The Origins Of Totalitarianism By Hannah Arendt

Nations all around the world are still healing from the wounds of twentieth century totalitarianism, yet more seems to be on the horizon. In his 1984 magnum opus, George Orwell warns future generations of the many dangers of allowing government, or the powerful few, from being the chiefs of law expression and history using the eerie, all-powerful dystopian Party. Unfortunately, it is a warning few have truly heeded in the past half century. Resulting from a lack of written laws, the Party may prosecute its citizens relentlessly and without reason. Moreover, the Party maintains an iron grip on all published information, ensuring a death hold on all free expression and education. Yet, above all, the Party controls history; it rewrites, revises and republishes the past to secure their totalitarian future. In spite of these warnings, the decades following the publication of this novel saw nations continue on the

Totalitarianism diminishes the idea of individuality and destroys all chances of self-improvement, and human’s natural hunger for knowledge. In George Orwell’s famous novel, “1984”, totalitarianism is clearly seen in the exaggerated control of the state over every single citizen, everyday, everywhere. Totalitarianism can also be seen in the book “Brave New World” by Aldous Huxley, in which humans are synthetically made and conditioned for their predestinated purpose on earth. The lack of individualism will lead a community towards a dystopia in which freedom is vanished by the uncontrolled power of the state.

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

Snyder also realizes the importance of establishing a private life. Throughout this lesson, Snyder references Hannah Arendt, a German-born American political theorist. Arendt believes that the beginning of totalitarianism is rather the blurring of public and private lives than the seizure of power by an all powerful dictatorial state. Snyder makes a point again to focus on the events in the 2016 election again, citing the hacking of Hillary Clinton and John Podesta’s emails as invasions of privacy and the coverage of these events served as warnings to the beginning of a totalitarian state. Arendt is referenced again stating that by indulging in this seizure of private information, individuals and society as a whole are being degenerated into a mob. This devolution, as Arendt calls it, lead to the rights of individuals being ignored and replaced with the wishes of

Arendt simply points out that in order for total terror to be inflicted the Nazis had to do away with all opposition. The lack of opposition would give the Nazis, perhaps, a sense of security while they executed millions of people.

Over seventy years after he lived and wrote, the works of English journalist and democratic socialist George Orwell, continue to fascinate, stimulate and enrage his readers concerning the structure of society and the organization of government. The controversial writer openly spoke out against the absolute power of any government, warning that a fascist government would deprive its people of their basic freedoms and liberties. Orwell’s novel, 1984, serves as a reminder of the danger of totalitarianism by depicting a future in which all citizens live under the constant surveillance of the “Big Brother.” Through the main character, Winston Smith, Orwell demonstrates the dangers of totalitarianism; writing of the consequences of absolute government in several essays and proposing socialism as an alternative. To Orwell, the role of government is to represent the common people rather than the old and the privileged.

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

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

According to Rosenfeld Arendt “famously gets a lot of her past wrong” (Rosenfeld 220). However, Rosenfeld’s study of Arendt’s work is not to find error rather depict the history of the writing of the French enlightenment. The “Truth in Politics” written by Arendt “provides a tour of various ancient and early modern thinkers, from Herodotus to Spinoza to James Madison, and of events in the profound and recent past to name a few” (qtd. in Rosenfeld 221).

Hannah Arendt is a German Jewish philosopher, born in 1906 and died in 1975. She studied philosophy with Martin Heidegger as Professor. Her works deal with the nature of power and political subjects such as democracy, authority, and totalitarianism. She flew away to France in 1933, when Adolf Hitler became Chancellor in Germany. She flew away from Europe to the United States after escaping from the concentration camp of Gurs. She became a Professor in New York city, in which she became an active member of the German Jewish community. In 1963, she was sent to Jerusalem to report on Eichmann’s trial by The New Yorker. Hannah Arendt’s thoughts on Eichmann’s trial were expected to be harsh, considering the philosopher’s roots. However, her

The governments in today’s society have brainwashed their citizens into believing everything their leader says and thinks is correct and everything else is wrong. This can sometimes be known as a totalitarian government. George Orwell’s novel 1984 revolves around totalitarianism. The members of the party in Oceania are taught and required to worship their leader Big Brother whether they believe in him or not. In the novel 1984, George Orwell shows the problems and the hatred with a totalitarian government through his use of symbolism, situational irony, and indirect characterization.

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

Arendt’s view on understanding the power of words is very convincing to me on understanding social power. One individual can be the strongest of all but when they are put next to a group, the powered group will always defeat in the end. She states that is only naturals that a group of people will turn against independence and its strength. This puts a lot of perspective on the on going fighting in the world. When someone stands up for something and has a team behind them, it is difficult to knock them down. Especially when there are other teams that has another belief system that they are surrounded by. These are examples of change the world uses to revolutionize. But it is so important to understand that violence is not the answer to validate the belief a group

In “Eichmann in Jerusalem,” Hannah Arendt analyzes Adolph Eichmann while he is on trial in Jerusalem for the crimes that he committed while being a Lieutenant Colonel in the SS during the Nazi Regime. In the book Arendt talks about how Eichmann’s actions were “banal” in the sense that he seemed to be an ordinary person who just committed acts that were evil. Italian-Jewish Writer Primo Levi, a Holocaust Survivor, states that SS officers like Eichmann lived in their own self-deception that made them believe that their actions were caused by just following their orders in the SS. In this paper, I will analyze the views that both Arendt and Levi had about the Eichmann trial and then compare and state the differences of their views. I will then explain the reasons why both Hannah Arendt’s and Primo Levi’s analysis of Adolph Eichmann that show that the actions that he committed were all truly evil actions.

The essay aims to investigate the extent to which the political thought of Hannah Arendt meets the requirement of Machiavelli's analysis. Political analysis of the two philosophical thinkers