Hannah Arendt, Totalitarianism ( New York ; Harcourt, 1976 )

While Hitler was the leader of the Third Reich, the functionalists believed that the ‘road to Auschwitz’ was characterized by an indirect unplanned path that was defined by cumulative radicalization of the Nazis due to the prevalence of chaotic decision-making processes that were a major feature of the polycratic system of governance. Additionally, this system was characterized by the elimination of individuals considered as destructive to the Nazi movement, leading to the creation of a movement that was ready to do anything to achieve a ‘final solution’ to the ‘Jew problem’. Karl Schleunes falls in this school of thought. Karl Schleunes argument, like that of other functionalists, was cemented on institutions and structure of the Third Reich. With the intentionalists arguing that the Holocaust was the fulfillment of Hitler’s plan hatched in the 1920s, their argument was summer up as the ‘straight road to Auschwitz.’ For functionalists, however, the path to the Holocaust was not straight, a reason why Karl Schleunes labeled his book The Twisted Road to

“The War Against The Jews” by Lucy Dawidowicz explores a very dark time in history and interprets it from her view. Through the use of other novels, she concurs and agrees to form her opinion. This essay will explore who Dawidowicz is, why she wrote the book, what the book is about, what other authors have explored with the same topic, and how I feel about the topic she wrote about. All in all, much research will be presented throughout the essay. In the end you will see how strongly I feel about the topic I chose. I believe that although Hitler terrorized the Jews, they continued to be stronger than ever, and tried to keep up their society.

The application of Nazi ideas and ideology was based on two types of force against individuals and social groups. One of these took the form of propaganda and indoctrination, the other was based on terror (Kühl, 2002). The Nazi ensured that not to appear

In the 20th century totalitarian governments had come to power in Italy, Germany, and the Soviet Union. These governments had forced their political authority and centralized control over all aspects of life (Document 3 and 6). The government had imposed public gatherings to invade people’s lives and indoctrination of totalitarian ideas had influenced youth organizations and literature to help the government gain authority over one’s country (Document 2). One method used by totalitarian dictatorship is having mass rallies and speeches. The totalitarian government that used these method leaders was Benito Mussolini of Italy and Adolf Hitler of Germany.

Night and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich express the potential horrors of humanity’s immense capacity for extreme cruelty. Both took place in mid-twentieth century Europe and exposed the hardships of life in forced-labor camps: Wiesel’s in various concentration camps, Solzhenitsyn’s in Gulags. It is important for human populations to be aware of these tragedies so as to not commit the same atrocities again; therefore, this essay will explore each with regards to shared or different themes included and the messages presented. Both of these books are important due to their influential and informative nature regarding the horrors of their respective historical times. Night by Elie Wiesel and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich by Aleksandr

The investigation assesses the Nazi regime from 1933 – 1945 in regards to the totality of their actions. In order to evaluate the Nazi regime on whether or not they were more evil than other genocidal regimes, the investigation evaluates how the Nazis controlled their country. The investigation will start in the early years of the Nazi regime in how they set up their totalitarian government and how they expanded their control. Then the Holocaust will be looked at for how the Nazis treated those they were exterminating. Accounts from soldiers and Jewish people who lived through the Nazi control will be mostly used to evaluate if the Nazis were more evil than other genocidal regimes. Two of the sources used in this essay, “The Liberation of Dachau” by Chuck Ferree, and “Fate did not let me go” a letter by Valli Ollendorff are then evaluated for their origins, purposes, values and limitations.

Arendt explains that the ultimate power of a totalitarian government is the acceptance of the ideology being propagated. The laws that are put into place in totalitarian government are not to empower the people and protect their rights. Instead, the laws tell the people what they must do, not what they must not do. Arendt tells how the law of nature is the foundation for Hitler's Nazis, and the law of history for Russia's communist regimes. According to Arendt, both the Nazi and communist regimes maintained that those laws gave them justification for their cruelty. These laws of nature and history are not permanent or stable. They are in motion to keep history and nature moving, so that it progresses without ever stopping. <p>Arendt claims that these laws of motion sustain the terror fueling the totalitarian government. Arendt says that terror is the realization and execution of these laws with nothing standing in its way. Throughout the selection, Arendt speaks of terror. Terror is essential for the state to keep its power, or else it will fall. According to Arendt, in a totalitarian state terror terminates individuality among the people. Individual men become a mass of humankind, in the eyes of the state. "Terror exists neither for nor against men", claims Arendt, "it substitutes for the boundaries and channels of communication between individual men a band of iron which holds them so tightly

Thesis: A key concept to understanding Hannah Arendt’s “Total Domination” is the essence of terror and the importance of concentration camps in maintaining the Nazi totalitarian state.

The most alarming thing about Arendt's book is that she is able to make a compelling case that the greatest evils of mankind are committed by ordinary people. Her work forces one to look at the world and realize that the Holocaust was not an isolated incident committed by blood thirsty sociopaths. One must realize that the decision making processes that created an environment accepting of the "Final Solution" is still alive an well today as it has been throughout history. The weight of personal moral choice

Eckardt presents the idea that the Holocaust was a result of three distinct factors; that it was the culmination of the church's teaching of contempt, the culmination of the church's absolute theology and finally the culmination of modern man's self-liberation from the shackles of God and morality .

Good people can cause severe harm if their motives are influenced by the values shared in a public corporation or are a result of manipulation controlled by the law. Bob Henderson’s ability to satisfy his interests to obtain success by dismissing social responsibility and contributing to the rise in obesity is wrong. Hannah Arendt founded the theory “The banality evil’ through analyzing Adolf Eichmann’s case during the time of the Holocaust. Eichmann and Henderson share similarities of both being ordinary men who influenced large scale harm. The intent of this essay will be to compare and contrast the perception of evil and discuss at which point radical evil may be mistaken for banal evil.

Hannah Arendt’s begins the chapter with the first part of after the fall of the First World War stating the condition of the stateless people clarified the catastrophe of the nation-state model and the failure of human rights. When the nation-system was created, the people in power in Europe separated the people into 3 major groups which are the state people, the nationalities like the Slovaks in Czechoslovakia, and the minorities like the Germans, being the strongest officially economically and in number. The “Minority Treaties” were created by the League of Nations to seek security to the minority groups in the new states. The “real significance of the Minority Treaties” (pg.274) was that currently millions of people were known by the international law since by the nation-states, they have the power to strip down the citizens of that state by banishment or other worse factors. Only nationals could be citizens and

The “Truth in Politics” expands upon Arendt’s “history of thought and politics and in her situation less between Europe Totalitarianism and post-war American democracy” (qtd. in Rosenfeld 221). Moreover, Arendt resolves politics and deception link together in some way. Furthermore, not all lying past to present are identical in form or effect. In “Truth and Politics” Arendt stands firm on the position of “total totalitarian regime in all reality become phony and boundaries between truth and lies blurred” (qtd. in Arendt 221).

Total Domination is described by Hannah Arendt as being “when people are brought down to such a low state that they aren’t even humans anymore but just a set of reactions”, this statement however, cannot be used to describe Egypt under the rule of Hosni Mubarak. Arendt’s definition of total domination can be used to describe the Nazi’s but not really the rule of Hosni Mubarak. He doesn’t use fear to try and control the people, nor does he put people in a group and send them to camps. His rule was oppressive and ended up being “charged with complicity in the murder and attempted murder of hundreds of peaceful demonstrations protesting his rule in Cairo, Alexandria, Suez, and several other Egyptian governorates” (hrw.org). Mubarak was intent

Many people have sought to evaluate the vulnerabilities associated with states and markets that are under totalitarianism, which is a political system in which the state holds total authority over the society. First developed in 1920 by the Italian fascists, and in particular Benito Mussolini, who ruled Italy for over twenty years, totalitarianism embossed the minds of those who lived under it. This system was conceptualized mainly to highlight the similarities between Nazi Germany and other fascist states. There’s one underlying difference that one must understand for one to assess the restrictions that totalitarianism puts on one’s liberty. One should realize that totalitarianism states are states where there is a single party rule, where a dictatorship is type of government in which a single person rules. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell are famous authors who opposed totalitarianism, and through their philosophical ideals, attempted to inform people of the dangers faced by society under this restricting system, where people are inhibited from holding any sort of authority. George Orwell, in 1984, discusses concerns relating to big government and big brother and Aldous Huxley, in Brave New World, discusses predatory markets impinging on our personal freedoms. Through their works, they attempt to question societal beliefs on brute force and physical coercion verses the manipulation of preferences and tastes leading to willing submission. George Orwell and Aldous Huxley each