This is an absurd description of what I can only presume is an absurd book. Firstly, Arendt can hardly be blamed for what has been made of her work, for what phrases have made their way into common parlance, and certainly not for the irritation they seem to cause the author. More importantly, a reading of Origins (not merely the second chapter) reveals a depth of thought and a level of perception that will impress any curious reader. A careful reading will leave no doubt as to the point Arendt is trying to make. The work lays bare the full horror of totalitarianism, of the appeal of fantastical totalitarian ideologies that could seemingly explain everything to the satisfaction of "ordinary/banal" people. Reading this book as an indictment of the Jewish people entirely misses the point. The second chapter merely shows why Nazi ideology appealed to simple minds. I doubt Arendt thought it worthwhile to attack the views of Nazi historians. That theirs was a fantastical, insane perspective is obvious. Naturally they were her sources - who better to give evidence in a trial of totalitarianism. This review confuses the incidental with the essential. Re. Heidegger, this hardly passes muster in a serious debate. Should we all be subject to criticism on the grounds of the political ideas of past loves? I suppose this 'theory' that Arendt was antisemitic is comforting in that it seems to explain everything she ever wrote. Arendt knew well that this was the comfort given by totalitarian ideologies. Its vague plausibility is enough to convince willing dupes. This was the point of the chapter on recent Jewish history. To miss this suggests a banality of thought.