I read that she is asserting that the scale of Eichmann’s self-absolution to the scale of Bresch’s self-absolution and that they are equally abhorrent.
She spends a few words establishing the first scale and a lot longer establishing the scale of the second by describing how evil she thinks this company is over and above that of a company that allows falsehoods and dubious practices to inform the value of a CEO’s efforts and so too their earnings.
If I were writing this article and I were to choose an alternative to Eichmann, I would have to find two things: A) a familiar (to most readers) entity/event that is equally or more evil, B) some participant (at the highest level) that has absolved themselves of all guilt. I would struggle to do both these things.
What goes unsaid, though, is the way we are easily and rightly disgusted by Eichmanns denial but see little wrong with that of Bresch and more worryingly, if we did, we have no way of ensuring that this becomes a crime and that suitable punishment is exacted upon transgressors for the simple reason that these same people are our effective rulers and politicians their lackeys. This is one of the reasons why I think society is somewhat broken.
Whispering in a corner will not change this. Ranting might. Clearly written ranting stands a better chance but I am not confident of that.