Eichmann, Bureaucracy and the Holocaust

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

Book: Eichmann, Bureaucracy and the Holocaust by Jonathan Stonehouse Read Free Book Online
Authors: Jonathan Stonehouse
whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty" (1986, p.339). Similarly, in light of Eichmann's authoritarian upbringing and obvious need for leadership, some might find Fromm's conceptualisation of the "authoritarian personality" more satisfying and assume that his behaviour and loyalty can be better explained in psychological terms (Kellner, 1989). However, if we assume that Eichmann's behaviour was the product of a neurosis combined with a limited intellect then we must also assume that this malaise had attained pandemic status in the Third Reich, given that following one's own personal convictions was the exception that proved the general rule of unconditional obedience. Although this serves to disprove the belief that the perpetrators were 'abnormal', such determinism fails to explain how and why fundamentally 'normal' people contributed to a policy of genocide. Nor can a purely psychological perspective explain why so many of the perpetrators seemed unable to discern the immorality of their actions, this being a prerequisite for any form of disobedience.
     
    While not discounting the possible influence of psychological factors, predicating Eichmann's actions on this basis alone does not stand up to serious examination. Notwithstanding his ignorance of NSDAP policy and chance entrance into the S.S., Eichmann always maintained that he knew exactly what it was that he was joining (in Arendt, 1999, p.43). Moreover, whether intelligent or not, Eichmann clearly possessed a certain amount of insight into the moral dilemma he faced: his desire to cover himself with orders demonstrates his awareness that this provided a (ultimately indefensible) defence of sorts. In fact, Eichmann's efforts in this respect validate a key aspect of Weber's theory, inasmuch as he clearly believed that responsibility for actions undertaken under orders lay with the issuing authority rather than the enacting officer. With these points in mind, the litmus test for any explanatory framework is to discover why so many failed to acknowledge their individual culpability, why even those who were aware of the centrality of their role managed to deflect responsibility for their actions, and to understand how they could return home as husbands and wives and fathers and mothers, having directly or indirectly contributed to the murder of entire families.
     
    The point then is to understand how it was that thousands became estranged from normal conceptions of right and wrong. In Eichmann's case it seems apparent that his moral sensibilities as a private individual remained intact and that he was fully capable of feeling guilt, shame and remorse. In his public role as Obersturmbannführer Eichmann, however, right and wrong were determined not by conventional Judeo-Christian norms but by his performance as measured against the exacting standards of his profession and superior officers. Morality for this public manifestation of Eichmann became synonymous with compliance, dedication, precision, excellence and absolute impartiality. North on Eichmann's moral compass was indicated by the flush of pride experienced on recognition of a job well done and furtherance of his reputation as "The Master"; South by feelings of fear, humiliation and anger at the thought of incurring a black mark on his record and the disapprobation of his superiors. These moral magnetic poles are by-products of the bureaucratic form and the strategies it employs to harness and redirect standards, concerns, beliefs and activities in ways that further the objectives of a specific department or organisation.
     
    This examination of Adolf Eichmann thus refutes the claim that he should be regarded as either evil or abnormal. By all accounts, his actions and behaviour demonstrate a high degree of correlation with those regarded as 'normal' for any bureaucrat. That he acted as he did despite the fact that his actions contributed to murder seems symptomatic

Similar Books

Lucky In Love

Deborah Coonts

Forever His Bride

LISA CHILDS

Timeline

Michael Crichton

An Affair to Remember

Virginia Budd

Rake's Progress

MC Beaton

Nonplussed!

Julian Havil