There is a striking structural homology between the operating mechanism of neoliberalism and Hannah Arendt's concept of the "banality of evil."
Neoliberalism is not merely an economic theory — it is a machine that systematically institutionalizes "non-thinking," professionalizes "numbness," and normalizes "indifference." It transforms people into "parameters," outsources moral judgment to "market laws," and thereby achieves collective immunity from responsibility.
1. Non-thinking: Refusal to Put Oneself in Another's Shoes
Eichmann was not a demon — he simply "did not think." He could not empathize with victims. He could only understand "superior orders," "administrative procedures," and "quota completion rates."
2. Language of Murder: Dehumanizing Language
The Nazis used "final solution," "resettlement," and "special treatment" to package genocide. This language shielded executors from confronting the moral reality of "I am killing."
3. Dilution of Responsibility: No One Needs to Answer for Results
Eichmann said: "I was just following orders." Every level is a "cog," every level feels "responsibility is not mine."
The Nazis had the "Final Solution." Neoliberalism has its own dehumanizing language:
- Not "cutting medical subsidies kills the elderly" — but "controlling the fiscal deficit."
- Not "privatizing water makes it unaffordable for the poor" — but "improving utility efficiency."
- Not "land speculation displaces farmers" — but "unlocking land value."
- Not "abolishing unions leads to worker deaths" — but "increasing labor market flexibility."
This language is itself a numbing agent. When you replace "human life" with "fiscal discipline," you successfully anesthetize yourself morally. You don't need to feel guilt — you're just "optimizing the system."
When an IMF economist drafts a "structural adjustment program," he faces "unemployment rates," "inflation rates," "debt ratios" — clean, operational numbers. He is trained as a "problem-solver," but never trained as a "questioner of the problem itself."
He doesn't need to think: How many children will suffer malnutrition from this "structural adjustment"? How many families will lose their homes from this "fiscal discipline"? He just needs to "professionally" complete the model — and clock out on time.
Higher education plays a crucial role here. Economics departments teach students "how to calculate" — but never "whether it should be calculated." They define "empathy" as "noise that interferes with judgment," and package "numbness" as "professional objectivity."
In the IMF structural adjustment chain:
- The IMF official says: "I'm just enforcing loan conditions."
- The think-tank scholar says: "I'm just providing policy advice."
- The finance minister says: "I'm just following fiscal rules."
- The banker says: "I'm just maximizing shareholder value."
Every level feels like a "cog." Every level feels "responsibility is not mine." When millions fall into poverty due to "structural adjustment," no one feels responsible — because "no one" made the decision. All decisions were just the "result of market laws."
Eichmann believed he was a "good citizen" — he obeyed the law, followed orders, completed his tasks on time.
Friedman believed he was a "good person" — he genuinely believed the free market could save humanity. When he implemented "shock therapy" under Pinochet's military dictatorship in Chile, he knew full well it would cause mass unemployment, hunger, and slum expansion. But he said: "The price was painful, but for long-term freedom, it is worth it."
Using "distant, abstract ideals" (the prosperity of all humanity) to justify "immediate, concrete suffering" (the hunger and death of real people) — this is the psychological mechanism of the banality of evil.
The traditional tyrant holds a knife — you recognize him as evil at once.
But the neoliberal technocrat holds an "econometric model" and wears a mask of "professional neutrality." They say: "We don't take sides — we only believe in data."
This is the banality of evil's most perfect disguise — packaging "class exploitation" as "natural law," disguising "moral choices" as "technical judgments."
When you make victims believe that "poverty is personal failure, not systemic outcome," you not only absolve the system of responsibility — you also make the suffering blame themselves.
Neoliberalism does not need evil people to execute it. It only needs "banal" people — banal enough to never ask: "If this theory were applied to me, could I bear it?"; banal enough to never think: "If my child slept in a metal cage, would I still think market efficiency is that important?"
It institutionalizes "non-thinking" as "professionalism," standardizes "numbness" as "objectivity," and dilutes "responsibility" until no one needs to answer for the results.
Neoliberalism is the economic incarnation of the banality of evil. The only way to fight it is what Arendt called "thinking" — putting oneself in another's shoes, refusing to treat people as parameters, refusing to outsource moral choices to market laws.