[Arendt] had gone to the Eichmann trial to confront the epitome of evil in her mind and expected to encounter something monstrous, and what she encountered instead was this nondescript little man, a bureaucrat, a technocrat, a guy who ... performed the technical functions that made the holocaust possible.... He was a good family man, in his way. He was loved by his children, participated in civic activities, was in essence the good German. ... he was every man, and that was what was truly horrifying to her in the end. That was a controversial thesis because ... she had breached the wall and brought the lessons of how Nazism actually functioned, the modernity of it, home and visited it upon everyone, calling for, then, personal accountability, responsibility, to the taking of responsibility for the outcome of the performance of one's functions.
In his book, On the Justice of Roosting Chickens (available locally at Rainbow Bookstore Co-op!), Churchill also talks about how quickly people rush to blame the over-arching structural issues (capitalism, imperialism) for the evils that they undoubtedly produce, yet try to excuse all the individual humans who participate, of any wrongdoing (he terms this "immaculate genocide").
Leaving aside the question (for the moment) of which individuals are fact responsible for the evils perpetrated by our government and its proxies, I was struck by the parallel between this and something else that I read recently... I will make it a separate post.
2 comments:
"...how quickly people rush to blame the over-arching structural issues (capitalism, imperialism) for the evils that they undoubtedly produce, yet try to excuse all the individual humans who participate, of any wrongdoing (he terms this "immaculate genocide")."
Unless I'm misreading, I think this is a good point, but only to a certain extent. Among academics and/or particular legs of the left (or, at least the ones that surround me), this seems to ring true. But most of the undergrads I teach are all about the vice versa. I mean, they seem not to have any sense of capitalism, imperialism, etc. as overarching strcutures with some degree of permanence. And in my discussions with other, similiarly less-educated folks, it seems to be the same.
I don't know Churchill's audience, though. Perhaps that's the point after all, that I'm missing. At any rate, interesting post. And happy birthday.
Yes, I know what you mean, on both counts (I enjoyed the image of you surrounded by legs of the left... actually what I saw in my mind's eye, was you in the middle of a tall Rm. 7110, with giant-sized legs of Reba and Wendy standing around you...)
I think Churchill must be talking to "over-educated" folks. The lefty left, and also the vast vapid liberal mainstream media, of the sort who listen to "All Things Considered" and consider themselves very progressive because they recycle.
See you soon!!! yay :-)
Post a Comment