Reddit mentions of Responsibility and Judgment

To answer your second question (sort of), Hannah Arendt went over questions of national responsibility in excruciating detail so agree with her or not, worry no more!

> Please define morality, so we can determine which peoples have a common moral foundation and which have in-group behavior that superficially resembles morality.

I won't try to define morality by fiat, but I will offer a "working hypothesis" version of a definition, and if you want to sort it out by dialogue, then maybe we can work towards consensus. So as a starting point, I'd say that morality is a set of principles intended to outline imperatives for conduct. Here I mean imperatives to imply the traditional oughts and ought-nots of moral maxims. I make those secondary to the principles because we do tend to rely on non-imperatives in order to formulate or extend those imperatives -- principles like equality, or justice.

And because I realize that it's likely to be the central bone of contention, I'm putting to one side the argument that morality is, by definition, custom. That's certainly the traditional understanding -- so much so that the Roman philosophers traced it back to their word for "custom." I suspect that it would involve me in a genetic fallacy to insist on that, so I'll just leave it there for discussion at the moment. It does raise interesting questions in relation to a culture that presumably has no history beyond living memory, since oral history is, likewise, a form of custom.

> I hate to think that I'm a part of some weird minority that wouldn't kill because it's fucking wrong, surrounded by a majority who don't only because some law says it's wrong.

You might find Hannah Arendt's essay "Responsibility under Dictatorship" interesting, if not exactly comforting. In it, she tackles the question of how some Germans maintained their moral compass even in the midst of a fascism that basically inverted the moral order. She suggests that given the thoroughness with which German society under Nazi rule devoted itself to the Final Solution, the remarkable fact is not that most people were complicit, but rather that some people were not. I think you would likely agree with her account of why they weren't, even if you're dismayed that they made up the minority. The essay was recently reissued in a volume of her collected ethical writings called Responsibility and Judgment.

> other sections which are something else entirely.

Which sections are you thinking of? I think I know what you mean but I don't want to assume.

If you like Eichmann, Responsibility and Judgment is an interesting and accessible collection of essays that expands upon some of her ideas.