Eichmann, Bureaucracy and the Holocaust by Jonathan Stonehouse Read Free Book Online Page A

French Jews seeking emigration to the unoccupied territories, Eichmann replies using what amounts to an identical form letter, stating that "in view of the forthcoming Final Solution of the problem of European Jewry one has to prevent the emigration of this Jewess into the unoccupied zone of France" (in Gilbert, 1987, p.222 & pp.237-8).
     
    * Eichmann in fact denied ever having made such decisions, claiming that only his superior had the authority to rule on individual cases, whereas he merely drafted the letters derived from such rulings. In this instance, we shall err on the side of the prosecution, which maintained that Eichmann did indeed have such authority.
     
    ** Theresienstadt was created by Himmler as a 'show-camp' in which to hold 'sensitive' cases.
     
    Again, there is a striking correlation with Weber's schema and the principle of sine ira et studio . The constant references to "general measures", protestations over "special treatment" and unwillingness to make exceptions highlights the problematic and potentially irrational nature of the bureaucratic modus operandi : its inability to adapt to specific, individual cases (Bendix, 1977, p.428). In these instances, the 'rational' action, the morally correct decision, is corrupted and turned on its head, becoming an irrational affront to the bureaucrat's ethical structure. And yet this topsy-turvy approach to morality is also a form of morality itself, a 'normal' pattern of responses and concerns made perverse only by the aims of the Nazi regime.
     
    With this in mind, a fitting finale to this study concerns an incident from Eichmann's time in Vienna. While perfecting his fast-track 'emigration' system it seems that Eichmann became annoyed by the irritating subjectivity (i.e. lack of compliance) of Josef Löwenherz, a Jewish Representative he was 'negotiating' with. At some point he appears to have lost control and slapped Löwenherz's face. Subsequently appalled by his actions, a contrite Eichmann later gathered together his staff and offered a public apology to Löwenherz (Arendt, 1994, pp.46-7). However, Arendt (ibid.) informs us that this incident "kept bothering him", it being inconsistent with his distaste for violence and his refusal to tolerate violence on the part of his subordinates. This demonstrates that on some level at least his moral integrity remained intact and his own personal actions were of great concern. In this limited private sense, it also demonstrates that Eichmann knew the difference between right and wrong. In a wider public sense, however, Eichmann's bureaucratic tunnel vision - the product of institutional moral blinkers - prevented him from passing sentence on his own moral responsibility right to the very end. In his own words:
     
"As for guilt in the ethical sense, any admission of one's own guilt to one's innermost self, that is something entirely different. That lies in areas totally inaccessible to the rules and regulations of a legal order. Here you argue with yourself, and you are your own judge. I have done it in my own case, and I am still doing it" (trial session 88-2).
     
    For our man of "average character" this brief moment of personal anger remained more significant than his impersonal contribution to the death of millions. Understanding why is perhaps the key to understanding the Holocaust.
     

Part Three:
Eichmann
in
Perspective
 
"Regrets do not do any good, regretting things is pointless, regrets are for little children. What is more important is to try and find ways and means of making such events impossible in the future."

-- Adolf Eichmann
 

I n re-examining Adolf Eichmann there is always the temptation to focus on his intellectual and psychological failings at the expense of the evidence presented here. For example, Arendt might well have had Eichmann in mind when she wrote that totalitarian regimes tend to replace "all first-rate talents, regardless of their sympathies, with those crack-pots and fools