had he truly been remorseful he would have either turned himself in to the authorities or Nazi hunters or at the very least would have apologized to Holocaust survivors for what he did to them and their family. On the contrary he remained unrepentant for the rest of his life even till his death and he fled to Argentina because he feared being put on trial and punished for his crimes.
Everyone has a problem with the trials. Sane people cannot comprehend what happened, she according to her statements never experienced the NAZIS. Why feel bad about what she thought or said? NAZIS had to be brought on trials, else this world will remain DUMB to every atrocity committed thereon , every time. That said I still disagree to the hanging. Life is punishment, death is not.
Research Rudolf Vrba (one of the few who actually escaped) and what he said about this. The element of deception about their end destination was crucial to ensure such big numbers. Likely many would have revolted, having known it, causing a hitch in an otherwise well-oiled machine.
An eye for an eye... As to Mrs Arendts book I found it insightful, questioning and even humerous and think it accompanies anything about Eichmann perfectly. #STOPIsrael #Palestina
I don’t think she deserved to be vilified the way she was over this book. All she did was write of her own personal take on the case and what she deduced from it. She never claimed people had to agree with her or that other opinions were wrong. She was simply trying to make sense of something very difficult to understand and her work simply reflects what we already know in that there is no real definitive logic to explain what happened in the Holocaust and how otherwise civilized people from an otherwise civilized society could do this.
Yes there is. Hers IS the explanation, even today. Not that we heed what she wrote. Also it's not personal, her take is philosophical and moral in the deepest human sense.
I do not buy it he was just a good soldier doing his duty. To hannah Arendt I think she was saying it did not matter if he was a monster. It was not just about eichmann but the millions who were not monsters but ended doing many monterous things. People just like us some were evil some were afraid some were just doing what they thought was duty. It could and has happened again and again and could even happen here. We are all the same.
As a veteran I do buy the " good soldier doing his duty" argument to a certain degree. Those who've never served could never comprehend this. When soldiers are given orders they're followed through with full diligence, there is no questioning; this is stressed heavily in basic training and carries through for your entire military career. The military trains you to be apolitical. However I do say to some degree since Eichmann had decades to devise such arguments for if he were ever to be captured.
The analysis here is very poor. the use of the word 'Banality' speaks to the darkest truth at the root of evil - that we are all capable of it. We must be in a constant practice of pushing back so as never to succumb to the worst human behaviour ever again. Hannah was not victim-blaming, she would never do such a thing and she was well aware of the various instances of violent Jewish resistance that occurred including Hashomer Hatzair in the front lines of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in April '43.
I’m confused-record after record, first hand testimony after first hand testimony, his own words and actions, the N*zi’s own words and actions, show how incredibly calculated and vicious they were, and SPECIFICALLY including Eichmann, also known for being diabolically duplicitous (not an exaggeration!). It’s incredible to me that Arendt’s bid for a “great theory” was premised on real people, real pain, and a fleeting impression that was WRONG. Her takes on power dynamics and motives excuse abuse and mock the abused. I am not Jewish nor am I even a Zionist, so I can’t be dismissed as such along with many others who had the same criticisms I do. As someone who, like almost everyone, has been the victim of abuse and has witnessed toxic power dynamics and oppression, gaslighting and manipulation, I take issue with Arendt’s and others’ dismissal of trauma and acceptance of a *self-admittedly, unquestionably* vicious and murderous human being’s presentation of himself over victims’ to be appalling. And frankly all too common and, yes, banal.
This was a bullshit show trial. Yes he was guilty, yes he was rightfully condemned, yes was boring, yes he was an uber criminal and yes im glad he is dead. But.. this was a bullshit show trial.
Illegally and callously kidnapped, tortured into false confessions of a mythical tale of wartime horrors and then hanged without a fair trial. They tried the same trick with Demjanjuk, failing miserably.
Jesus is the king of the Jews ,rabbinicisim is not Judaism ,Jesus made a new covenant he is the holy remnant the true and faithful Israel ,all who believe in Jesus are the Israel of God as Paul the apostle writes in the letter to the Galatians .
Thanks for taking the trouble to upload
I think her stance on the Jewish Councils in Europe is much more controversial than her stance on Eichmann
A horrific, most horrific plight engineered, orchestrated by many evil people. I feel that Arndt was splitting hairs in her analysis. Does it really matter the level of complicity in these atrocities. And as for those perpetrators Jews or non Jews, I understand the horrific situations, families and men and women who were under duress and I pray for their souls.
I totally agree. There was almost always a sense of saving some, through cooperation. I think there must have been internal guilt, if not at the time, after, if they survived.
I’m just sad that her ultimate interpretations have been so widely accepted when they are the exact opposite of what is helpful in understanding, I don’t know, totalitarianism! She blames those who had less power and no good options and then excuses those who were, unquestionably, backed up by mounds of evidence, cruel and ill-intended.
She herself seemed aware of N*zi duplicity, but not when it came to Eichmann. She took his word in court and to his interrogators and in his memoirs over what he did, what he said to fellow N*zis, both during and after the war. She didn’t believe (or seem to listen to) many witnesses and laughed at their trauma. They were there. She was not. Their takes are supported by the facts x1000. Hers are not. But I suppose it is human nature to believe the abuser.
It’s just, that’s one reason this whole thing HAPPENED. Because everyone underestimated the dedication and drive to plan and execute the most pointless and horrific of acts. That would be too much, yes? That’s what they hoped! And I am talking about the masterminds and worst of the worst, not the people who genuinely were hoodwinked.
Arendt expressly said that she thought the "Eichmann typus" was more evil than the outright murderer
Thank you for this one! #neverforget
This trial needed to be held to set an official record of the holocaust.
Thank you very much for upload this interesting documentary!!! I admire the wonderful and courageous Hannah Arendt, I began to read her books when I was 15 years old.
I was assigned a report on Adolf Eichmann back in 1968, when I was 13 years old, and I took Eichmann in Jerusalem out of the library. At the time I only read the chapters on Eichmann’s bio and trial, but it set off a life-long fascination on the Holocaust. About 45 years later I bought a copy of the book and read it with great interest for Arendt’s observations on how European countries reacted to Nazi occupation and philosophy on “the banality of evil.” In subsequent years I think there’s a connection between sociopathic personalities and how the Nazis developed their principles. About 5% of the population have sociopathic tendencies and they tend to be overrepresented at top political levels. They weed out colleagues who aren’t ruthless enough so the very worst survive politically and gain power. In totalitarian societies this creates the Hitlers and Stalin’s.
@@wildflowerred6323 And the Donald Trumps as well. Trump would be a Hitler if he could just pull it off, with help from the likes of Bannon, Miller and others.
People in life or death situations will comply with almost anything if they harbor the hope, however irrational or unlikely, that such compliance will keep them alive. And they can't, and shouldn't, be blamed for that.
Only if those people fear death more than they fear living a lifetime with the knowledge that they literally have no principal worth dying for
@@rosep8481 Everything is easy to say from behind a computer keyboard. To say it from an Auschwitz Birkenau bunk in 1940... not quite the same.
Her point is that the perpetrators were not in life/death situations, but that they were simply indifferent to the plight of fellow human beings whom they had dehumanized and that this was the key to the extent of the shoah
I don't think the lessons from her book have been absorbed into our culture even today. So many people and so much of our cultural pains would be helped by approaching the problem of evil and the problem of conformity in the way she did. The point that people miss, the many are missed, is that she is not saying that evil is only banal, hopefully that it is most often and perhaps most horrifically banal. No one is denying the sadists of the world and the psychopaths, but accepting that this makes up for a small portion of the evil done in the world is not only true, but necessary in the prevention of future atrocities and injustice.
Thanks for uploading! That smart looking historian talks about incarnate evil as if evil was some sort of an otherworldly mythical entity. Actually, everyone were just regular folks doing what regular folks want to do when the circumstances are right. That's the big warning from history.
Agreed. If you want to know why it happened, look around you
Brilliant. Thank you so much.
Idk how her statements were controversial. The “obedience to authority” effect is well documented and is one of the most prominent findings of psychology.
Telling about the time when she wrote about these things.
So
AE, was a small cog inside a massive machine. The evil crime was carried out by folk who never considered themselves to be guilty. The guilt could be spread across so many that when looked at the scale was massive.
Aaah, there is an immense truth in this. Evil carried out by folk who push every responsibility of their own wrong doing as far away from themselves as possible. It also seems that they really do think they can spread out the guilt as an effective way of minimizing the crime.
I think everyone at some time or another has said something like "I was just following my instructions." I know I have
To call evil banal means to deny the fact that evil may have aspects which transcend our understanding by means of rationality. For me therefore evil is by no means banal, although one can understand aggressive behaviour to some extend.
Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14).
The phrase banality of evil doesn't mean evil is banal.
She never meant to say, that all evil is banal, but very often the execution of evil acts is very banal itself.
Organising trains to send people like goods to extermination camps is itself a very banal act, with huge effects.
@@MephistoWaits agreed, but it always strikes me as odd that evil is often, very often carried out by very banal people
Good People will try to save themselves and their families no matter what. So who is this ridiculous journalist asking offensive questions to people who were nothing short of brave and courageous Jews.
It is good they made an example of EICHMEN . SO as the others would shit there pants and live in fear .
When did he flee, running away because he knew he was guilty? How long was he allowed to live a normal life, leaving behind all the horror he caused? How could he sleep? Did he ever have nightmares about what he did?
Every day he was a free man he should not have been allowed to be a free man.
I bet he had sleepless nights .he was the logistical brain behind the hollacast .the master race .5 .6 inches tall .bow legged with a hook nose .tea right .
@@dm5129Eichmann showed no remorse for any of his actions and therefore probably didn’t have any nightmares about what he had done. Had he truly been remorseful he would have either turned himself in to the authorities or Nazi hunters or at the very least would have apologized to Holocaust survivors for what he did to them and their family. On the contrary he remained unrepentant for the rest of his life even till his death and he fled to Argentina because he feared being put on trial and punished for his crimes.
No. She blamed the leaders. The elites.
We could have treated the Germans as the Romans treated the Carthaginians, and students 1000 years from now would write university theses.
How could they rebel . They were skin and bone . If they had off a huge example would a been made a them .
Prior to that...
Everyone has a problem with the trials. Sane people cannot comprehend what happened, she according to her statements never experienced the NAZIS. Why feel bad about what she thought or said? NAZIS had to be brought on trials, else this world will remain DUMB to every atrocity committed thereon , every time. That said I still disagree to the hanging. Life is punishment, death is not.
Many went along, or they would have been killed. Let's be honest.
Research Rudolf Vrba (one of the few who actually escaped) and what he said about this. The element of deception about their end destination was crucial to ensure such big numbers. Likely many would have revolted, having known it, causing a hitch in an otherwise well-oiled machine.
Not one incident of that scenario has ever been found, not even in the military.
An eye for an eye...
As to Mrs Arendts book I found it insightful, questioning and even humerous and think it accompanies anything about Eichmann perfectly. #STOPIsrael #Palestina
I found it rather tibious.
@@NorceCodine Are you mocking my p9 lack of talent here... 😊
I don’t think she deserved to be vilified the way she was over this book. All she did was write of her own personal take on the case and what she deduced from it. She never claimed people had to agree with her or that other opinions were wrong. She was simply trying to make sense of something very difficult to understand and her work simply reflects what we already know in that there is no real definitive logic to explain what happened in the Holocaust and how otherwise civilized people from an otherwise civilized society could do this.
Yes there is. Hers IS the explanation, even today. Not that we heed what she wrote. Also it's not personal, her take is philosophical and moral in the deepest human sense.
Sorry what happen for all save world
I do not buy it he was just a good soldier doing his duty. To hannah Arendt I think she was saying it did not matter if he was a monster. It was not just about eichmann but the millions who were not monsters but ended doing many monterous things. People just like us some were evil some were afraid some were just doing what they thought was duty. It could and has happened again and again and could even happen here. We are all the same.
As a veteran I do buy the " good soldier doing his duty" argument to a certain degree. Those who've never served could never comprehend this. When soldiers are given orders they're followed through with full diligence, there is no questioning; this is stressed heavily in basic training and carries through for your entire military career. The military trains you to be apolitical. However I do say to some degree since Eichmann had decades to devise such arguments for if he were ever to be captured.
He just did as he was being told, right?
The analysis here is very poor. the use of the word 'Banality' speaks to the darkest truth at the root of evil - that we are all capable of it. We must be in a constant practice of pushing back so as never to succumb to the worst human behaviour ever again. Hannah was not victim-blaming, she would never do such a thing and she was well aware of the various instances of violent Jewish resistance that occurred including Hashomer Hatzair in the front lines of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in April '43.
I’m confused-record after record, first hand testimony after first hand testimony, his own words and actions, the N*zi’s own words and actions, show how incredibly calculated and vicious they were, and SPECIFICALLY including Eichmann, also known for being diabolically duplicitous (not an exaggeration!). It’s incredible to me that Arendt’s bid for a “great theory” was premised on real people, real pain, and a fleeting impression that was WRONG.
Her takes on power dynamics and motives excuse abuse and mock the abused. I am not Jewish nor am I even a Zionist, so I can’t be dismissed as such along with many others who had the same criticisms I do. As someone who, like almost everyone, has been the victim of abuse and has witnessed toxic power dynamics and oppression, gaslighting and manipulation, I take issue with Arendt’s and others’ dismissal of trauma and acceptance of a *self-admittedly, unquestionably* vicious and murderous human being’s presentation of himself over victims’ to be appalling. And frankly all too common and, yes, banal.
Why would this "intellectual" take such a stupid position about making the horrible man be tried?
When is the documentary of the Ukrainian holodomor coming out?...nothing eh?
When is Soros appearing in Jerusalem?
Great evil in real court Moshe family.
Eichman didnt do anything but follow orders... He was living peacefully in Argentina. Show trial lol, wtf was Eichman going get but hanged? ``
This was a bullshit show trial. Yes he was guilty, yes he was rightfully condemned, yes was boring, yes he was an uber criminal and yes im glad he is dead. But.. this was a bullshit show trial.
Illegally and callously kidnapped, tortured into false confessions of a mythical tale of wartime horrors and then hanged without a fair trial. They tried the same trick with Demjanjuk, failing miserably.
bla bla bla - your so full of shit
Please My Friends! Turn To Christ! Please My Friends! Please! John 3:16
Jesus is the king of the Jews ,rabbinicisim is not Judaism ,Jesus made a new covenant he is the holy remnant the true and faithful Israel ,all who believe in Jesus are the Israel of God as Paul the apostle writes in the letter to the Galatians .
Please My Friends! Turn To Christ! Please My Friends! Please! John 3:16