Hannah Arendt’s Eichmann in Jerusalem triggered a tempest of controversy when it appeared in 1963 and plagued her until her death in 1969. The subtitle of this work set critics’ thoughts on fire: A Report on the Banality of Evil. The implications of these words suggest the “normalization of evil,” treating it as a phenomenon whose routine occurrence numbed perpetrators’ minds, making them incognizant of the horrors they committed. In one of Arendt’s most bracing comments: “The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal.” And Eichmann’s “inability to speak was closely connected with an inability to think, namely, to think from the standpoint of somebody else.” Thus, one could argue that his culpability diminished in proportion to his intellectual and moral infirmities.
Malicious nonsense, her appalled critics proclaimed: Eichmann had played her, he knew exactly what he was doing and was proud of it, declared philosopher Bettina Stangneth, who is cited by Douglas Murray in his recent essay on Arendt’s now widely used phrase. Murray states that shrugging off evil as “banal” or “mundane” is catastrophically perverse; we must be able to identify “the profundity of evil.” Elizabeth Minnich, Arendt’s last student, was more on the mark in her book, The Evil of Banality: On The Life and Death Importance of Thinking. Further, Amos Elon in the introduction to Arendt’s work stated that evil can be committed by “morons and imbeciles as well.”
Which of course brings us to Kamala Harris. Her critics stress inconsistencies in her speeches, her outpourings of gibberish (or word salads, if you prefer) and her failure to state policy stances. One reason she avoids clarifying her views is to deflect her connection with Biden’s presidency, which is understandable. Another reason is simply that she can’t. Harris’ sound bite answers to questions skitter through the catacombs of her mind like tumbleweeds, some of which are easier to snag than others. Thus, “Orange Man Bad” can be plucked with little effort, along with variations of “Abortion über alles.” My favorite is, she was raised in a middle-class family, which brings to mind Bill Cosby’s quip during the 1960s that he started out as a child; while both comments are vacuous and amusing, one is not intentionally funny. Charles C. W. Cooke nails it: “Harris isn’t ‘vague’ or ‘careful’ or disinclined to ‘delineate her stance.’ She’s wildly, catastrophically, incontestably out of her depth. She’s not ‘light’; she’s dull. She’s not a ‘dodger’; she’s a fool. She’s not ‘joyful’; she’s imbecilic.”
All of which makes her a frightfully dangerous person, because her thought fragments tend toward evil and are amplified by her advisers. This is where things get worse, because those around her likely are more intelligent but also reek of Eichmannism that bursts with up-to-date, radical left slogans. Consider Camilla Thorndike, for instance, who regards fossil fuel industry a “death cult” and has accused its workers of committing “'Ecoterrorism,' Weaponizing 'White Supremacy' and 'Toxic Patriarchy.'” Question: how many mature grown-ups talk like this or believe that stuff? Answer: probably none. Next question: how many people are there like her? Answer: countless, and they permeate decision making institutions in and out of government.
Our last question is, how should we regard such people? Another example is worth citing here, this one provided by Heather Mac Donald, who in 2018 commented on Sarah Jeong, a new hire on the New York Times editorial board. Tweet detectives unearthed a treasure trove of animosities, mostly directed toward white people: “white men are [bullsh**],” “#cancelwhitepeople,” “National/ Pretty god**m white/ Radio,” she proclaimed. Mac Donald also stated that Jeong is committed “to the claim that we live in a rape culture,” and has a “sneering contempt for objectivity and truth-seeking.” Jeong fueled her arrogance with fashionable hatreds and convenient resentments in her march to the top. Mac Donald’s depiction of her ices the case: Jeong is “a Boring Typical Product of the American Academy.” This enables us further to grasp Harris and her ilk: smart or stupid, they are boring typical products of the American academy and are banal to their bones.
Which brings us to the evil of banality. Consider left wing policy goals, short- and long term: unlimited illegal immigration, a nationalized two-tier judicial system, end of freedom of speech, housing illegals in citizens’ homes, regulating troubling businesses to extinction, abortion on demand, transgender surgeries on children without parental consent, regulating consumer products deemed dangerous by authorities, arresting and/or bankrupting opposition to bureaucratic edicts, nationalizing DEI in every walk of life, likely accompanied by unlimited surveillance of American citizens. This is a short list; see, for example, Roger Kimball’s recent essay for more details. For a review that is even more stunning, consult Park MacDougald’s aptly titled, “The Democrats’ Insanity Defense.” Try not to lose your sanity when you delve into such accounts.
In short, the Democratic party is saturated with Harriss’, Thorndikes, and Jeongs, who have succumbed to the evil of banality that spurns critical thinking and makes them act and sound alike, which is boring, tedious, and threatening to Western civilization. The fact that leftists’ views are crazily different from those of normal citizens bothers them not one bit; banal elites are notoriously unreflective and tend to blame others for their failures, accusing citizens of being too racist, sexist, or stupid to think like them and vote accordingly. The fact that now and then Republicans win elections won’t change entrenched views of an entrenched class.
But for Republicans, at least, it’s a start.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member