alt Hacker NewsWell,
I gotta mention that Arendt relationship with actual NAZI ideologue Martin Heidegger might have somewhat colored her analysis of evil. I mean, she had a reason to dismiss the importance of ideas, propaganda and prominent intellectuals in creating "evil" regimes when she had a connection to such things (just as she and others covered up how much of an overt NAZI and antisemite Heidegger was, even Hitler took power).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt#Marburg_(1924%E2...
And naturally this is a controversial take since Arendt and Heidegger have defenders to the present day.
Replies
Heidegger became a Nazi -- literally, he joined the party -- but he was not a "Nazi ideologue" for any reasonable definition of "ideologue".
And the idea that Hannah Arendt needs "defenders" because she had an affair with Heidegger is just bizarre.
Not 'defending' Arendt, as I don't know enough about her or Heidegger to do so. But doesn't her relationship with Heidegger underscore her point? At the time it would have seemed like two adults indulging everyday human impulses.
When you're looking to get laid you don't ask a lot of questions about politics. Same goes when you're looking for a job. Soon enough, you -- or your offspring -- are part of the machine. And that's the banality of evil.
I think you are painting Heidegger in an undeservedly bad light (not all Nazis were the same. There were shades of grey), and even if you consider Heidegger's thoughts as worthless by contamination (which would be a tragedy), you are adding a contact guilt to one of the most influential philosophers for having known him 10 years before he turned brown.
In which ways do you think it might have colored her analysis? Was she maybe "too soft" for current standards?