Hannah Arendt and her politics world politics today. She wrote a collection of books such as "The Origin of Totalitarianism" in 1966, "The Human Condition" in 1958 and "Eichmann in Jerusalem" in 1968a. The majority of her works rose to fame in 2006, a period epitomized by governmental and moral calamities, similar to those she experienced at various stages of her life. Arendt's work stands out for its particularity, particularly with regard to political theories, humanities and social sciences. Given its broad academic tendencies, most international political theories, such as postcolonialism, classical republicanism, poststructuralism, critical theory and feminism, etc., look towards recording some similarities with the idea by Arendt. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay However, it is worth noting that Arendt's ideology does not fit into any school of thought and that is why it matters the most in today's world. .BiographyHannah was born on October 14, 1906. She grew up as a middle-class civilian in a Jewish community. At 16, she studied Christian theology and classics, took up phenomenology at 18, and received her doctorate from the University of Heidelberg in 1995. Her educational stream of works and thoughts has been influenced by scholars such as Karl Jaspers, his educator, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche and Heidegger. In 1930, when Nazism began to take over Germany, Arendt allied herself with Jewish politics to combat crimes against Jews. This triggered her arrest and she subsequently fled to Paris for refuge. However, this did not discourage her from continuing her Jewish political activities, as she could be seen rescuing young Jews and preparing them for resettlement in Palestine. Following the German occupation of France after World War II, Arendt was arrested for the second time by the Germans, claiming she was an enemy. She later ran to the United States with her family where she spent her entire life. Also in the United States, she continued to lobby for a Jewish militia aimed at defeating Hitler's forces and freeing the Jews. Despite her zeal to liberate the Jews, she was not in favor of the creation of an independent Jewish country by the Zionists, as she did not see this as necessary in the future (20th century). Arendt instead believes that a dual state, consisting of a local Jewish-Arab council in Palestine, would be the most preferable solution. This caused Arendt to lose her ties to the Jewish community, particularly those who represented an organized Jewish nation. The connection was further loosened in 1961 when Arendt described Adolf Eichmann's actions against the Jews as banal and not radical as most Jews will see them. Despite the struggles and criticism she faced during her life, Arendt still managed to establish herself as a major ideologue. in international politics, through some of his works such as; The origin of totalitarianism, Eichmann in Jerusalem: report on the banality of evil, on revolution, etc. She died in 1975 following a heart attack and was buried in New York.Totalitarianism, imperialism and a break with traditionTo Hannah, the SecondWorld War and its devastating effects left Western traditions and political thoughts in a sham. She deeply believed that totalitarianism, imperialism, and world wars destroyed Western traditions, particularly that Western tradition which concerned political philosophers trying to control politics and political actions by applying what they reasoned or thought was just. Arendt was of the opinion that political actions or life cannot be controlled by the thoughts of philosophers. What they think is right would seem impossible once they start implementing them in the political system. For Hannah, totalitarianism is now the order of the day in the 20th century, a system that moves away from 19th century historical processes such as imperialism and anti-Semitism. She describes this new system of totalitarianism as a “new and radical form of evil”, aimed at making humans undesirable. It suggests that the broad liberal distinctions between war and peace, on the one hand, and conflicts on the European continent, as opposed to conflicts in their colonies, on the other, cannot be respected. Violence, Power, and New Beginnings In Western traditions, politics was taken to mean the accumulation of power. In other words, the more territory a state has the power to own, the more its leader establishes himself as the dominant figure among his fellow leaders. Thus, violence was the only method that rulers could use to gain power and dominate other rulers. Violence and power were therefore concepts that went hand in hand in the era of Western traditions. For Hannah, she did not believe that violence and power were birds of the same feather. This can be seen in the way she defines power, violence, justification and legitimacy. For Arendt, power is the ability of a group of people to act together and achieve their common goal; in the meantime, violence is a means to achieve this goal. That is, violence is used to enhance the strength of the group and ensure that people obey their orders. Hannah attempts to distinguish between power and violence using justification and legitimacy. According to her, although violence must be justified as legitimate in others to achieve a particular goal through speeches before an audience, power does not need to be justified but must simply be legitimate and in accordance with the laws in force. For Arendt, war (World War II) was necessary for a new political beginning. She opposed Fanon's belief that through violence colonized countries would discover social truth. She was of the opinion that violence causes the silence of the people and as such, the truth and new knowledge are not heard. Politics, plurality and the public world For Arendt, politics is not acting with violence and fighting among the leaders of others to achieve a goal. For her, politics is the ability for a state to sit down with a group of plural equals and debate in order to propose something new that would be for the common good of the world as a whole. When leaders come together to discuss issues that are common to them, a public world is created. For Arendt, in doing so, leaders discover things about themselves that they would never have known in the absence of such debates and discourses. This is what brings Arendt closer to Habermas (a critical theorist), because he also emphasizes discourses in the public world. However, they record a certain divergence of opinion regarding Arendt's positions on protest and.

Essay / Hannah Arendt and her politics world politics today. She wrote a collection of books such as "The Origin of Totalitarianism" in 1966, "The Human Condition" in 1958 and "Eichmann in Jerusalem" in 1968a. The majority of her works rose to fame in 2006, a period epitomized by governmental and moral calamities, similar to those she experienced at various stages of her life. Arendt's work stands out for its particularity, particularly with regard to political theories, humanities and social sciences. Given its broad academic tendencies, most international political theories, such as postcolonialism, classical republicanism, poststructuralism, critical theory and feminism, etc., look towards recording some similarities with the idea by Arendt. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay However, it is worth noting that Arendt's ideology does not fit into any school of thought and that is why it matters the most in today's world. .BiographyHannah was born on October 14, 1906. She grew up as a middle-class civilian in a Jewish community. At 16, she studied Christian theology and classics, took up phenomenology at 18, and received her doctorate from the University of Heidelberg in 1995. Her educational stream of works and thoughts has been influenced by scholars such as Karl Jaspers, his educator, Immanuel Kant, Nietzsche and Heidegger. In 1930, when Nazism began to take over Germany, Arendt allied herself with Jewish politics to combat crimes against Jews. This triggered her arrest and she subsequently fled to Paris for refuge. However, this did not discourage her from continuing her Jewish political activities, as she could be seen rescuing young Jews and preparing them for resettlement in Palestine. Following the German occupation of France after World War II, Arendt was arrested for the second time by the Germans, claiming she was an enemy. She later ran to the United States with her family where she spent her entire life. Also in the United States, she continued to lobby for a Jewish militia aimed at defeating Hitler's forces and freeing the Jews. Despite her zeal to liberate the Jews, she was not in favor of the creation of an independent Jewish country by the Zionists, as she did not see this as necessary in the future (20th century). Arendt instead believes that a dual state, consisting of a local Jewish-Arab council in Palestine, would be the most preferable solution. This caused Arendt to lose her ties to the Jewish community, particularly those who represented an organized Jewish nation. The connection was further loosened in 1961 when Arendt described Adolf Eichmann's actions against the Jews as banal and not radical as most Jews will see them. Despite the struggles and criticism she faced during her life, Arendt still managed to establish herself as a major ideologue. in international politics, through some of his works such as; The origin of totalitarianism, Eichmann in Jerusalem: report on the banality of evil, on revolution, etc. She died in 1975 following a heart attack and was buried in New York.Totalitarianism, imperialism and a break with traditionTo Hannah, the SecondWorld War and its devastating effects left Western traditions and political thoughts in a sham. She deeply believed that totalitarianism, imperialism, and world wars destroyed Western traditions, particularly that Western tradition which concerned political philosophers trying to control politics and political actions by applying what they reasoned or thought was just. Arendt was of the opinion that political actions or life cannot be controlled by the thoughts of philosophers. What they think is right would seem impossible once they start implementing them in the political system. For Hannah, totalitarianism is now the order of the day in the 20th century, a system that moves away from 19th century historical processes such as imperialism and anti-Semitism. She describes this new system of totalitarianism as a “new and radical form of evil”, aimed at making humans undesirable. It suggests that the broad liberal distinctions between war and peace, on the one hand, and conflicts on the European continent, as opposed to conflicts in their colonies, on the other, cannot be respected. Violence, Power, and New Beginnings In Western traditions, politics was taken to mean the accumulation of power. In other words, the more territory a state has the power to own, the more its leader establishes himself as the dominant figure among his fellow leaders. Thus, violence was the only method that rulers could use to gain power and dominate other rulers. Violence and power were therefore concepts that went hand in hand in the era of Western traditions. For Hannah, she did not believe that violence and power were birds of the same feather. This can be seen in the way she defines power, violence, justification and legitimacy. For Arendt, power is the ability of a group of people to act together and achieve their common goal; in the meantime, violence is a means to achieve this goal. That is, violence is used to enhance the strength of the group and ensure that people obey their orders. Hannah attempts to distinguish between power and violence using justification and legitimacy. According to her, although violence must be justified as legitimate in others to achieve a particular goal through speeches before an audience, power does not need to be justified but must simply be legitimate and in accordance with the laws in force. For Arendt, war (World War II) was necessary for a new political beginning. She opposed Fanon's belief that through violence colonized countries would discover social truth. She was of the opinion that violence causes the silence of the people and as such, the truth and new knowledge are not heard. Politics, plurality and the public world For Arendt, politics is not acting with violence and fighting among the leaders of others to achieve a goal. For her, politics is the ability for a state to sit down with a group of plural equals and debate in order to propose something new that would be for the common good of the world as a whole. When leaders come together to discuss issues that are common to them, a public world is created. For Arendt, in doing so, leaders discover things about themselves that they would never have known in the absence of such debates and discourses. This is what brings Arendt closer to Habermas (a critical theorist), because he also emphasizes discourses in the public world. However, they record a certain divergence of opinion regarding Arendt's positions on protest and.

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch