Like in all things, it's important not to end up on the maximalist end of the spectrum. Obviously an individual is not only the result of a certain social conditioning nor only an isolated madman, and that's not Arendt theory; but it's undisputable how even the leaders brought to extreme consequences certain societal instincts that were present. When you compare the qualities of Italian fascist leaders with German ones, for example, you can see the differences: while Italians were focused on heroism and individual excellence (as expoused by D'Annunzio, for example), Germans valued more order in all systems - which is why the holocaust was as effective as it was. That's because the societal views that shaped them were different.
That does not mean that society carries all responsibility for the actions of this or that person, of course, that's never the case. What the banality of evil tells us is that society contains the conceptual germs for behaviour that can turn atrocious, when brought to extreme lengths by this or that individual.
That does not mean that society carries all responsibility for the actions of this or that person, of course, that's never the case. What the banality of evil tells us is that society contains the conceptual germs for behaviour that can turn atrocious, when brought to extreme lengths by this or that individual.