Picture: People bring flowers and candles in honour of the victims at the sites of the preventable terrorist attacks in Vienna on 02 November 2020.
How evil takes shape through the denial of responsibility for one's own actions.
When contemplating evil, we often come across a disturbing paradox: even supposedly good people can become perpetrators by denying their responsibility. Hannah Arendt's concept of the "banality of evil" sheds light on this dark dimension by showing how people can fall prey to moral inertia in their everyday lives. A current example that illustrates this depressing topic is the case of the Degewo top management. Thousands of people were knowingly exposed to the dangers of asbestos without those responsible having to face appropriate consequences to this day. This harrowing example shows how refusing to take responsibility for one's actions can open the door to evil, even for seemingly respectable individuals.
The banality of evil: An overview
Hannah Arendt coined the concept of the banality of evil during the trial of Adolf Eichmann, one of the main perpetrators of the Holocaust. Arendt was shocked by Eichmann's superficially normal demeanour and his ability to portray his actions as merely obedient compliance with orders. These observations led her to realise that evil does not necessarily result from deep-rooted malice, but rather from a frightening absence of reflection and responsibility.
Arendt argues that the banality of evil arises at the moment when man as an individual being stops thinking about the consequences of his actions. This thoughtless attitude allows evil to creep into the habits and structures of everyday life without being immediately recognised as such.
Denial of responsibility and its effects
At the heart of Arendt's concept of the banality of evil lies in the denial of individual responsibility for one's own actions. This does not only mean that people actively choose evil, but rather that they refuse to think about the moral consequences of their actions. By hiding behind authority or conformity, they shirk their duty to scrutinise their own actions.
This denial of responsibility can occur in many facets of everyday life. From passive acceptance of unjust structures to indifference to the suffering of others, evil manifests itself in the disturbing normality of irresponsibility. People caught in these patterns often unwittingly contribute to the perpetuation of systems that cause suffering and injustice.
A look behind the facade
Hannah Arendt's emphasis on the banality of evil invites us to look beyond the surface of everyday actions and recognise the deeper meaning of irresponsibility. Rather than seeing evil as something extraordinary and sensational, she reminds us that it exists even in the seemingly unremarkable choices and omissions.
Refusing to take responsibility for our actions can lead to a gradual decline in moral integrity. Arendt calls on us to critically scrutinise our own actions and decisions and to consider the consequences of our actions. Only through this conscious reflection can we break through the banality of evil and embark on a new path of ethical responsibility.
Conclusion
Hannah Arendt's concept of the banality of evil offers a profound insight into the way in which evil takes shape in everyday life. The denial of responsibility for one's actions allows evil to enter our lives inconspicuously and seemingly harmlessly. By becoming aware of the subtle mechanisms that lead to irresponsibility, we can hopefully help to recognise and actively combat the power of evil. Arendt's message reminds us that the pursuit of ethical responsibility is an ongoing process that requires our continuous attention and reflection.