Misconceptions Regarding Arendt on Eichmann

Hannah Arendt’s controversial book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil offered an account of the actions and motivations of the Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann. Arendt’s book sparked lively debate and engendered polemical responses as a result of her portrayal of Eichmann as neither a cruel sadist nor a fanatical anti-Semite. Arendt described Eichmann as demonstrating the banality of evil, indicating that Eichmann’s motivations were banal and petty rather than deeply evil. And yet the banality of his motives did not preclude him from participation in radical, extreme evil. This significant philosophical point is often obscured by the disputes surrounding Arendt’s depiction of Eichmann. In this article I identify and challenge the main misconceptions and misunderstandings of Arendt’s account of Eichmann which have often overshadowed the philosophically pertinent discussions in the book, emphasizing the centrality of personal responsibility in Arendt’s portrayal.