Eichmann in Jerusalem

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Eichmann in Jerusalem. A Report on the Banality of Evil is a book of political theorist Hannah Arendt , they mark the 1961 in the District Court of Jerusalem out process against the obersturmbannführer Adolf Eichmann wrote. The book first appeared in 1963 and sparked several long-running controversies.

pads

Arendt was present at the Eichmann trial in April and June 1961 as a trial observer for the magazine “ The New Yorker ” and followed the beginning of the taking of evidence by interrogating various witnesses. The further course of the process up to August 1961, in particular the cross-examination of Eichmann by Attorney General Gideon Hausner and his questioning by the court, was taken from the transcripts of the trial sent to her by the Jerusalem District Court, as well as from newspaper and television reports. Almost two years later, Arendt published her impressions in five successive editions of the New Yorker under the title "A Reporter at Large: Eichmann in Jerusalem". The 1963 book "Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil" was a slightly expanded and slightly modified version of the text in the New Yorker. Between 1963 and 1965 the book appeared in four different versions in five print versions. Compared to the first English edition, extensive changes were made to the German translation in 1964, which were also incorporated into the American paperback edition of 1965. The main addition was a correction of their claim that the number of victims could have been fewer. For this first German edition at Piper Verlag , Hans Rößner was the publishing director there. Hannah Arendt never heard of his career as SS-Obersturmbannführer and head of cultural department in the Reich Security Main Office . The second editions (in both languages: 1965) were supplemented by the author, both in terms of content and with an additional preface about the controversy that the book had caused. Since 1986, after the author's death in 1975, the German version has been published with a text by the historian Hans Mommsen , which is referred to as an "introductory essay", is 39 pages long, with 64 own, detailed comments. This text harshly criticizes the following text by Arendt. The German editions since 1986 are marked “extended edition”. An index and notes were added without naming the author. They deal with people, processes and literature up to July 1984.

Content and effect

Arendt describes Eichmann as "normal people". Apart from the fact that he wanted to make a career in the SS apparatus, he had no motive, above all he was not excessively anti-Semitic . He was psychologically normal, was not a “demon or monster” and had only fulfilled his “duty”. Eichmann not only obeyed orders, but "the law". The legislature was no longer "master of myself" for Adolf Hitler with his will to be a leader and Eichmann; "[He] couldn't change anything". Eichmann's inability to think for himself was shown above all by the use of clichéd phrases, hiding behind the official language. When the heads of ministries, justice and the armed forces agreed to the final solution without being contradicted at the Wannsee Conference , Eichmann felt relieved of all responsibility: The "good society" agreed - what should he do as a little man? After the Wannsee Conference, when he was allowed to talk shop with the “big ones”, minimal doubts and possible remorse had disappeared: “At that moment I felt like Pontius Pilate , devoid of any guilt”. In contrast, Arendt emphasizes that even under totalitarian rule there are options, a morality.

The book is based on trial documents that Arendt, like all other reporters, were made available by the court, as well as, to a minor extent, on Eichmann's interview with Willem Sassen in the cleaned LIFE version. In the introduction to the German edition, Arendt states that she used Reitlinger's “The End Solution” throughout for her report , but above all “on Raul Hilberg's work , Die Vernichtung der Europäische Juden , the most detailed and well-founded source-based Presentation of the Jewish policy of the Third Reich ”, left. At times Arendt took part in the court sessions. The book contains Arendt's personal impression of the court, a résumé of the accused and his activities as a expeller of Jews, as a deportation specialist to the camps and as an administrative mass murderer. After a report on the Wannsee Conference, country reports follow in sections, as Eichmann had different regional focuses for his crimes: the area that the Nazis counted as part of the "Reich", western Europe, the Balkan states, south-east central Europe (Hungary, Slovakia), the east (with the Focus on Auschwitz and Theresienstadt , whose top director was Eichmann at the end). Included are Arendt's reflections on this modern type of international mass criminal (“On the Duties of a Law-Abiding Citizen”), the final report on the judgment and finally its classification in international legal developments (the “ Crime against humanity ”) in the epilogue. Arendt ends with a fictional judge's speech, in which she in turn reflects herself, i.e. transcends a report. She justified her plea for Eichmann's death penalty, despite her formal concerns, as well as the entitlement of an Israeli court to such a judgment. A detailed bibliography follows in the appendix .

Arendt emphasizes what is new about the crimes committed by Eichmann and the other Nazi Germans; this new aspect also presented the Jerusalem court with particular challenges. Using the example of the various degrees of persecution in the occupied countries, she shows how resistance from the population and the local administration saved the lives of Jews (in Bulgaria , Italy, Denmark : saving the Danish Jews ), while the unconditional and z. T. advance cooperation, z. B. through the collaboration in France (1940-1944) , the Nazis facilitated the murder.

If Eichmann's activities and thus Arendt's report are classified in the overall complex of the Holocaust , this book primarily reports on the administrative mass murders , and less on those on the Eastern Front and in the south, in which Jews were murdered directly on site without great administrative effort, especially by the Einsatzgruppen and the armed forces working towards them. The extent of these murders had been known in the West since the Einsatzgruppen trial of 1947–1948, but it was difficult to prove; Today it is known that the direct killings killed roughly the same number of civilians as those organized from Berlin. As a result of the previous deliberations as well as the existing orders, plans and correspondence, more sources are available for the murders organized by Eichmann than for the direct mass murders, which can usually only be substantiated indirectly, e.g. B. by the “Reichenau Decree” of October 10, 1941, which is essentially a call for murder. Often the Jews in Eichmann's sphere of influence were driven for days on trains through Europe. The time of death was also determined administratively, depending on factors such as their state of health, age and gender, the current capacity of trains and gas chambers, and the overcrowding of camps. Therefore Arendt calls Eichmann an "administrative mass murderer".

The fierce controversy of the 1960s that followed her book, primarily in the United States, the Federal Republic of Germany and Israel, has been weakened to this day, especially with regard to the concept of the “banality of evil”. The attacks marked a further biographical turning point for Arendt, comparable to her flight from Germany in 1933 and from Europe in 1941. Dozens of acquaintances and friends distanced themselves. To understand the radical nature of this turning point and the overall context of the Eichmann book, numerous passages in her letters and many later texts with reference to Eichmann serve to find u. a. with Elisabeth Young-Bruehl and Julia Schulze Wessel.

In her essay “ Truth and Politics ”, first published in the USA in 1964 and revised in 1969 , Arendt addresses this controversy.

Heinar Kipphardt's posthumous play "Brother Eichmann" uses numerous quotations from Arendt's book. In Leslie Kaplan's novel “ Fever ”, Eichmann plays a role model for two young murderers when they feel their conscience after the crime; the figure links the generations of grandfathers and grandchildren.

First controversy: the banality of evil

The word “banal” has in German and French a. a. a diminutive (diminishing) overtone; together with the “bad guys” there was a misinterpretation that Arendt was talking down the Nazi crimes. In English, on the other hand, it means "generally applicable", a "matter of course", which is more likely to meet your opinion. Eichmann is a type of the modern division of labor, evil in the form he perpetrates is potentially widespread. On the other hand, Arendt consistently emphasizes the possibility that he could have made a different decision; that is their conception of free will, which they learned from Kant . As examples of behavior contrary to the usual of the time, she mentions the NCO Anton Schmid as individuals , who saved Jews and was executed for them, and as the states of Denmark and Bulgaria, whose people and government sabotaged the German extermination program.

Arendt's definition of evil in Eichmann as an omnipresent danger follows from an existentialist cultural criticism, which is described with the terms abandonment (“worldlessness”), lack of ties, division of labor and bureaucratic anonymity. Nazism realized this previously only latent danger, and Arendt highly values ​​its effect on the people of most countries. The accusation that she exonerated Eichmann, however, is misleading, as she expressly welcomes the death sentence and, despite formal concerns about the jurisdiction of the court, agrees with it. Eichmann was, as evidenced by his actions, determined not to share the world with a certain part of the family of nations, the Jews; his execution was the only meaningful consequence.

Schulze Wessel points out that for Arendt the German murder program became not only real, increasingly in scope, but also more and more radical ideologically, insofar as the people destined for death were less and less murdered “as Jews”, the term “anti-Semitism” in the book no longer appears and the murder of other groups was planned as part of the " destruction of life unworthy of life " ( Nazi murders ). In accordance with the Nuremberg Laws, it was against people who no longer understood themselves as Jews; but Eichmann and the other Nazi murderers wanted, according to Arendt, the killing itself, an "everything is possible". They realized an ideology of objectivity and the ability to plan, which can be summed up in Eichmann's sentence: "If this thing had to be done once, ... then it was better if there was peace and order and everything worked out", whereby he with "thing" meant the extermination of the Jews. Arendt emphasizes that the Nazis' language was aimed at disguising connections from the perpetrators themselves (from others anyway) in order to calm down remnants of conscience that some perpetrators might initially have. This applies here to the word “thing” or generally to the typical camouflage language of the time, e.g. B. " Final Solution " for the mass murder of Jews. According to Arendt, Eichmann had completely internalized this reified language during the trial, twenty years after his activity, and used it constantly in the interrogations before Avner Less and in court.

Arendt himself defined the term “banality” in the German version through the expressions “terrible” and “wickedness”. Her summary of the process reads: “In these last minutes it was as if Eichmann himself was drawing the conclusion of the long lesson on human wickedness that we had attended - the conclusion of the terrible banality of evil, before which the word fails and in which thinking fails. "

Second controversy: the role of the Jewish councils

In the Eichmann book, Arendt expressed criticism of a certain cooperation that Jewish functionaries of all ranks (from the highest representative to the ghetto policeman) had done. The result was fierce criticism, especially in the USA and Israel; a Hebrew edition of the book did not appear until the year 2000. This point led to the fact that many acquaintances, including good ones, turned away from her, including Gershom Scholem and Hans Jonas . Mommsen assumes that she has a certain arrogance, since she does not differentiate between times, places and people at which different types of cooperation have taken place. Biographically, Arendt herself had been very lucky twice in her life (in Berlin and in Gurs ) that she was able to escape the Germans. She could not judge from her own experience about behavior in the ghetto or in the extermination camp.

Arendt didn't want to write a history book. Your criticism is political; She criticizes the fact that German-Jewish institutions in particular had believed in the state for too long, understood the state as a protective authority, and therefore participated in all kinds of regulatory tasks, in particular the listing of people and property.

The partially blanket statements are also explained with Arendt's lifelong engagement with Zionism ; for a large part of the surviving high Jewish functionaries later played a role in the State of Israel, the establishment of which Arendt viewed critically in this national form. The aversion between the functionaries and Arendt was mutual. It is often overlooked that Arendt was personally involved in the immigration to Palestine, so he saw a point in it; During her years in France she had professionally prepared young Jews for the aliyah .

For Arendt, the organized attacks because of her statements, together with an accident that she suffered at the time, meant a psychological burden. However, she gained insights into lobbying in the USA, the influence of organized interest groups, which shaped her later political thinking. Theoretically, it increasingly relied on the individual's thinking in political matters and on spontaneous acts of resistance against injustice. In their own words:

“The lesson of such stories […] is, politically speaking, that under conditions of terror most people will submit, but some will not. Just like the lesson to be learned from the countries around the 'Final Solution' is that it could indeed 'happen' in most countries, but it did not happen everywhere. In human terms, more is not necessary and can reasonably not be asked for so that this planet remains a place where people can live. "

Arendt saw the question of Jewish collaboration as a mentality problem for the Jewish victims, who for too long did not want to face the reality of the coming annihilation in the eye.

Third Controversy: "Crimes Against Humanity"

Arendt would have welcomed it if an international criminal court had ruled that Eichmann's crimes and those of the other Germans were directed against humanity as a whole, the “plurality of existence” of different peoples in general. When she realistically realized that there would be no such court in the foreseeable future, she agreed to the trial in Jerusalem, but above all reflected in the epilogue on how things could have gone differently. Eichmann's extradition to Germany, which was never applied for anyway, was refused in view of the numerous acquittals or minimal sentences for Nazi perpetrators; she realized that the Adenauer government was not interested in discussing the role of Hans Globke and other top Nazis in the FRG.

Arendt, in agreement with her friend Karl Jaspers , found it very important that the acts of the Nazis should be seen as " crimes against humanity " and condemned if possible. The Nazi ideology of unlimited feasibility and the complete control of people by "leaders", with the loss of any individuality, they considered an attack on humanity in general, in the words of the French prosecutor in Nuremberg: "A crime against the rank and status of the People. ”She therefore fought against the belittling of the“ crime against humanity ”, a term that has become generally accepted today (because of the ambiguity of“ humanity ”). She remarked ironically that it sounded as if the only thing the Nazis had lacked in the mass murder was humanity towards the victims.

In conclusion, Arendt evaluates "Eichmann in Jerusalem" as a necessary consequence of the Nuremberg Trials , no more, but also no less: Despite its national limitations, the Jerusalem Process informed the world public, revealed Germany's moral collapse worldwide and, in general, the political thought that Thinking responsibly, encouraged. The often sarcastic, almost always ironic tone of the book suggests that Arendt himself had at times reached the limits of thinking about the Holocaust. It also poses a challenge to translators into languages ​​other than the editions managed by Arendt (English and German).

criticism

Arendt's report as a reporter for The New Yorker magazine on the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem caused intense controversy, mainly in the USA, Israel and Germany. Shortly before the publication of the German edition of Eichmann in Jerusalem in 1964, an anthology was published that documented and continued the controversy that had started. In it z. B. the philosopher and historian Ernst Simon from the finding that Arendt apparently "the entire, extraordinarily extensive material" remained closed in Hebrew and Yiddish during the Nazi era, a "number of their misjudgments and omissions". In addition to the stylistic device of irony, which is inadequate and consistent for the topic, Simon problematizes Arendt's "sociological historiography". In her presentations she uncritically adopts “pre-formed categories” and generalizes based on documented individual cases without having checked “the general validity” of the sources. According to Simon, this approach is quite the opposite of that of a "real historian" and is fed by an "obsessional neurotic (n) complementary fantasy". On the other hand, Simon sees a “post-Zionist resentment” at work in Arendt, which led to her inaccurate accusation that the Zionist propaganda of German Jews during the Nazi era “improperly exploited the boom in anti-Semitism against the assimilants”. Simon regards this as a clearly demonstrable “violation of the method and ethics of scientific objectivity”, which Arendt “has got into debt”. This resentment has also led to emotionally charged accusations against the Jewish councils , which are based on generalizations and no historical evidence, and to serious contradictions in their representations in the case of the former Zionist Arendt .

The American Holocaust researcher Raul Hilberg also formulated fundamental objections in a newspaper interview in 1999 under the title: "Eichmann was not banal." In his uninvited memoirs , Hilberg distanced himself from both Arendt's concept of the banality of evil and from her analysis of the Jewish councils. According to Hilberg, these were "not only tools of the Germans, but also an instrument of the Jewish community". Arendt, who in 1959 judged Hilberg's dissertation (published in 1961 with the title The Destruction of the European Jews ) as an insignificant case study, did not engage with Hilberg directly. Hilberg, on the other hand, assumed that Arendt had plagiarized certain passages from his work, but did not take any legal action.

In his biography of Eichmann, the British historian David Cesarani places the emphasis on de-demonization and refutes previous representations that put Eichmann on a par with Hitler or Stalin . While the young Adolf Eichmann was still inconspicuous from an anti-Semitic perspective, with increasing responsibility he became more and more obsessed with his task, and he continued to develop his organizational talent. Also Hannah Arendt's thesis that Eichmann was a desk perpetrator (but that par excellence) is refuted by Cesarani by showing how Eichmann made a picture of the atrocities on site in order to inspect and perfect his methods of extermination. According to this, he was a fanatical National Socialist who only faked the “technocrats” in the process so that no “racial hatred” (a low, murder-qualifying motive) could be proven.

Schulze Wessel comes to the conclusion that the “banality of evil” is not a trivialization of Nazi acts, but on the contrary a radicalization of anti-Semitic ideology; Eichmann presented himself in Jerusalem only as a willless instrument of a “will of a leader”, as a man without qualities. According to Avner Werner Less , who interrogated Eichmann for 275 hours, Hannah Arendt misunderstood that Eichmann's statements were a web of lies. Eichmann's defense strategy consisted in convincing the judges of the unimportance and insignificance of his own person.

According to Moishe Postone , her theory misses the special meaning of the annihilation of the Jews and wrongly interprets the Holocaust as the annihilation of the "superfluous", although the Nazi ideology assumes the Jews as "the evil" and "tangible abstract" that should be destroyed .

expenditure

  • Eichmann in Jerusalem. A report on the banality of evil (from American English by Brigitte Granzow, revised version of the first English edition by the author, new “preface”).
    • Since 1986 with an "introductory essay" by Hans Mommsen. Extended paperback edition (= Piper Taschenbuch , Volume 4822; first edition: August 1986, Volume 308). 15th edition, Piper, Munich / Zurich 2006, ISBN 978-3-492-24822-8 . (This edition is based on the page count in this article.)
    • Extended reprint: Hannah Arendt: Eichmann in Jerusalem. A report on the banality of evil (= Piper Taschenbuch , Volume 6478). With an introductory essay and an afterword to the current edition by Hans Mommsen , Piper, Munich / Zurich 2011, ISBN 978-3-492-26478-5 .
    • Excerpt: Adolf Eichmann. From the banality of evil. In: Merkur , No. 186, August 1963, ISSN  0026-0096 ; again in: The Message of Mercury. An anthology from fifty years of the magazine [ed. by Karl Heinz Bohrer and Kurt Scheel], Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 1997, ISBN 3-608-91825-6 , pp. 152-169.
  • Eichmann in Jerusalem. A Report on the Banality of Evil (first published in 1963; the edition since 1965 with the German “preface” as an afterword ( postscript ) in the revised and enlarged edition ). Penguin Books, New York 2006, ISBN 978-0-14-303988-4 ( online ).
    • Eichmann and the Holocaust (Series: Penguin Great Ideas ). Penguin, New York 2005, ISBN 978-0-14-102400-4 . (Contains excerpts on 129 pages.)

literature

On Eichmann's kidnapping and the trial, see the literature in the article Eichmann trial

Primary literature
  • A Reporter at Large: Eichmann in Jerusalem , in: The New Yorker
    • February 16, 1963, pp. 40-113.
    • February 23, 1963, pp. 40-111.
    • March 2, 1963, pp. 40-91.
    • March 9, 1963, pp. 48-131.
    • March 16, 1963, pp. 48-134.
  • Letters to Karl Jaspers (excerpts): in: Ursula Ludz (ed.): Hannah Arendt. I want to understand. Self-assessment of life and work . Piper, Munich 1996, new edition 2005, ISBN 3-492-24591-9 .
  • Hannah Arendt , Joachim Fest . Eichmann was outrageously stupid. Conversations and letters. Eds. Ursula Ludz & Thomas Wild. Piper, Munich 2011 ISBN 3-492-05442-0 .
    • partly also on: Hannah Arendt (with party) & Karl Jaspers (with Francois Bondy ): Eichmann. From the banality of evil. Series: Original sound science. Audio CD 60 min., Quartino 2010, ISBN 3-86750-072-X .
    • Transcript of the conversation in Baden-Baden 1964 on hannaharendt.net under website - accessed on September 11, 2013.
Secondary literature
  • Kai Ambos , Luis Pereira Coutinho, Maria Fernanda Palma, Paulo des Sousa Mendes: "Eichmann in Jerusalem." Fifty years after. An interdisciplinary approach Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2012 ISBN 3-428-13893-7 .
  • Gulie Neʾeman Arad (eds.): Hannah Arendt and Eichmann in Jerusalem . History & memory; 8.2. Bloomington, Ind .: Indiana Univ. Press, 1996
  • Steven E. Aschheim (ed.): Hannah Arendt in Jerusalem. University of California Press, Berkeley 2001 ISBN 0-520-22057-9 ; ISBN 0-520-22056-0 .
  • Bethánia Assy: Eichmann in Jerusalem , in: Wolfgang Heuer , Bernd Heiter, Stefanie Rosenmüller (eds.): Arendt-Handbuch. Life, work, effect. JB Metzler, Stuttgart Weimar 2011, ISBN 978-3-476-02255-4 , pp. 92-98.
  • Richard J. Bernstein: Did Hannah Arendt Change Her Mind? From Radical Evil to the Banality of Evil In: Hannah Arendt. Twenty Years Later MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. & London 1996, pp. 127-146.
  • Hans Blumenberg : Eichmann - the "negative hero" of the state , in: NZZ , March 1, 2014, p. 28f. [from the Marbach estate]
  • Claudia Bozzaro: Hannah Arendt and the Banality of Evil Vorw. Lore Hühn. FWPF (Association for the Promotion of Scientific Publications by Women) Freiburg 2007, ISBN 978-3-939348-09-2 .
  • David Cesarani : Adolf Eichmann. Bureaucrat and mass murderer . Propylaea, Munich 2004.
    • dsb .: Becoming Eichmann. Rethinking the Life, Crimes and Trials of a Desk Murderer. Da Capo, Cambridge MA 2006
  • Dan Diner : Hannah Arendt Reconsidered. On the Banal and the Evil in Her Holocaust Narrative In: Zs. New German Critique No. 71, Spring / Summer 1997, pp. 177-190.
  • Amos Elon : Foreword to the edition of Eichmann in Jerusalem. Penguin Classics series, London 2011. ISBN 0-14-303988-1 .
  • Wolfgang Heuer : Hannah Arendt. Rowohlt, Reinbek 1987 a. ö., pp. 56-63, pp. 108-114.
  • Hans Egon Holthusen : Hannah Arendt, Eichmann und die Kritiker, in Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte , 13, 1965, pp. 174–190. (also online: [1] ; PDF; 737 kB)
  • Friedrich Krummacher (ed.): The controversy Hannah Arendt, Eichmann and the Jews , Nymphenburger Verlagshandlung Munich, 1964
  • Walter Laqueur : Hannah Arendt in Jerusalem. The Controversy Revisited In: Lyman H. Legters (Ed.): Western Society after the Holocaust Westview Press, Boulder (Colorado) 1983, ISBN 0-86531-985-5 , pp. 107-120.
  • Regine Lamboy: The real "Banality of evil." An examination of Hannah Arendt's reflections on thinking. LAP Lambert Academic Publ., Saarbrücken 2010 ISBN 3-8383-3967-3 . (in English)
  • Sabina Lietzmann : Were the victims accomplices of the executioners? in: FAZ , November 16, 1963
  • Ursula Ludz: Just a report? Hannah Arendt and her Eichmann book , in: Werner Renz (Hrsg.): Interests around Eichmann. Israeli justice, German law enforcement and old comradeships . Campus, Frankfurt a. M. 2012, ISBN 978-3-593-39750-4 , pp. 258-288.
  • Golo Mann : The twisted Eichmann , in: Die Zeit , January 26, 1964, No. 4 online
  • Ahlrich Meyer : The enemy and the need for myth , in: NZZ , March 1, 2014, p. 29.
  • Ashraf Noor: The Historian and the Judge: Arendt, Ricœur and the Relationship between Narrativity and Historiography in the Film “A Specialist”, in: Susanne Düwell Matthias Schmidt (ed.), Past Politics and Narratives of the Shoah. Series: Studies on Judaism and Christianity. Schöningh, Paderborn 2002, pp. 209-227.
  • Ingeborg Nordmann: Just an outrageous question? Hannah Arendt's Banality of Evil in the Current Discussion, in Thursday issues. About politics, culture, society, 1. Old Synagogue (Essen) , 2. revised. Edition ISBN 3-924384-02-9 , pp. 35-48.
  • Jacob Robinson : "And the crooked shall be made straight." The Eichmann trial, the jewish catastrophe, and Hannah Arendt's narrative. Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia 1965; Macmillan, NY 1965
  • Julia Schulze Wessel: Ideology of Objectivity. Hannah Arendt's political theory of anti-Semitism. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt 2006 (series: TB Wissenschaft 1796), ISBN 3-518-29396-6 ; Review by Yvonne Al-Taie.
  • Heinrich Senfft : Hannah Arendt's “Eichmann in Jerusalem” in the light of the Goldhagen debate . Lang, Bern 1997.
  • Barry Sharpe: Modesty and arrogance in judgment. Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem . Westport CT 1999, ISBN 0-275-96403-5 .
  • Gary Smith (Ed.): Hannah Arendt revisited: "Eichmann in Jerusalem" and the consequences. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt 2000, ISBN 3-518-12135-9 .
  • Alexandra Tacke: desk clerk and global company boss. Section: “Un Spécialist” (1999), in: Claudia Bruns, Asal Dardan, Anette Dietrich, ed . : “Which of the stones you lift.” Cinematic memory of the Holocaust. Medien / Kultur series, 3rd Bertz + Fischer Verlag, Berlin 2012 ISBN 978-3-86505-397-8 , pp. 123–127.
  • Annette Vowinckel : Arendt . Reclam, Leipzig 2006, ISBN 978-3-379-20303-6 , pp. 55-66.
  • Christian Volk: Judging in dark times. A new reading of H. Arendt's “Banality of Evil”. Berlin 2005, ISBN 3-936872-54-6 .
  • Thomas Wild: Hannah Arendt . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt 2006, ISBN 978-3-518-18217-8 , pp. 97-103.
  • Elhanan Yakira: Post-Holocaust post-Zionism: three essays on denial, forgetting, and the delegitimation of Israel . Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010, pp. 220-302.
  • Elisabeth Young-Bruehl : Hannah Arendt. Life, work and time. From the American. by Hans Günter Holl. Fischer, Frankfurt 2004, ISBN 3-596-16010-3 , pp. 451-518.
  • Keyword Arendt controversy , in: Enzyklopädie des Holocaust , Vol. 1, Piper, Munich 1995 ISBN 3-492-22700-7 , pp. 74f.

Sound and picture

See also

Web links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ a b c Ahlrich Meyer : "The whole truth". Hannah Arendt and her critics - a dispute over the number of victims and ethics of responsibility , in: NZZ , December 5, 2015, pp. 25f.
  2. ↑ p. 231.
  3. ^ Translation of the corresponding passage on p. 112 of the English edition, comparable to the German edition, p. 205.
  4. ↑ by Arendt misspelled: "Schmidt", the error runs through all editions and the secondary literature.
  5. ^ Hannah Arendt: Eichmann in Jerusalem , p. 296.
  6. ^ Hannah Arendt: Eichmann in Jerusalem , p. 371.
  7. ↑ Scholem Arendt described her view of “Jewish behavior under extreme circumstances” as “quaternio terminorum” (“crossing of concepts”, a special form of fallacy); see. The zeitgeist. Semi-monthly supplement of the structure , No. 208, New York, Dec. 20, 1963; p. 17/18.
  8. ↑ p. 347.
  9. ↑ Ernst Simon: Hannah Arendt - An Analysis , in: Friedrich Krummacher (ed.): The controversy Hannah Arendt, Eichmann und die Juden , Nymphenburger Verlagshandlung München, 1964, p. 41.
  10. ↑ Ernst Simon: Hannah Arendt , p. 44.
  11. ↑ Ernst Simon: Hannah Arendt , p. 48.
  12. ↑ Ernst Simon: Hannah Arendt , p. 61.
  13. ↑ Ernst Simon: Hannah Arendt , p. 69.
  14. ↑ online , in Die Welt , August 28, 1999.
  15. ↑ Raul Hilberg: Unsolicited memory. The path of a Holocaust researcher. S. Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt a. M., 1994, p. 130.
  16. ↑ Ursula Ludz: In the Shoals of All Too Human , in "HannahArendt.net, Journal for Political Thinking," No. 1/2, Nov. 2011 ISSN  1869-5787 . There are several essays on “Eichmann in Jerusalem” in the booklet, e. T. in engl. Language, under different aspects. Only online. (As of January 2013).
  17. ↑ David Cesarani : Becoming Eichmann: Rethinking the Life, Crimes and Trial of a 'Desk Murderer' Da Capo Press, Cambridge MA, 2006, p. 197, 347. German edition: Adolf Eichmann. Bureaucrat and mass murderer Propylaea, Berlin 2004, p. 360ff. & Pp. 483-495 and ö.
  18. ↑ Avner Werner Less: “Lie! Everything is a lie ”- records of the Eichmann interrogator. Reconstructed by Bettina Stangneth. Zurich, Hamburg 2012, ISBN 978-3-7160-2689-2 , pp. 220–222.
  19. ↑ Moishe Postone: The unresolved antinomy of universality and the particular. In: Gary Smith (Ed.): Hannah Arendt revisited: "Eichmann in Jerusalem" and the consequences. Frankfurt am Main 2000, pp. 264-290.
  20. ↑ Jaspers with Bondy: before the trial begins
  21. ↑ Table of contents on the DNB server . Review by Ruth Bettina Birn in Zs. "Insight 09th Bulletin of the Fritz Bauer Institute", March 2013, pp. 73f.
  22. ↑ Only the introduction by Aschheim, pp. 1-18, and three other essays by Mommsen, Leora Bilsky and Richard I. Cohen (pp. 224-280) are on this topic.
  23. ↑ Complete representation of the "evil" in Arendt, including late work
  24. ↑ Elon goes into the controversies about the book in detail, especially on the "banality of evil", also taking into account the opponents at the time. In English. First in World Policy Journal, Vol. 23, H. 4 (Winter), Ed. WP Institute, Sage, London 2006 ISSN  0740-2775 pp. 93-102.
  25. ↑ Jacob Robinson was an employee of the Jerusalem prosecution, he wants to refute Arendt in every respect. See Leon Poliakov: And the Crooked Shall Be Made Straight, by Jacob Robinson; Justice in Jerusalem, by Gideon Hausner , review, in: Commentary , 1/1967
  26. ↑ To the film of the same name by Eyal Sivan and Ronny Brauman. Detailed Presentation of the origin of the film material, the adoption of Arendt's view of Eichmann, the repeated discussions also about the film in Israel; Literature, Fig.
  27. ↑ see in detail above Lit .: Alexandra Tacke, 2012; and Ashraf Noor, 2002
  28. ↑ Enter "eichmann jerusalem" in the search, 4 pages with 71 mentions of the Hannah Arendt Papers appear. A collection of A's documents. about the process, the police interrogation protocols and about her book (reviews, polemics etc.) in the Library of Congress. Partly difficult to read because of the original scan. Some material is only listed and not readable online. For scientific purposes, copies can be viewed in full in the HA archive in Oldenburg
  29. ↑ in various languages, mostly German and English. therein a note from the editors to unpublished notes by Arendt in connection with the Eichmann controversy, which are kept under the "Hannah Arendt Papers" in the Library of Congress . Essays by Elisabeth Young-Bruehl , Ursula Ludz, Wolfgang Heuer , Susanne Lüdemann, Marie Luise Knott (Review of Thomas Wild: After the breach of history. German writers around Hannah Arendt ); also Carl Schmitt on "Eichmann in Jerusalem"