"Responsibility and judgment."

Arendt unpublished posthumous collection. Famous keyword of Arendt thought, "mediocrity of evil". It can not be aware of their own the determined responsibility, and also, and that can not be the will of the good, thing of evil that dwells in such mediocrity is. It was carried out in Germany under the Hitler dictatorship, many of the atrocities. It went evil, just was very ordinary people. Most ugly evil, lacking the will to judgment and responsibility sense and goodness, born from the "mediocrity of" ordinary. That's why, we are once again, individual responsibility, judgment, reconsider the will power, or not do I have to revive it. I think real voice of Arendt is like coming sounded to the bottom of the belly, it's a great great book. 1. "The responsibility of the individual under the dictatorship." Under the Hitler dictatorship in Nazi, many of the Jews were killed. This thing, I wonder can I we How thinking. After the war, Arendt was his big idea challenge this thing. Was contracted to murder, it was a man who not only just a gear for Hitler. They abandoned their "judgment", only it is ordained was carried out slaughter act to leave. In the "Third Reich, make decisions, a human just one person to run, this man I was responsible politically. It is leading to was Hitler himself. From [snip] officials of the terminal officials until, all of the people of the other that has been processing the public issue was only to actually . just because, anyone or will be that it does not bear personal responsibility. " Arendt says. Nevertheless, it was guilty person and he is responsible as "personal". On the basis of the Nuremberg trials that judged Nazi crimes, Arendt says in the following manner. that "justices revealed paying a big effort, rather than to be tried in the court system, neither a historical trend in the history of the case, rather than somehow even principle (for example, anti-Semitism), one person was that he such. " Is to be judged by the law, it is a "person" as a last responsibility subject. But also at the same time, "It may not be allowed that does not matter system of responsibility itself at all. Even from the moral point of view also from a legal point of view, I responsible for this system is called into question in the form of the circumstances." If a crime has been made, the responsibility is always personal. But the responsibility of the system that drove the individual to the crime also, there need to be asked of course. This is the basic when you think about the "individual responsibility." Arendt is a translation to claim so. 2. "Some of the problems of moral philosophy." It is most "philosophical" discussion unfolds in this book, is a lecture book entitled "some of the problems of moral philosophy," this. In this lecture, Arendt first say in the following manner. "All of ethics, for the human mortal, and as the assumption that life is not the highest good" is, and. That is, "In the human students, I thing important is to always present than the survival and reproduction of individual life." Arendt, ethics and just a "living" thing to say that it is not. To borrow the words of Aristotle, it is going to be called, it is that "to live well." (See page of Aristotle "political science") So, whether such hell does it mean to be a "live well". ① of very ordinary people responsibility Arendt says. "Nazi regime and proposed a new value system, these are worth system was introduced a legal system that has been devised on the basis of. In addition any person of German society, though not exactly the Force, is tuned to the Nazi regime Te, rather than their social status, it up to the moral beliefs was accompanied to these social status, it was as if were buried left out overnight. " Totalitarianism of the Nazis, was presented by the Nazis, was an absolute reduction of a new value system. And people, to leave is said, he had tuned into the value system. Therefore, it was gone disrupt the morality is, it was a very ordinary people. "Cause the collapse of morality is a collection of mere customs, practices that can arbitrarily change things, habits, from being out in the convention, not the responsibility of the criminal, it is the responsibility of very ordinary people. " Furthermore Arendt says. After the war, Germany is of the people, "and only notice a slight period of time," history "is only told the defeat of Germany, he returned to the original morality" of it and. "So we," the collapse of the moral "order, not only once, twice, not forced said that he had witnessed." Very ordinary people, the moral order in society, was very easily collapse. In fear of this thing, Arendt managed an think. That's why, we once again, there is a need to rethink the "individual responsibility." And whether will be able to regain the "number" as the responsibility mainly how, there is a need to rethink. Arendt is ask so. It is desirable to be made than do that bad ② Subsequently Arendt says. I, can be cut off if think the relationship with others, to try to Danto himself. But there is a can not regardless of being cut off in any way. It is the involvement of the "I". So we say. This is, rather than do that, "evil, shows the actual basis for the assertion that better to be made that the evil is desirable. When you do that bad, the person I was going to be bad in your own inner it will burdened, and I are forced to spend a lifetime in the close relationship of the more unbearable with this person. that you begin to follow this who you can not absolutely, "said. This sentence is, I think very attractive descent seems to Arendt. However, on the other hand, unfortunately this is whether not're bankrupt logically I think. Even say, Arendt, "it is plagued by later guilt if Nase evil. The relationship between such myself, I can not be cut off," he says, but we on the contrary, the "evil for When you are prompted, it is saddled with the resentment of that. the relationship between such myself, because I it is also possible to say that it can not be "that sever. In short, "themselves for it is not possible to sever a relation between the" thing grounds, to be discussed that "made evil" as more advantage that "to form an evil" is, he is unreasonable. But Arendt On the other hand, while borrowing the words of Plato, noble people as writings thought of (these Plato we are saying that choose to "be made evil" than that "to form the evil" has been expanded , see such as a page of "Gorgias"). This means that, there is a sufficiently convincing as mental attitude. Assuming, we can take over Arendt, or be able to get this "nobility" in how, and, it would be important to consider the social and educational conditions. ③ responsibility and storage Subsequently Arendt says. "The greatest villain, in order not to think about what their it was a person that can not be stored that his is a, and since it is not stored, the person who what also not disturbed to such I. " The responsible person refers to a person who is able to securely store its own actions. And the fact of such individuals, it referred to as a "personality". Therefore Arendt says as follows. "Then, the personality will be that it's results that are brought directly from . In other words, it is giving forgiveness, not a sin, it is that you forgive personality. And evil you have lost roots In, I personality that can forgive are no longer left. " When we referred to as "forgive" the others, it is, he forgive the "personality" rather than forgive sins. However, if the person is, if even possible to "remember" their sin is that it could not also be "deep thinking", we would not be able to find a character that can be "forgive" it is no longer It will be called. It's was a unprecedented in Nazi trial, just the people, in the defendant, should be forgiven, or lies in the fact it was difficult to find a "personality" should be tried. "The embarrassment at the trial of Nazi criminal has occurred, have these criminals voluntarily give up all of the personality nature, do not some people should also be pardoned person to punish like left Because it was like. " ④ reason, desire, will Furthermore Arendt says. Human beings there is a reason to, but people would sometimes allowed to surrender it to the desire. But to us, to arbitrate this reason and desire, it is equipped with further third of capacity. It's "intention". "Will is the arbiter of reason and desire, only intention in this role that's the freedom. [Snip] completely me just to be unique is the intention." By the force of this will, we can determine the right and wrong, and Megakeru to goodness. In either it would be possible if how. ⑤ You can either live with anyone. And, mediocrity of evil Arendt says. Firmly to determine the right and wrong, that is aiming at the good by the will. The conditions, are by the question of "Who with you want to live," said. "Which kind of people and you want to both life, through example, real or fictional person, already through the model of the deceased person or persons are now tail alive, and be thinking through the model of past and current events in, it is to choose. " Itself and by having the people who want to model, you can keep the will to good. Arendt argue so. When you, the terrible of is "yourself in with any person, it may appear a person of being able ", and Arendt says. "To choose their own model, if it is not possible to select a person who want to live together in the first place if there is no intention to be selected, and either not be able to interact with others by determining, when there is no intention involved is born true stumbling stone (Sukandaron) is. " In my, that there is no model, such as seems to want to cultivate the will to goodness, these people can be run to easily evil. So Arendt says. "There there is fear. And is there there is mediocrity of evil at the same time." Evil of mediocrity is, it is not able to will the good to have themselves the determined responsibility, he thing of evil that dwells in such mediocrity is.

"About the Revolution"

first The unique thinker that Arendt, I would borne away in feeling that you want to strongly at the same time and attracted, also strongly resistance. A wide range of deep culture and, insight, supported by it. Oozing even while being restrained, love for human beings, and, unique thought language. It's what the very top-notch thinkers, but that's why, there is a place to come shakes here of the existential to the strange. The reason is that what wonder, and it has been thought for a long time, once you read this book, indeed, Arendt's a too impressive "critics", that there is that it was strangely convinced I thought. By making full use of the wide range of liberal arts in freely, to capture sharp historical or contemporary events. But that ability is too too impressive, I also all events, including, but she thought that would be housed comfortably within the frame of the, there is such uncomfortable. It is, of course, there is a condition of strong philosophical thinking. But I, in its style, was carrying at the same time subtle discomfort and admire you. Although totally personal taste issue, I like Arendt, "world I'm this happens, but what would be so" to "criticism" style that, you feel some uncomfortable. I, hopes polish that "it is possible to envision so much affluent society Come to think of it like this, Come What about", such a style rather. And though it is completely personal taste issue, unique thinkers that Arendt, like this, there is something like make me thinking from the ground what it means to "idea". Anyway, for this book. While comparing the American Revolution and the French Revolution, why the former to some extent "success", why the latter ended in "failure", you are trying to sharp analysis. What is a revolution, something its significance is, and how if, whether we can create a prosperous society. Thinking of Arendt is still Saewata~tsu. 1. Meaning of revolution According to Arendt, the purpose of the revolution is the "freedom of establishment". It does not mean liberation from mere old power. Arendt says. "Would be released when the (liberation) and freedom (freedom) is obvious is not the same. Although release is in the freedom of conditions, there is no intended bring never automatically free. And of release notion is included in among the, if not out of the realm of Negative to be considered. Therefore not the same thing as the desire to even the intention to release it. " Regardless distinguish between liberty and freedom. Revolution and is not a liberation from mere old power, which means a "new beginning" with the aim of freedom of configuration. And also, the he must such. Arendt says so. Similar to the phenomenon of "revolution that can not be explained only change, is not sufficient explanation alone violence. In other words, occurs a change in the sense of a new beginning, set a governance form of violence is completely different, a new political body is used to form, only if the release from oppression is aiming to at least freedom of construction, it is to be able to talk about revolution. " 2. The American Revolution and the French Revolution Well, the revolution that happened in reality in the, really really, I wonder was aimed at freedom of configuration "new beginning". In the evaluation of Arendt, the American Revolution was so. But the French Revolution, have no choice but to say it was a revolution that failed to freedom of configuration. For some reason. In the French Revolution, freedom of the purpose of the revolution that the configuration is, because had been converted unawares to extinction of "social problems" of "poverty". This has become a direct contributing cause of the terror by Robespierre. So Arendt said. "I unleash terrorism, and the drove up to the downfall of the revolution is a necessity [poverty], was the people of tense deficiency." "During this time the revolution is changing its direction, it had become no longer freedom of revolutionary purpose." At the bottom of the desire of solving social problems of poverty of extinction, there is sympathy for the poor. This, Rousseau is brought to social thought, Robespierre is practice, thus it is power that sparked a terror. So Arendt see. . "The compassion that were considered virtues of the source, have demonstrated that you have the ability to become cruel than cruelty itself" for compassion, for love human beings against, non-humanly and familiar! "- -. These words that were almost out punching in any from among the petition section was addressed to the National Convention with Paris Commune, nor also extreme rather than be one of accidental This is a word of mercy of truth It is there By the way, in my opinion, Rousseau criticism of Arendt is something somewhat unfair. "Social Contract," I wrote in the pages of, as Rousseau, is respected, thinkers also are hated at the same time is not in the other. And one of the reasons why he is hated horribly, the Robespierre is in the place where had appointed himself the faithful embodies's Rousseau's theory. There are Rousseau is at the root of terror. This was long in common belief. But in my opinion, this criticism is something almost unfair. For example, Arendt Although regarded as a violent concept to request a "perfect match" and "general will", this is a criticism that was removed exactly the target. "General will" is, social power is a principle of "legitimacy" only be referred to as "legitimate", of power that when it can on behalf of the "will" of all citizens, fully to match everyone's interests not simply the principle of the requirement that such must be (see page of Rousseau "Social Contract"). Also, certainly Rousseau has been preached the importance of "compassion," "mercy" (see page of Rousseau "Discourse on the Origin of Inequality"), because that, and the like Horobose thoroughly rich for the poor I did not say a word to. I do think Rousseau criticism of Arendt is the unfair is, like this, there is a place where Arendt has gone interprets Rousseau quite forcibly their own context. Anyway, we intend to move ahead. French Revolution, whereas had to convert the purpose and to solve social problems from the free configuration as above, the American Revolution is, from beginning to end, was Perpetuate the purpose of freedom of configuration. "The American position is actually declared, all mankind are not to be more than the fact that they need a government that has been civilized. In contrast, the French stance is, independent of the political body , also the external rights are declared to be present, further progressing, this so-called right - that of human beings as a human right - have rights and equal view of the citizens. " French Revolution, people gave birth to the idea that it is equally born. This, however, would speak, it led to the idea to deny all power and domination. However, human beings, along with others, yet in order to live as a free present, what is public, it needed or "political body" is. In order to be free, to establish a public space that can guarantee freedom. Americans knew this thing. So Arendt said. The reason, she is described as follows. First, the fact that the United States has caused a revolution in the lower "limit monarchy" in the United Kingdom. The French Revolution was a revolution under "absolute monarchy". People had to be first anyway overthrown the power absolutely. Therefore, he idea of ​​the revolutionaries who make up the new power was not born easily. In contrast, in the United States, the idea of ​​constituting a "power" better than alternative to "limit monarch" has been present from the beginning of the first place. Alternatively, the "social issues" that like France "poverty" is I was also fortunate that there was little in the United States. (Referred to slavery, but further problems that obscure the poverty problem was present.) So, we that were able to continue defined the purpose of the revolution always to the "freedom of the Configuration". something that the American Revolution was taught to we. Arendt says. It is human only in the human connection that was based on a multiple of, thing that truly humanly possible "activities", and. "It's reliable also human as individuals, live in more than one person on this planet rather than one person, is because between them there is a fact that shaped the world. People from the human nature of pitfalls and the save is the man of this world of. " The "power, and the only human attributes that people are able to each other knot is related to each other among the founding act by keeping the promise without the promise, only applies to interventional (in-between) space of the world it is. And it would be fair to see the best of human ability in the political area. " (Most Arendt, subsequent America are disappointed that it was not possible to sustain and develop such a revolutionary spirit.) 3. = The space appeared to be free Thus Arendt of the question, people are what society there is a need to make in order to become free, continue to fruition to the thing. Her answer is exactly the same in principle as that shown in the primary work "human condition" (see page of Arendt "human condition"). "Public without sharing the happiness not be said that everyone is happy, everyone is without experience of public freedom is also not be said to be free and to participate in public power to share it to none, I can not "to the fact that everyone is happy is free. The space for such freedom, Arendt called a "spatial manifestation." "Freedom in Positive sense is possible only between the equal persons. The equality itself, by no means universally valid principle, and also with the marginal pickled, inside the space limitations only The present invention can be applied such free spaces, -. Rather than using intact John Adams terms, just speaking according to its gist - manifestation of the space (space of appearance) can also be referred to as a use. " First, equal - and good is better to translate and equal than translated as equality I believe - is a condition. And, as equal presence with each other, I someone, you are someone, and, mutually vividly the question dress space. This is the space appear. Where flying about the diverse opinions (opinion), people are all the "" expressed, to discuss, and determining "engaged in activities" that can. Our political society, something that is easy to will be moved in the decision by the "representative" of our citizens absence. But we, mutually expressed as much as possible everyone opinion, it is necessary to plan the society so that it can leave appear in political society. The first time to become so, we he can be a reality a free society. Arendt argue so.

"Human condition."

first Jews from Germany, Arendt. Of her went to America after fleeing Nazi persecution, book by the English is very difficult to understand. Circuitous writing and that it is not forced and likely approaching to the heart of the problem, many of the episodes like flaunt the knowledgeable they are, are more difficult to read her book. Nevertheless, the problems that she raised, the possibility of the resolution, there is serving face of the leading thinkers vivid. This document, the labor of human active life, work, were discussed from three aspects of activities, primary work of Arendt. We How do the "free", and will be able to "richly to live." Its essential insight is shown strong. 1. Labor, work, activities "By the term vita activa, I, three basic human activity force, ie, labor, work, want to to mean the activity." Famous, labor in active life, work, activity concept device. And labor, it of vital activities. The work, that of activities that create an artificial world. For example, it's that the craftsman or make a chair. And activities and, the thing of the activities that are made in the relationship with the people. Such as speech activities and commercial activities falls on it. Arendt himself, but he does not say clearly, in my feeling, this division, when you think of "what to do in our lives rich in society", pretty useful. Below, we want to and I think the thing to continue to introduce this book from this point of view. 2. The emergence of social area And in considering the above-mentioned problems, Arendt, go to historically clarify the first society become things of the rise. If you say "strictly, the advent of neither social area intended public without those private is a relatively new phenomenon, its origin is the same time and modern appearance, the political form of nation It is seen in the nation. " In ancient Greece, private area and public area (Police) (family) had been clearly distinguished. So Arendt says. Because family, that of natural communities that have been dominated by the "necessary". In order to live, the family must earn the daily bread to cooperate. Police contrast, those who have overcome this biological need, a joint body to be "free". Biological needs captive not those who gathered, I engaged decide on their own that their a "free" life. In ancient Greece, in order to be "free", it is necessary to overcome the biological necessary to have initially. But it is just the labor and production only to engage, was also intended to be a possible only if there is the presence of the slaves. On the other hand, or "free" of us in modern times can be if collateral. In the modern, "free" of the million people first has been released. It is short, but the fact that each person has their own biological need, no longer must satisfy himself. We no longer, we can not afford to have them produce what you need in the "slave" to our survival. Thus modern times, was to first "animal for labor," each person. "All modern communities are within quickly, it became to the center of labor is the only active power required to sustain life." From there, things become "social" in the modern is I was supposed to occur. Arendt points out so. First, animal serving as human beings to labor, become gradually as we won the property. And, it would like hope that this is guaranteed by what is "public". That is, until it while there was a "private" (family) to come out beyond the area "public" (Police) area, a "private" area,'ll have protection by the "public" area It idea appeared that. Thus strict distinction between "I" and "public" is no longer, the region that they are intertwined with each other "society" has emerged. Arendt argue so. In addition, modernization is also the era production has expanded explosively by the division of labor. This means, the "labor" of each person, rather than a lonely work, but that came to be Itonama in people's relationships. Such a thing of the relationship between the mesh also Arendt referred to as a "society" in this book. 3. Labor advantage of modern As we have seen above, modernization is labor advantage of the era. And it is grave by production value through the labor at all. "We already are alive in society, such as calculated by the consumption of power to earn what's called wealth. And, because the power of this earning and consumption, two aspects of the metabolism of the human body to perform and than is not only of deformation. " You get what you need in life by working, to consume this. Only a succession of such a kind of metabolism, has become our lives. Arendt points out so. "When you try to us what, it is believed to be for all the" make a living ". It is a judgment of society." 4. Work people to work Human beings to labor, whereas that become a slave of the day-to-day life, what work people to do the job is the ruler of this world. So Arendt says. They because freely, can make their own world. "Only just with the image for the product of the future alone is production freely, than is free to destroy the work of their own hands." In However modern works of these tools who also, after all has been consumed as a consumer product. If it would be would be "animal that labor" and "animal to do the job", human beings anyway, is reduced to the presence of as What, he not be seen as Who. In this way human beings, has become a thoroughly exchange can exist. Arendt points out so. And it should by no means "rich" students, and. In our raw, or can become richer if how. keywords that Arendt presents is "activities". Five. Activity "Human beings, through speech and activity, simply to try Nukindeyo beyond the dimension of" different things ". This means that speech and activities with each other, human beings, rather than as a physical object, as a human being, in a manner that appears to mutual It is there We, just instead of being seen as "What is" (what) as an exchange value, must be of the "either who the" as people themselves seen and (who). That's the insight of Arendt. And it says. To that end, we and he need to "act" and "words". "This is because these two abilities, naturally much the same as the production is to produce the use object, it is because to produce a meaningful story." However, the area of ​​this "speech", "activity" is a very unstable world. Because Man is a diverse and do not know what kind of "speech (thought)" appears, what kind of "activities" you do not know may have the power. But this does not mean in any way intended to enrich the human students to control this. So Arendt says. How much area of ​​freedom and "free speech", "activity" is or may be collateral. This is, we can be rich to live, that is the biggest of the conditions themselves that Ae exchange with others the "Who, or is". In I wonder this instability of the region it can be overcome by how I. Idea of ​​Arendt's as follows. Relief against irreversible and impossible prophecy of the process to start the "activities, another with it, rather than coming from higher capacity something, one of the potential of activity itself is hitting in relief. Because irreversibility, does not know that the person is performing the own, even though not can be known, yourself is that not possible to undo that had done. The Kedasu de from predicament of irreversibility possible remedy is the ability of forgiveness. On the other hand, uncertainty that was chaotic in the future, in other words, the remedy against improper prophecy of promise was, has been included in the ability to keep a promise. " "Because sovereign, whether personal entity called personality, and any collective entity of people, if required by a single entity in isolation, it is. However, constrained by the promise of mutual always false In the case of a large number of people, is limited to have a reality. In this case sovereignty, as a result, was born in case you have escaped to some extent the future of Fukasoku resistance. because the degree, a promise, limit that is included in the capacity itself to protect to be the same thing. " Forgiveness and promise of ability. This is, it is a condition to live rich through the "speech", "activities". Arendt argue so.

"Totalitarianism of origin 2: imperialism"

first "The Origins of Totalitarianism 1: anti-Semitism" in, I have been investigated or have been Wakioko~tsu to how the anti-Semitism in the 19th century Europe. Volume 2 of the theme continues, nation-state takes the imperialist policy, is considered like going to unfold one after another colonial rule. And in the process, how it began to gather to totalitarianism, further, why when the Jews has been the target that is revealed. Volume 2 going imminent to finally a problem of the heart. Part 2 imperialism 1. To imperialism of expansion Nation-state will be soon and proceeds to the road of imperialism. For some reason. Capitalists who appeared in the nation-state, which is based free economic activity, because he determined to further investments overseas. "The biggest cause of this development is the presence of one of the small class of capitalists, their wealth is not fully fit in the framework of the country's social structure, the planet that it off they are seeking lucrative investment destination of excess capital The is because the traveling around looking with greedy eyes. " When this happens, "Jewish financiers will lose its position in the imperialist project, initiative moved into the hands of industrial capital" to become a go thing. As revealed in the previous volume, power defunct wealth, it would then be showered contempt and resentment from the people. Soil of contempt and hatred of the Jewish people, was equipped longer sufficient. 2. Deployment of racial thought In addition, this time, racial thought had Wakioko~tsu in various forms in Europe. In particular, in the United Kingdom that class rise due to economic activity has become relatively easy, eugenic racial thought has flourished. "The result, if you look in the racial theory development, is that the idea of ​​Toka selection Toka biological genetic quality has become more dominant than anywhere else in the race theory of the United Kingdom. So-called eugenics It has originated in all England. " 18 century, knowledge people, while There are a variety of human beings in the world, was praise that you have the essence of as the same person. "18 century, and to borrow a wonderfully precise words of Tokkuvu~iru," diversity of races, but is was believed "the identity of the human race. In Germany, Herder is has emphasized that it is not should be used in human beings to "lowly" words such as race. " But the 19th century, people is began with the relative merits to race. That one of the hotbed is in the "Africa scramble" in imperialism. In South Africa, it was originally Europeans settled. 17 century, is a Boer who turned into the local people emigrated from the Netherlands (Buhr people). They first would be to embrace the overwhelming racial thought. "Race idea of ​​Buhr who had wriggling to clearly seen cultural or dark continent without all have a political entity, human beings also is one that came from fear of existence which is not tired, even with animals." I think that the fear of ethnic groups in Africa, and, but their own is what is much higher ethnic. This has aroused the absolute race thought to Buhr people. In South Africa the soil of such racial thought was well equipped, the 19th century, large deposits of gold and diamonds have been discovered. Many people have been rushed in force from Europe. to come was the were expelled from their home country, was our (dropouts from any class) mob to aim a fortune. "They, rather than jumped out of his to say civil society is too cramped, is the abandoned spitting from the civil society. They were literally of waste of this society." Society adventurer our Fodder gather. Of course, racism idea becomes even more strongly. And Jews, in the midst of this race thought, it became for the first time put is it. In imperialism initial stage, Jews because still was the main player of the financial activity. In this way "for the Jews was supposed to play the role of the representatives in the race society, seen they are now of all of the other as" the special one is distinguished from the Caucasian, "" Race, "" Rukoto It Became. In fierce location racial thought, and it was supposed to be Jewish is seen just as a "Jewish race". Furthermore, in this South Africa is not the economic activities and political activities, pure violence had dominated. "In other words, if only pure violence without even have the economic power status, a non-rights in the society, or that a layer subject to exploitation, it is possible to create as you like, and to perform such a hierarchy conversion Revolution does not need, it can be even be in favor of the layer with a ruling class, and in the end, be able to use the different ethnic groups and backward ethnic groups is the best bet for the rise of the mob itself in society, it seemed was. " Also to race thought and violence rule of imperialism era also, we he can see the sprouting of totalitarianism. 3. Bureaucracy In the colonial under imperialism, it was supposed to be thorough bureaucracy dominated is deer. Race thought and bureaucracy dominated. The two are, Arendt to be a feature of imperialism said. "What is the law speaking domination by the bureaucracy law opposite, it is dominated by the Cabinet Order. For [snip] The law is always issued under the responsibility of a particular personality or legislative meeting, Cabinet Order always is an anonymous, to indicate the reason for the individual cases also not justified need. " The bureaucracy, which is the dominant anonymous person. Colonial politician Cecil Rhodes in South Africa also, load Cromer in Egypt, we set a bureaucratic dictatorship ruled that escaped the surveillance of the home country. It is a so-called rule by secret societies, Arendt this, saying that "straightforward indicator of imperialist domination generally essential elements". Its purpose is merely intently expansion, it was expanded for the expansion. Rose also Cromer also regarded themselves as expansion of the gear for this expansion, was set a bureaucracy dominated for that. This purpose performance for ultra-purpose and objective should say also has the same structure as the totalitarianism after. So Arendt argue. As we shall see in Volume 3, totalitarianism exactly and, well, even if such thing individual and society, or vice versa's world domination of historical inevitability but Toka Aryan, action the referred to in the words of Arendt I because on the principle. Thus, on the structure of imperialist domination, We're be able to find the origin of totalitarianism. 4. Continent imperialism and pan-ethnic movement 19 century, was held the hegemony of the world, it was of course the United Kingdom. Germany and Russia, which had the ressentiment in this United Kingdom, against foreign imperialism of the United Kingdom, to expand the continent imperialism. This time was to function, it is pan-ethnic ideology. In other words, it is a pan-German Social and Pan-Slavism. "We converted to politics racial ideology directly," The future of the German played for the first time the role that claims as that there is no doubt that the "suffering from blood, was a continent imperialism. " And pan-nationalism, with respect to the overseas imperialism was only meaning is black discrimination by whites, was supposed to end up to the chosen people thought. "The contrast is as foreign imperialism had been satisfied with the relative superiority theory with a limit to the political Despite its desire for power-expansion greed (national" mission "or" white man's burden ") manner, pan-ethnic movement immediately themselves have set a claim that it is the chosen nation to God. Elect idea of ​​the pan-nationalism also became the origin of totalitarianism. Rather than the individual, it totalitarian "collective property" (ethnic) is what became a problem. "Thus Kano uniform, totalitarian" collective property "Massenhaftigkeit is prepared, in which the individual is actually no longer feel only one of the species of the sample yourself. " Five. The end of the downfall and the human rights of the nation-state Then Arendt is to study, it's the presence of ethnic minorities and asylum seekers, which appeared after the first World War. This was a very big international issues. The essence of this problem lies in the fact that they in any nation is not protected nor representative. "One minority in the ethnic, abnormalities of state of the two groups is that the other a stateless person exile, lies in the fact that they are not protected but is not officially representative also by any nation." This is exactly, had meant the collapse of the nation-state. "Stateless person is the most disastrous products of the civil war of European countries, is the most obvious signs of the collapse of the nation-state." The ethnic minorities and stateless persons, there is no "human rights". Nobody do not observe them of "human rights". This becomes the hotbed of Hitler basis totalitarianism. "Solution of the Jewish problem of Hitler flow - First homestretch German Jews to non-certified minority's position in Germany, the next it was expelled from the border in the stateless person, without leaving finally one person again asked collected was fed to extermination camps in - showed how that can be "solved" all the ethnic minority issues and statelessness problems in reality towards the whole world supremely clearly " The presence of ethnic minorities and stateless persons who appeared by the first World War, taught to totalitarianism the effect of taking away the human rights of individuals. Again, this is the origin of totalitarianism. Or more, or was under preparation imperialism is how totalitarianism is I was in the clear. If you leave organize it would be as follows. ① expansion of racial thought in Africa. ② and violence dominate in Africa. In ③ colonial, anonymous bureaucracy dominated for the purpose of expansion for expansion. Pan-ethnic movement in ④ developing countries (pan-German doctrine, Pan-Slavism). ⑤ after the first World War, the emergence of ethnic minorities and stateless persons. Ie the emergence of human rights defunct people.

The Origins of Totalitarianism 1: anti-Semitism

first Totalitarianism What is. Whether it is why, and what happened how. Part 1, "anti-Semitism", the second part of "imperialism", this book consisting Part 3 "totalitarianism" is, it is a masterpiece of modern politics that aims to answer this question. Arendt was born as a Jewish child in Germany itself, the Nazis in 1933 will take the regime, France, it was forced to and subsequently to the United States exile. Whether that madness Why happened. And, why could not anyone stop it. Arendt of inquiry is, quietly, but proceed to be moved per magma deep underground. After the Second World War, this book that has been so written in side dishes the time is, therefore, then, it has received often pointed out, such as there is an error in the recognition some historical facts. However, this book rather than empirical history book, it's what should be called first-class philosophy book to gain insight into the human and social. Her philosophical insights to be found in such as "human condition" after is faster finalized at this time considerably. Than to worry about the fine historical facts of error, Arendt had insight through the rise of totalitarianism, want to direct the eye what the society of the way for that will not be repeated this problem I think. The contents of this book that overlapping theme over and over again in the long, it is not easy to present in the single muscle that easy to understand. However, in the following, so that it can be speculated a structure that is as much as possible this book of the nucleus, we would like to introduce and explanation. Because it is very long book, from Part 1 to Part 3, we will introduce and explanation in a separate page. (Because this document climax After all of Part 3, If you want to know is quick, I think if you read there only you.) Part 1 anti-Semitism 1. Mood of anti-Semitism Its origins to totalitarianism (Nazism and Stalinism) was the rise of the 20th century, Arendt first to start a discussion going back to the anti-Semitism that was serious in the 19th century Europe. She first say in the following manner. To understand the "mood" of anti-Semitism at that time, help the following insight that Tocqueville had said at the time of the French Revolution, and. French people once, even while hating the aristocracy as oppressors, respect for they also had not a little. Having said Somehow, noble because he was "ruling class" when. But during the Revolution, the nobility lost its position as the ruler. Even though, they are only "wealth" had still. The people have hatred vigorously nobility, it was this point. In habit that can not be governed, wealth only have. This thing, people we could not forgive. "Unbearable felt the oppression itself, was not first in the exploitation itself. To the tantalizing anger of the people it than much, was the wealth that have no clear function." It the same as this is, and I say to anti-Semitism of the 19th century. So Arendt argue. Jews, even losing its power, he wealth only had continue to have. What it means. Europe seventeen to nineteen century, absolute monarchy. In here, had played the role of monarch of the purse, it was a court Jews. For example, bankers of the United Kingdom of Queen Elizabeth, was the Jews of Spanish descent. However absolute monarchy, soon while themselves the foundation, will be to continue to migrate to the nation-state. Nation-state is the foundation of the free economic activities of the people. All wealth gather in absolute monarch, and he no longer lost in despotism exploitation system. When this happens, the Jews of wealth becomes no longer necessary. Jews, "That only is not can become a basis of a general hatred because of the useless wealth, it is the could not become only the basis of a general contempt because of their obvious helplessness." 2. Rothschilds The anti-Semitism, and one, that world domination conspiracy theory by the Jews, it was absurd mood is also haunted. The symbolism is, it Rothschilds. In the nation-state of the 19th century, to guarantee equal rights to all Western European Jews, Jewish liberation decree was issued one after another in each country. This, however, from the Court Jew, but rather meant that the privilege until it is deprivation. This release Ordinance, it is possible to give equal rights and citizenship in the country of the Jews, he Jews there is a possibility that shakes the foundation of businesses that have built internationally to it. Rothschild was the court Jews, where leave to the following measures. Themselves while serving in Hesse Elector, five sons also, by which makes served at the same time in Frankfurt, Paris, London, Naples Wien respectively, he was raised tailoring his sept to international conglomerates. This has changed the entire Jewish community. International business that has been contracted in the entire traditional Jewish community, and he was supposed to be dominated by one family. "True patronage banker of this time is a Rothschild, all the other things Rothschild representative, contact person, is was not only agent." Delusion that the Jewish world domination by the Arendt see when due here. "If you try to demonstrate the absurd notion of Jewish world domination, or would have obtained Where is dressed proof than those seen in the image of this family?" 3. The birth of the anti-Semitic political party Signs of anti-Semitism took place in the early 19th century Prussia. Prussia, after losing to Napoleon, the nation began to remodel into a nation-state. At that time the nobility lost their privileges, of the nobles had turned their hatred is, I was the Jews. But anti-Semitism of the nobles was something transient. More importantly, it was a Jew hatred by then petit bourgeois who appeared in the nation-state (small shopkeepers, etc.) us. As previously described, the nation-state is composed of free economic activity of citizens. It 's Bank of petit bourgeois they rely. And the bank, it had been dominated by Jews. In addition, the Jewish bankers, was associated with an absolute monarchy of the setting sun. And the nation, it does not attempt to aid their petit bourgeois even a little. "That it is exasperation of small citizen class against the bankers can understand, it looked as if they are joined one to economically dependent to state apparatus that is not helped at the same time also at all they no longer bank capital are the first time that there is a, this outrage has become explosive political factor. " In this way, I would be anti-Semitism party appeared to Prussia. This anti-Semitism political parties, there was a striking feature. It is because it listed the "anti-Semitism", he was charged with ultra-national trend. Jews all over the world. Thus, "anti-Semitism" also become ultra-national. If you contrast the "old party system, probably the most essential differences that anti-Semitism parties have, all of the anti-Semitic population of these parties from the beginning of Europe in one of the super-national organization It was in place and that has begun to be mobilized. " This anti-Semitism political party, it is possible to see the sprouting of "super-national" movement serving totalitarianism. Arendt argue so. 4. Dreyfus Affair 19 century, incident that anti-Semitism became visible as a large historical flow, but Dreyfus Affair. "1894 year-end, the French Jewish staff officer Alfred Dreyfus is accused of spying for the German Reich in a military court, was sentenced to life in exile to the devil island. Decision is made unanimously, hearing It was held in private. " Dreyfus has had pleaded not guilty from the beginning, was never convicted overturned. (After that incident it was found that was a hoax, finally it will be to win the innocence 1906.) There was behind the incident, was very Jewish hatred. France at the time, I had done the construction of the Panama Canal. It was a require significant investment, but already business this time was bankrupt. But the Panama Canal digging company, to hide the fact that the public, were bonds issued in the acquisition of parliament. It was unheard of acquisition incident. It is a Panama scandal incident. "Panama scandal incident, it was clarified that the two in first, that the internal among the members and the state bureaucracy of the third Republic has become a merchant and the second, private business -.. In this case Panama Canal company - and it is mediation between the national mechanism has been carried out at the hands of the Jews to an extent almost say the exclusive ". Many investment banks go bankrupt, people lost their savings. They have hatred, it was Jewish financiers who centered the aforementioned Rothschilds. And it showed up this time is, it is mob (the masses). "Mob is every class dropouts It consists of. It is included every class of society Some of the mob. [Snip] mob hated and society that shut out their own, the Congress that he is not representative. " Furthermore brunt of the anger, will be directed to the course the Jews. In this way, the piece of anti-Semitism was finalized. Let us organize below. ① in the flow from the absolute monarchy to the nation-state, contemptuous hatred of Jews who also had only wealth losing its national importance. ② delusion that Jewish world domination by the Rothschilds. ③ of petit bourgeois who, hatred of Jewish bankers. ④ of mob us, hatred of wealthy Jews.