The Origins of Totalitarianism
- Downloads：6677
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-08-04 09:52:44
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Hannah Arendt
- ISBN：0241316758
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Hannah Arendt's definitive work on totalitarianism and an essential component of any study of twentieth-century political history
The Origins of Totalitarianism begins with the rise of anti-Semitism in central and western Europe in the 1800s and continues with an examination of European colonial imperialism from 1884 to the outbreak of World War I。 Arendt explores the institutions and operations of totalitarian movements， focusing on the two genuine forms of totalitarian government in our time—Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia—which she adroitly recognizes were two sides of the same coin， rather than opposing philosophies of Right and Left。 From this vantage point， she discusses the evolution of classes into masses， the role of propaganda in dealing with the nontotalitarian world， the use of terror， and the nature of isolation and loneliness as preconditions for total domination。
The Origins of Totalitarianism begins with the rise of anti-Semitism in central and western Europe in the 1800s and continues with an examination of European colonial imperialism from 1884 to the outbreak of World War I。 Arendt explores the institutions and operations of totalitarian movements， focusing on the two genuine forms of totalitarian government in our time—Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia—which she adroitly recognizes were two sides of the same coin， rather than opposing philosophies of Right and Left。 From this vantage point， she discusses the evolution of classes into masses， the role of propaganda in dealing with the nontotalitarian world， the use of terror， and the nature of isolation and loneliness as preconditions for total domination。
Reviews
Nathan
，
A masterpiece that organized itself in order to make you not read it。
Indumugi C
，
Extremely difficult to read but every bit enthralling。 Although an academic work， it has been passionately written and consists endless references， that are in themselves eye-opening。
Alienne Laval
，
I think that the "fascist character" that she explores almost is the normal condition and not to get away by socialization and democratization: "willing executioners" are produced that do not even need a leader anymore。。。A central role play religion and media。The only way out was an Aztec style two-tier caste republic S。P。Q。R！ I think that the "fascist character" that she explores almost is the normal condition and not to get away by socialization and democratization: "willing executioners" are produced that do not even need a leader anymore。。。A central role play religion and media。The only way out was an Aztec style two-tier caste republic S。P。Q。R！ 。。。more
Brendan Ray
，
I really liked the cultural history of society's ills here。 The way that dictatorship embrace anti-Semitism not as a product of history but as an element of statecraft and social reconstruction is interesting。 I generally don't buy into the "horseshoe" model that far-left and far-right are pretty indistinguishable， but she makes a solid argument on the rhyming， if not repetition， of history amongst those poles。 The significance for me as a modern-day political observer （as opposed to purely look I really liked the cultural history of society's ills here。 The way that dictatorship embrace anti-Semitism not as a product of history but as an element of statecraft and social reconstruction is interesting。 I generally don't buy into the "horseshoe" model that far-left and far-right are pretty indistinguishable， but she makes a solid argument on the rhyming， if not repetition， of history amongst those poles。 The significance for me as a modern-day political observer （as opposed to purely looking at the book as history） is that there is a reminder to look at the jingoism of populism， the national myth-making in rejection of nuanced history， and the dis-inclusion of non-establishment populations in the construction of those national myths is an important warning sign of undemocratic tendencies。 The seeds of totalitarianism exist in the fallow earth of democracies， which require regular weeding。 。。。more
Marcin Jezewski
，
I read it twice， forst time years ago and nearly forgot I did it。。。 until I read it again and realised this book influenced me immensly。 It should be a mandatory reading for all of us。
Robert Behrman
，
This book is the kind of book that you're not done with after you finish it。It is not an easy book to read for entertainment。 I feel like I need a semester long seminar class with supplementary materials and guest speakers to fully handle the firehose of Ideas I just subjected myself to。 However， having done so， I have a vast array of ideas of my own to explore and interesting thoughts to pursue further。The book is narrative about the origins of the Nazi and Stalinist totalitarian political move This book is the kind of book that you're not done with after you finish it。It is not an easy book to read for entertainment。 I feel like I need a semester long seminar class with supplementary materials and guest speakers to fully handle the firehose of Ideas I just subjected myself to。 However， having done so， I have a vast array of ideas of my own to explore and interesting thoughts to pursue further。The book is narrative about the origins of the Nazi and Stalinist totalitarian political movements and governments， where they came from， and why they behaved the way they when they were seeking and eventually consolidating power。 The narrative flows by casting a huge net in the first （Anti-Semitism） and second （Imperialism） books， and then bringing the vast array of ideas it threw out there together in the third book （Totalitarianism）。 For me as the casual reader， this technique brought together all sorts of stuff I've heard about in passing with a couple things I know a bit about， and slammed them into my head repeatedly until I'm left with a few ideas that will be really important and a vague overwhelmed stupefied feeling。 The narrative tosses enormous ideas out every few minutes， tucked casually in a sentence mentioning some name or I vaguely remember from something or another thirty years ago。 I made it through the first and second books in a sort of fugue state， trying vaguely to keep up。 However， it was highly worth it。 By the time I hit the last book， the first to talk about Totalitarianism in proper， I was well prepared to follow and be fascinated by the argument。I listened to the book on audible， narrated by Nadia May。 This method has limitations - the narration is fast， and I had to listen slower than usual to keep up。 In addition， without quotation marks， endnotes， etc。 I couldn't always tell what was source material and what was the author's。 Finally， Nadia May's old english schoolmistress voice with Hannah Arendt's didactic writing style made me feel like I was being lectured by a professor of my dad's generation who is much smarter than I。 On the other hand， I doubt I would have found the time to sit with this book and finish it， so narration it is。Having finished the book now， it was worth it to do。 I recommend this for general education and political interest。 If you want to know more about the specific Nazi or Stalinist movements， read something more focused。 I came out of this with all sorts of "ooh， I can see that kind of behavior in the news today"， or "I wonder how this applies to， say， China today or North Korea？" In addition， I will now buy and stick a copy of the book with random highlights and tabs on my bookshelf， in case I need to intimidate someone at a house party。 。。。more
Michael J
，
Growing up during Detente in the shadow of the Iron Curtain， this book helpedme understand the world I knew and how it got to be。 Written like a thesis，it can be hard to fathom at times and I had to put it down and re-readsections to better understand the histories and concepts the author conveysin great detail。The first section on anti-Semitism was particularly hard to absorb， perhapsbecause it wasn't as contemporary relatively speaking as the later chapters。The imperialism section registered m Growing up during Detente in the shadow of the Iron Curtain， this book helpedme understand the world I knew and how it got to be。 Written like a thesis，it can be hard to fathom at times and I had to put it down and re-readsections to better understand the histories and concepts the author conveysin great detail。The first section on anti-Semitism was particularly hard to absorb， perhapsbecause it wasn't as contemporary relatively speaking as the later chapters。The imperialism section registered more with me as it covered much of what Iwas taught in my early high school years， but obviously in much more detailand from other non-Western perspectives。But the last section really struck a chord with me。 The author weaves togetherthe seemingly countless strands from the earlier chapters to paint a completeand devastating picture of totalitarianism。 Sprinkled with details from theonly two totalitarian forms of goverment the world has seen （so far）， Ifinally understood how close to the brink the world was to utter catastrophe，bringing books such as Orwell's 1984 into clearer focus and context。 。。。more
David Steele
，
Should be compulsory reading for anyone in the modern world who thinks they are taking on “fascists” by engaging in spats on social media。Or anyone who thinks people should lose their jobs / platform / reputation for voicing the wrong opinions。A long read， full of dense wording。 It took a long time to read！ I think people had much better reading & attention spans in the 50s。Fascinating commentary about why the fascists were so hung up on Jews。 I had no idea。
Philip Kuhn
，
This is a very deep and profound book on the subject。 Don't be fooled by the short page length， it will take you awhile to read it。 I recommend that you skip the first few chapters， they're just too background。 Although the book is a few years old， it's a classic that holds up well。 Highly recommended。 One of her major points is how groups of people become "stateless " and then they lose all their rights。 Very true。 Just look at the Palestinian people。 They certainly qualify。 So do Narive Americ This is a very deep and profound book on the subject。 Don't be fooled by the short page length， it will take you awhile to read it。 I recommend that you skip the first few chapters， they're just too background。 Although the book is a few years old， it's a classic that holds up well。 Highly recommended。 One of her major points is how groups of people become "stateless " and then they lose all their rights。 Very true。 Just look at the Palestinian people。 They certainly qualify。 So do Narive Americans。 And black Americans for all but the last 40 years。 She writes that the totalitarian state is "one that anything is possible and nothing matters。 " Very true。 Just look at the ridiculous show trials under Stalin。 PHIL Kuhn 。。。more
David
，
Uno de de los mayores desafíos literarios a los que me he enfrentado， quizás el que mayor de todos。 Complicado， denso， inabarcable。。。La sensación continua de desconocer términos， personajes y eventos históricos que Arendt hila en un texto en el que intenta desgranar de forma racional todos los hechos históricos de los últimos siglos que condujeron a las mayores catástrofes y crímenes cometidos en la historia。 Y no obstante， por poner un pero， es ese intento constante como buena alemana de la esc Uno de de los mayores desafíos literarios a los que me he enfrentado， quizás el que mayor de todos。 Complicado， denso， inabarcable。。。La sensación continua de desconocer términos， personajes y eventos históricos que Arendt hila en un texto en el que intenta desgranar de forma racional todos los hechos históricos de los últimos siglos que condujeron a las mayores catástrofes y crímenes cometidos en la historia。 Y no obstante， por poner un pero， es ese intento constante como buena alemana de la escuela de filosofía de intentar racionalizar y buscar un por qué lógico a todo el que acaba por momentos despistando más; el no aceptar quizás que hay en todos los odios， nacionalismos y luchas una parte que escapa a la comprensión racional y que es inherente a muchos seres humanos。 A pesar de que lo consideren uno de los libros más accesibles de la autora， y quizás el más importante， no es en absoluto fácil， y menos si， como en mi caso， uno desconoce los principios y términos básicos de las ciencias políticas y sociales， así como de la historia reciente internacional。 Pero contra el sistema educativo que uno recibe poco se puede esperar。 Sólo apto para aquellos realmente interesados en conocer a su autora， que nunca pasará de moda ni perderá su relevancia， o para aquellos que realmente estén interesados en los temas que trata， que divide en tres partes: antisemitismo， imperialismo y totalitarismo 。。。more
Rajiv Chopra
，
The first thing that I will say is this: This is a difficult book to read。Hannah Arendt uses exceptionally long and convoluted sentences， which you must unravel slowly。 It is only when you do this that you can make sense of what she writes。 She divided the book into three sections:- The Jewish Question。 Since I am not familiar with their history， this entire section made little sense to me。 Having said that， I was extremely surprised to note that anti-Semitism does not have deep historical root The first thing that I will say is this: This is a difficult book to read。Hannah Arendt uses exceptionally long and convoluted sentences， which you must unravel slowly。 It is only when you do this that you can make sense of what she writes。 She divided the book into three sections:- The Jewish Question。 Since I am not familiar with their history， this entire section made little sense to me。 Having said that， I was extremely surprised to note that anti-Semitism does not have deep historical roots！ There is some very good material on the changes that took place in Europe towards the end of the 19th century， possibly causing some of the disasters of the 20th century。- Imperialism。 There was some good material here， but she kept dancing between England and Hitler。 Because of this her narrative was not clear。- Totalitarianism。 This is when the book began to shine。 There is so much material in this section that this alone makes the book worthwhile。 However， she obsessed about Stalin and Hitler。 I don't know why she did not compare these two men with other totalitarian leaders。 Nor did she explore the fine lines between totalitarianism， tyranny and dictatorship。 。。。more
Teresa
，
No es de lectura fácil， hay que tener muchos conocimientos de historia y de filosofía para poder entender tanto como desarrollo la temática， como los pies de página。 Creo que uno debe leer las otras obras que tiene， para entender el 100 este libro。 Tiene un gran poder actual。
Coraline
，
Possibly the best work on this topic ive ever read。 Complete masterpiece。
Noah Edinger-Reeve
，
Great for a light Sunday read。 Not too long and not too complex。Highly recommend the sequel， 'Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil'。cheers。 Great for a light Sunday read。 Not too long and not too complex。Highly recommend the sequel， 'Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil'。cheers。 。。。more
John Biddle
，
This book was the biggest disappointment I can remember reading。 I guess this kind of verbal diarrhea passes for scholarship but not to me。 It's just one statement after another about seemingly everything but with no analysis to tie it all together。 I wanted explanations that clarify not one assertion after another。 Assertions that come from other historians and academics rather than original materials。 It was very hard reading; put me to sleep many times。 I read Part 1 and had to go read a book This book was the biggest disappointment I can remember reading。 I guess this kind of verbal diarrhea passes for scholarship but not to me。 It's just one statement after another about seemingly everything but with no analysis to tie it all together。 I wanted explanations that clarify not one assertion after another。 Assertions that come from other historians and academics rather than original materials。 It was very hard reading; put me to sleep many times。 I read Part 1 and had to go read a book I liked。 Did the same with part 2。 then went back and read part 3。 I kept hoping it would get better， and actually it did though from a very low starting point indeed。 Even the best parts weren't good。 I finished the book， but I'd bet I'm in very small company。 This was so well reviewed but you couldn't convince me that the reviewers actually read the book rather than other reviews。 Only way this gets a high number is by the pound。Don't waste your time。 。。。more
Phillip
，
Okay， so the central idea of Arendt's book is excellent， but there's so much here that feels like it could be trimmed away or reduced。 The first two essays--on antisemitism and imperialism--do play an important role in setting the stage for Arendt's main argument about totalitarianism， but they're so expansive and so dense。 Like， we don't need the history of how Jews fit into the social system of every European country during the 18th and 19th centuries。 The basic premise that she sets up about Okay， so the central idea of Arendt's book is excellent， but there's so much here that feels like it could be trimmed away or reduced。 The first two essays--on antisemitism and imperialism--do play an important role in setting the stage for Arendt's main argument about totalitarianism， but they're so expansive and so dense。 Like， we don't need the history of how Jews fit into the social system of every European country during the 18th and 19th centuries。 The basic premise that she sets up about Jews as the only European people （1） capable of transnational business dealings because of our diasporic heritage， and （2） dependent on national governments because we never formed distinct class interests to protect ourselves from anti-Jewish violence， could be demonstrated with substantially less words than Arendt actually devotes to it。 The same goes for the second essay， in imperialism。 This critique， by the way， is only valid if one's primary interest in reading the book is to understand Arendt's thoughts on totalitarianism itself。Her argument about totalitarianism is extremely interesting。 She argues essentially that proto-totalitarian movements organize the great mass of people who normally take no interest in politics， convincing them that their interests have been ignored by the ruling classes （which is generally true）， and that only the Party seeks to redress this wrong。 The Party， however， is scrupulous about never actually committing to a permanent platform， instead thinking and acting in the name of a larger compelling force--the laws of nature for the Nazis， and the laws of history for Stalin's Soviet Union。 In the name of nature or history， the Party and especially its leader is allowed to do anything in the name of achieving the result which is seen as inevitable。 In other words， for the racist who takes as a given that some races are better than others， the logical end is inevitably that those less worthy races should die--the Nazi then takes this a step further and says that the less desirable races should be killed because this is the inevitable law of nature。 And the totalitarian will pursue the endgoal of the movement's law regardless of other considerations--they will divert resources to it even if those are crucially needed for a flagging war effort， as the Nazis did during the Holocaust， or they will execute important economic and industrial leaders at the beginning of an economic recovery， as Stalin did in the early 1930s。However， even this ruthless and anti-utilitarian devotion to the ideologically determined laws of nature or history is not sufficient to make a state truly totalitarian。 To achieve that， the state needs to move beyond individualism。 And this is where Arendt makes one of her really central arguments。 The totalitarian state will， after the Party has established power and functionally eliminated active opposition， turn the force of state terror indiscriminately against the population。 This seems counterintuitive， but it actually makes excellent sense。 A dictatorship or tyranny will use the repressive apparatus of the state to punish dissent。 Those who suffer are， in some way， guilty of a crime， even if that crime is relatively minor; they are responsible in some way for opposing or questioning the state。 In a totalitarian system， however， the question of guilt becomes irrelevant。 One can be sent to the camps--effectively erased from society and existence--without ever having had the least hint of opposition to the state or the Party。 It is enough that the ideology of the law of nature or history demands that you be eliminated from society and existence。 This is the logic by which the Nazis sent Jews to camps--even Jews who had never offered any resistance to Nazism， and were， therefore， legally and politically innocent。 And it also explains why even those who positively affirmed their support for the movement， Party， and/or state were subject to execution--like those original members of the Bolshevik revolution who were shot in Stalinist purges， or the members of the SA leadership executed on Hitler's orders。 The point of terror under the totalitarian regime is no longer to deal with political opponents， criminals， or enemies， it is to make terror an absolute fact of individual existence， in the sense that at any time the terroristic apparatus of the state could turn on any individual。 This is the true depth of the totalitarian elimination of individualism。 There is nothing one can do or avoid doing that would prevent one's execution if the totalitarian law of nature or history was deemed to require that execution--because one lives in a society where death can be meted out arbitrarily in the name of a transcendental and inevitable process， it's no longer even necessary to state one's loyalty to the state， Party， or movement， because whether one supports or opposes the totalitarian government is a matter of supreme indifference to the totalitarian machine。https://youtu。be/FbExl1n6saM 。。。more
Mark
，
Thoughtful， academic insight into the development of Russian and German Totalitarianism。 It gave surprising insights into European government developments and antisemitism。 A lot of antisemitic tropes were based on facts。
Socrate
，
Mulţi încă mai consideră un accident faptul că ideologia nazistă s-a concentrat asupra antisemitismului şi că politica nazistă a urmărit， consecvent şi fără compromisuri， persecutarea şi， în cele din urmă， exterminarea evreilor。 Doar oroarea care a învăluit catastrofa finală şi， mai mult， dezrădăcinarea şi izgonirea supravieţuitorilor din căminele lor au făcut ca „problema evreiască” să ocupe un loc atât de proeminent în viaţa noastră politică de fiecare zi。 Ceea ce naziştii înşişi au numit esen Mulţi încă mai consideră un accident faptul că ideologia nazistă s-a concentrat asupra antisemitismului şi că politica nazistă a urmărit， consecvent şi fără compromisuri， persecutarea şi， în cele din urmă， exterminarea evreilor。 Doar oroarea care a învăluit catastrofa finală şi， mai mult， dezrădăcinarea şi izgonirea supravieţuitorilor din căminele lor au făcut ca „problema evreiască” să ocupe un loc atât de proeminent în viaţa noastră politică de fiecare zi。 Ceea ce naziştii înşişi au numit esenţiala lor descoperire – rolul poporului evreu în politica mondială – şi principalul lor interes – persecutarea evreilor în întreaga lume – a fost considerat de opinia publică un pretext pentru câştigarea maselor sau un artificiu interesant al demagogiei lor。 Faptul că ceea ce proclamau naziştii înşişi nu a fost luat în serios este cât se poate de semnificativ。 Aproape că nu există aspect al istoriei contemporane mai iritant şi mai mistificator decât faptul că， dintre toate marile chestiuni politice nerezolvate ale secolului nostru， tocmai această problemă evreiască， în aparenţă măruntă şineimportantă， a trebuit să fie cea căreia i-a revenit cinstea dubioasă de a pune în mişcare întreaga maşină infernală。 Asemenea discrepanţe între cauză şi efect sunt un ultragiu la adresa bunului nostru simţ， ca să nu mai vorbim de simţul istoricului faţă de echilibru şi armonie。 În comparaţie cu evenimentele înseşi， orice explicare a antisemitismului pare construită în grabă şi la întâmplare， pentru a masca o problemă care ne ameninţă într-o măsură atât de mare simţul proporţiilor şi speranţa de sănătate mintală。 Una dintre aceste clarificări grăbite a constat în identificarea antisemitismului cu naţionalismul tot mai activ şi cu izbucnirile sale xenofobe。 Din nefericire， faptele arată că antisemitismul modern a crescut direct proporţional cu declinul naţionalismului tradiţional şi a atins punctul culminant exact în momentul când sistemul european al statelor naţionale şi precarul sau echilibru de forţe s-au prăbuşit。 。。。more
Shawn
，
This is one of the best *big* books I have ever read。 She is a really good writer。 The prose is difficult but does get easier if you stick with it。 I would echo the positive observations others have noted here。 In particular Arendt has really good insight into human behavior within a political context。 To my mind this is a feature of the book that transcends argumentation or theory --- she just has really keen vision on what this stuff is about。 A truly original thinker。 This book is just as rel This is one of the best *big* books I have ever read。 She is a really good writer。 The prose is difficult but does get easier if you stick with it。 I would echo the positive observations others have noted here。 In particular Arendt has really good insight into human behavior within a political context。 To my mind this is a feature of the book that transcends argumentation or theory --- she just has really keen vision on what this stuff is about。 A truly original thinker。 This book is just as relevant now as ever。 。。。more
Stijn De Smet
，
As many other reviewers have already pointed out The Origins of Totalitarianism is a challenging， yet fascinating dive into the origins and inner workings of the most destructive movements in the history of mankind。The Origins of Totalitarianism is divided in three parts: antisemitism， imperialism and totalitarianism。 If you are solely interested in totalitarianism itself， you could skip the first two parts， yet you would also miss out on the history and context that paved the road to the horror As many other reviewers have already pointed out The Origins of Totalitarianism is a challenging， yet fascinating dive into the origins and inner workings of the most destructive movements in the history of mankind。The Origins of Totalitarianism is divided in three parts: antisemitism， imperialism and totalitarianism。 If you are solely interested in totalitarianism itself， you could skip the first two parts， yet you would also miss out on the history and context that paved the road to the horrors of the 20th century。The book is not an easy read and I would be lying if I said that I fully understand everything I have read。 Arendt does not list events in a chronological order， she expects that the reader has a good understanding of history and philosophy。 Therefore I would not recommend the book to someone who is looking for an introduction of the subject。But while the book can certainly be called complex， there are also flashes of insight into the insanity of the totalitarian mindset。 I think the NY times' remark that this is a non-fiction bookend to 1984 is right on the money。 While 1984 brilliantly manages to capture the life under totalitarianism in a fictional setting， Origins of Totalitarianism manages to capture the cold logic that supports totalitarianism in the 20th century。I can't help but feeling disturbed and anxious about our own future after reading this book。 While Nazism or Stalinism are currently considered to be relics of the past， too brutal and arbitrary in it's terror to comprehend in today's times， I can't help but notice that the same conditions which Arendt describes in the book are again （or always have been） present today。 The increase of atomization and loneliness of the individual， the increasing strength of movements that demand total submission to their own absurd inner logic， the superfluousness of human labour， the decline of trust in institutions and political parties and more seem to be fertile grounds for the rise of new totalitarian movements that will plague our future。 As Arendt clearly shows， it's not only the ideology of Nazism or Communism that can result in totalitarian movements。 Even more disturbing is the fact that with the technology of today a new totalitarian victory would lead to devastating results which Hitler or Stalin could only have dreamed of。 My hope is that people， regardless of political beliefs， will be able to turn the tide when totalitarianism once again threatens human civilization。If you are intrigued by the 20th century， a fan of George Orwell， and also willing to spend the time and effort， The Origins of Totalitarianism is a must read。 。。。more
Jason Poling
，
Genius！ I cannot believe how good this was。
Nathan Reed
，
One doesn't just simply read a Hannah Arendt book！ And yes， it took me this long to read it because it took me this long to learn the historical context of this book。 Hannah's work is the foundation to some many other books that I've read on critical race thinking and racist ideology。 The Origins of Totalitarianism gives historical accounts of events that lead to anti-Semitic rhetoric that eventually became racist ideology that persuaded some many governing bodies that we see today。 One doesn't just simply read a Hannah Arendt book！ And yes， it took me this long to read it because it took me this long to learn the historical context of this book。 Hannah's work is the foundation to some many other books that I've read on critical race thinking and racist ideology。 The Origins of Totalitarianism gives historical accounts of events that lead to anti-Semitic rhetoric that eventually became racist ideology that persuaded some many governing bodies that we see today。 。。。more
Jacob Longini
，
A deep exploration into some of the darkest themes in political philosophy。 Arendt studies the conditions necessary for totalitarian rule， what it does to those subjected to it， and what risk totalitarian regimes pose for the future of humanity。 Written from the 40s to the 60s （with multiple， updated editions）， the book is startlingly prognosticative， as many sections sound like descriptions of the radicalized far-right in America today。 （NOTE: I read only the prefaces， "The Dreyfus Affair"， pp。 A deep exploration into some of the darkest themes in political philosophy。 Arendt studies the conditions necessary for totalitarian rule， what it does to those subjected to it， and what risk totalitarian regimes pose for the future of humanity。 Written from the 40s to the 60s （with multiple， updated editions）， the book is startlingly prognosticative， as many sections sound like descriptions of the radicalized far-right in America today。 （NOTE: I read only the prefaces， "The Dreyfus Affair"， pp。 305-307， pp。 326-328， and the final chapter "Ideology & Terror"。 These sections were recommended to me by my Nana， who has delved further into much of Hannah Arendt's work。） 。。。more
Patrick Ma
，
This was a difficult book。 But it sure is important。 Totalitarian regimes destroy the individual and make him dependent on a larger whole。 Facts no longer mean anything， punishment is random。 Imperialism created， or at least greatly exaggerated， racial differences to justify cruelty。 "Normal men do not know everything is possible" starts off the chapter on totalitarianism。 I thought it was an inspirational quote， like， "Believe in your dreams，" but it actually means that totalitarianism can make This was a difficult book。 But it sure is important。 Totalitarian regimes destroy the individual and make him dependent on a larger whole。 Facts no longer mean anything， punishment is random。 Imperialism created， or at least greatly exaggerated， racial differences to justify cruelty。 "Normal men do not know everything is possible" starts off the chapter on totalitarianism。 I thought it was an inspirational quote， like， "Believe in your dreams，" but it actually means that totalitarianism can make people believe anything。 。。。more
Marla
，
I can see why Hannah Arendt is considered one of the most important political thinkers of the 20th century。 In this books she weaves together history， human behavior， psychologic， literature and philosophy。 The main topics are antisemitism， imperialism， and totalitarianism。 The explanation of why antisemitism was so wide spread and became so deadly was not what I expected and is still relevant to today’s struggles between ethnic groups。 I became so engrossed in this work that it seem to end sudd I can see why Hannah Arendt is considered one of the most important political thinkers of the 20th century。 In this books she weaves together history， human behavior， psychologic， literature and philosophy。 The main topics are antisemitism， imperialism， and totalitarianism。 The explanation of why antisemitism was so wide spread and became so deadly was not what I expected and is still relevant to today’s struggles between ethnic groups。 I became so engrossed in this work that it seem to end suddenly and my need for more understanding made me turn right around and start it again。 “In an ever-changing， incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would， at the same time， believe everything and nothing， think that everything was possible and that nothing was true。 [。。。] under such conditions， one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day， and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood， they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them， they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness。” 。。。more
Whitney Moore
，
At the risk of over-simplifying this exquisitely nuanced book， I need to say that， for me， it all boils down to this: tyranny has happened before and will happen again， as if it is a vein that runs way down deep beneath the dirt of earth， always available to be tapped。 That might be why the work of Hannah Arendt resonates so profoundly today; why we hear her words echoing still， in the present tense。Arendt proves Voltaire was right that “those who can make you believe absurdities can make you co At the risk of over-simplifying this exquisitely nuanced book， I need to say that， for me， it all boils down to this: tyranny has happened before and will happen again， as if it is a vein that runs way down deep beneath the dirt of earth， always available to be tapped。 That might be why the work of Hannah Arendt resonates so profoundly today; why we hear her words echoing still， in the present tense。Arendt proves Voltaire was right that “those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities。” The litmus test is absurdity – like the idea that people with a penis are welcome to participate in women’s sports。 Eradicating common sense paves the way for enticing people to embrace a prevailing proposition （however bizarre it may be） and then proceeds into pressuring people （or worse） to conform。 Totalism （her word） will not tolerate dissent， and she documents that this scenario never ends well。The tyranny of the Nazis did not start by calling for the extermination of Jews。 Nazi Evil began because Germans were so demoralized after WWI that Hitler sounded inspirational and began to restore national pride。 The cult of racial purity started with insinuations that Jews were shrewd and greedy and secretly conspiring to run the world。 This was preposterous， but it raised suspicions that were fanned into flame when the German Parliament burned down。 Hitler grabbed the fire as a pretext for denigrating Jews， suspending civil liberties， and crushing dissent。 He was elevating a narrative that permeated even the most respectable German minds with fear。 Soon there was a widespread willingness to round up all the yellow stars， load them into boxcars， and carry them away。Consider this sentence by Arendt: “In Nazi Germany， questioning the validity of racism and antisemitism when nothing mattered but race origin， when [your] career depended upon an Aryan physiognomy and [your] amount of food depended on the number of [your] Jewish grandparents， was like questioning the existence of the world。” Now substitute a few words from current events so that it reads， “In modern-day America， questioning the validity of systemic racism， when nothing matters but social justice for black lives， is like questioning the existence of the world。” Noble sounding words: “doing your part” to erase white privilege。 But， ever so gradually， even the most well-educated are calling themselves “white allies” – not realizing that they sound like Kipling’s colonial characters， carrying “the white man’s burden” for “the great unwashed。” I favor being an ally -- regardless of skin color – a friend to all mankind。 But that’s probably sexist or racist or both in today’s Orwellian world。Hannah Arendt would say “Watch out！” because once you have an Oppressed， then you have an Oppressor， and nothing good has ever come of that。 I appreciate her thoroughly documented proof that decent people can be turned into monsters – easily。 It only takes a small minority to tap into the ooze of tyranny that calls to them， and we can see that they are tapping into it now， though it isn’t wearing a red suit with horns and a tail。 Evil never shows up that way。 It always shows up looking different， but it’s the same。 。。。more
Evan Wirth
，
Arednt takes on an ambitious task of historically accounting for the rise of totalitarianism both in Nazi Germany and in Soviet Russia。 Her historical account is deeply disturbing because it accounts for this new form of government， not just as being the decisions of a few bad people， but as arising from various movements and the exploitation of those movements。 We also learn that these movements were more far-reaching than just within the borders of Germany or Russia。The first section of the bo Arednt takes on an ambitious task of historically accounting for the rise of totalitarianism both in Nazi Germany and in Soviet Russia。 Her historical account is deeply disturbing because it accounts for this new form of government， not just as being the decisions of a few bad people， but as arising from various movements and the exploitation of those movements。 We also learn that these movements were more far-reaching than just within the borders of Germany or Russia。The first section of the book deals with antisemitism in a very detailed historical account。 Arednt makes a distinction between modern secular anti-semitism and the dislike of Jews that carried through the Middle Ages。 This modern form was especially dangerous because the Jews became defined as Jews by birth not merely by religious belief or following tradition。 This set some of the foundations for what the Nazis would later do。 One potentially problematic part of Arednt’s analysis is that she appears to be saying the Jews were partly responsible for the development of anti-semitism because some Jewish historians defined their history as a struggle of the chosen people under constant persecution， and that some Jews held privileged positions at the birth of the nation-state due to their history as money lenders。 It would be rash to apply this responsibility to every person of Jewish heritage， since only a minority of Jews would’ve been in a position to define their history or hold these privileged positions。The second section follows the rise of Imperialism from the political emancipation of the bourgeoisie。 The bourgeoisie now held a special position in society to influence politics with the fall of the nobility。 This power led to the political need for expansion and exploitation of other nations to serve the necessity of continual growth under capitalism。 This historical chapter culminates in the absurd beginnings of World War I。The third section describes totalitarianism and how this differed from other political movements。 Arednt even distinguishes Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia from other dictatorships。 She describes the death and work camps as indispensable parts of this form of government which needed to dehumanize large groups of people， separating them from their supposedly inalienable human rights by depriving them of their citizenship and identity to serve the political goals of these movements。This book deserves it’s own essay in review， which I would have only been prepared to write if I took more time to work my way through each section of the book， taking detailed notes and discussing points along the way。 I recommend this book more for academic study than for a book club or personal enjoyment。 That being said， it seems to offer a unique and detailed account of the origins of totalitarianism。 。。。more
Antonino
，
Questo saggio ha demolito i preconcetti con cui mi ci ero avvicinato， nell'ordine: 1） essendo stato scritto a ridosso della fine della guerra potrebbe soffrire di mancanza di distanza storica， troppo recenti i fatti per essere pienamente compresi （addirittura lo stalinismo era ancora in auge al tempo della pubblicazione）; FALSO， la Arendt aveva già pienamente maturato e sedimentato per tempo tutti questi concetti e la sua analisi rimane lucida e potente， le mancavano forse dei dettagli ma il qua Questo saggio ha demolito i preconcetti con cui mi ci ero avvicinato， nell'ordine: 1） essendo stato scritto a ridosso della fine della guerra potrebbe soffrire di mancanza di distanza storica， troppo recenti i fatti per essere pienamente compresi （addirittura lo stalinismo era ancora in auge al tempo della pubblicazione）; FALSO， la Arendt aveva già pienamente maturato e sedimentato per tempo tutti questi concetti e la sua analisi rimane lucida e potente， le mancavano forse dei dettagli ma il quadro generale l'ha tutto。 2） scritto più di 70 anni fa， cosa ci sarà ancora di attuale？ TANTISSIMO， molta parte dell'analisi sulla formazione del consenso， su cosa sia un movimento anti-sistema， sulla realtà ideologica che schiaccia i fatti （pensate alle fake news di Trump）， sull'estraniazione e atomizzazione come prodromici all'instaurarsi di una dittatura， o addirittura， di un totalitarismo sono ATTUALISSIMI， farei leggere e rileggere nelle scuole interi capitoli per la chiarezza con cui sono spiegati strumenti di analisi che oggi latitano paurosamente。 3） Mi ritengo abbastanza ferrato in tema WWII， ho letto tanto， cosa potrei trovarci che non sappia già？ MOLTISSIMO， anche se è vero che molte pagine le ho lette in velocità sapendo in anticipo dove si andava a parare， ho trovato comunque pagine straordinariamente interessanti， sul disconoscimento del diritto tout-court （i nazisti si comportavano non contro la legge， ma aldilà della legge， di fatto la costituzione di Weimar non venne mai abrogata！）， sul rendere-essere apolidi come mezzo di pressione per diffondere l' antisemitismo anche tra gli altri stati， e molti dettagli sullo stato di polizia （in particolare sul passaggio da SA a SS） etc。。 4） è un mattone di oltre 650 pagine， sarà una lettura estenuante。 FALSO， benchè sia un saggio di natura politica-filosofica， il libro è molto scorrevole， scritto con perfetta padronanza narratoria， c'è una costruzione logica che tiene unito l'impianto del libro che è ben presente dall'inizio alla fine， non c'è il rischio di perdersi， alla fine l'ho proprio divorato。 QUINDI， non abbiatene paura， leggetelo。 Se posso criticare qualcosa （ma chi sono io per criticare Arendt？？）， non sono rimasto convinto della tesi che entrambi i totalitarismi， nazismo e stalinismo， abbiano avuto davvero la medesima origine nell'antisemitismo e nell'imperialismo。 Sono pienamente d'accordo sul motore puramente ideologico che sta alla base di essi e ho trovato che le pagine più belle siano proprio quelle dedicate al rapporto tra ideologia e fatti。 。。。more
Harry Taylor
，
Should be three reviews。The first third is a genuinely insightful analysis of Antisemitism and Jewish history from a clearly Marxist point of view。The second is a completely bizarre series of ramblings on Imperialism that makes very little sense and would have zero chance of being published today。Maybe the final third on totalitarianism only seems dull because ideas that were novel then are extremely common and well known now， but I didn't get much from this other than the Jewish history。 Should be three reviews。The first third is a genuinely insightful analysis of Antisemitism and Jewish history from a clearly Marxist point of view。The second is a completely bizarre series of ramblings on Imperialism that makes very little sense and would have zero chance of being published today。Maybe the final third on totalitarianism only seems dull because ideas that were novel then are extremely common and well known now， but I didn't get much from this other than the Jewish history。 。。。more
Nick
，