The Holocaust has always been etched in my mind. However, the atrocity wasn't clear at the beginning until I gained a deeper understanding of the Holocaust through watching "Schindler's List," "Life is Beautiful," and "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" as well as reading a memoir by a Holocaust survivor titled "I Promise I Would Tell,".

In which, I came to realize that it was not merely an act of violence. Hitler's Final Solution was an extreme evil devoid of humanity, marked by ruthless cruelty. However, the majority of those who facilitated this tragedy - the Nazi soldiers, and the executioners who gunned down Jewish people in rows - were characterized by "the banality of evil" (Banality of Evit). The concept of the "banality of evil" was first introduced by Hannah Arendt, one of the most significant political theorists, intellectuals, and a German-American Jewish philosopher of the 20th century, in her book "Eichmann in Jerusalem." This book sparked intense discussions across society upon its publication, with some condemning and denying her ideas and even morally criticizing Arendt for not vilifying the perpetrators or showing sufficient reverence for the victims.

Evil thoughts and actions could originate from a lack of critical thinking. For example, those who blindly follow something without discerning good from evil. Can we categorize them as the epitome of wickedness? Perhaps not; they only know how to execute orders without questioning the morality of their actions. To them, killing Jewish people was merely an order, devoid of hatred towards the Jewish nation or any concern for personal gain. Therefore, they never reflected on their actions or perceived the massacre as wrong.

In the modern society nowadays, how can individuals make choices when encountering situations of moral collapse? Beyond the Holocaust as a singular event, there are numerous aspects worth pondering. Arendt pointed out that the "banality of evil" can only be overcome through critical thinking. Does this mean that the power of thought can surpass authority and action? The banality of evil exists within everyone and can even arise from human instincts. Does that imply it deserves forgiveness?

Arendt forgave them, labeling them as "self-hating Jews." History and crimes should not be forgiven, but attributing the blame for the greatest Jewish persecution to a single person is another form of evil mixed with revenge and political motives including the lack of critical thinking. By looking at the movie poster of "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas", we can see the towering iron fence, a well-dressed boy and a boy in striped pajamas, one outside the fence and the other inside. One detail caught my attention - the grass outside the fence was lush green, while inside, it had withered to a lifeless yellow. It reflects the need for a critical thinking too.

Apart from that, nine-year-old Bruno knew nothing about the Holocaust. His father, a Nazi officer, was assigned to Auschwitz for the final massacre. When Bruno felt lonely bidding farewell to his friends in Berlin, he encountered Shmuel, a Jewish boy from the concentration camp, and they chatted and played across the fence. Despite Bruno and his sister being raised with hatred towards Jewish people, Shmuel remained Bruno's best friend. One day, when Shmuel's father disappeared, Bruno decided to secretly enter the camp and help his friend find his father, which set the stage for tragedy. Unlike other films or books depicting the Holocaust, "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" unfolds through the perspective of an innocent young boy. In his eyes, Shmuel and others lived in striped pajamas on a large farm, playing games. Nevertheless, he showed occasional hesitation, with his mother's unusual behavior raising suspicions about his father's work. It is this innocence and doubt that lead to the tragic ending. The movie does not depict gruesome scenes or violence; instead, it focuses on the pure friendship between the two young boys and portrays the life of Bruno's family. Nonetheless, the emotional impact it delivers surpasses other similar works because it touches on the emotions destroyed by war.

I find myself questioning who should bear responsibility for this tragedy. The answer is nobody but everybody. No individual should be deemed the criminal of history, but each one should be condemned, whether for their violent actions or indifferent attitudes, as they all contributed to the massacre. As a result, I feel perplexed about why hatred and discrimination exist. Why do massacres and genocides recur throughout history? Why are people so indifferent to one another? Why can't humanity live in harmony and love? If another Holocaust were to happen, what could I, a 15-year-old unarmed high school student, do? Perhaps nothing; I may not even have the right to know the truth. I feel powerless and hopeless, unable to see hope.

"Even if hope is not visible, it doesn't mean hope doesn't exist." Suddenly, these words, which have motivated me countless times, flashing in my mind. Also, the concluding sentence from the afterword of "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas," "Their lost voices must continue to be heard; their untold stories must continue to be recounted. For they represent the ones who didn't live to tell their stories themselves."