Totalitarianism is a system of government where the government assumes total authority over its citizens. The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt addresses the analysis of historical circumstances during the rise of totalitarianism in the 20 th century (Arendt 1973). The first section determines why anti-Semitism and the figure of the Jews played an important role in the Nazi and totalitarianism agenda. She argues that the horror meted among the Jews was not a coincidence but rather they were chosen (Sigwart 2016 p. 265). Additionally she argues that investigating the relationship to the society might provide insight on why they became the object of hatred. The second section analyses the disintegration of the state that coincides with imperial expansion in the 19 th century and eventually led to the First World War. The third section addresses totalitarianism; Arendt uses the first two categories to dissect totalitarianism (Arendt 1973). Just like imperialism, totalitarianism is described by its emphasis on constant movement that takes away the importance of individual men by making them cogs in a grand motor of history.
The minorities Arendt addresses are all the ethnic groups displaced by war while the stateless are the groups not living in their own state. Essentially, Arendt means that the Jews without a state of their own were considered a minority even though the Jewish population in Europe at that time was more than 9.5 million people. Arendt investigates the roles of the Jews as financiers to the state and a special group in society that was not integrated into the nation state (Hansen 2013). The situation of the refugees after First World War highlighted the failure of the nation or state. The nation could not take care of the minorities since they considered them outsiders. The totalitarian state would not accept any opposition and would rather lose their citizens that harbor individuals with different views.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Human rights were meant to be man’s way to be the source of law rather than religion and customs (Gundogdu 2014) Denationalizing human beings by declaring the stateless meant the end of human rights since these rights proved unenforceable in countries where the constitution was based upon them whenever people who were not citizens appeared. Arendt analyzes the notion of reducing human beings to people with no exceptional qualities. Arendt considers the denationalization of these citizens a failure of the state. Arendt argues that the Jews’ lack of political views and preferences was the reason they were expelled from humanity. Arendt argues that then end of human rights began when human rights were adjudicated within political communities.
Hannah Arendt argues that the assumption of universal human rights is unrealistic. According to Arendt, the notion of human rights broke down the moment those who were supposed to believe in the rights failed and treated fellow human beings inhumanely (Arendt 1973). Additionally, she insinuates that universal human rights are null concepts only implored upon as a last measure and consequently to no avail (Kang 2013 p. 139). Arendt view universal human rights as having intrinsic moral value. The mere availability of these rights is evidence that there is need for institutional change. The right of every human being to belong to humanity is an unconditional demand that cannot live in good faith at the hands of humans.
Universal human rights dictate that the rights apply to all human beings by virtue of being human. The main challenge to the universality factor derives from imperialism. The minorities were treated as ideas rather than individuals; they were judged according to their political values rather than their value as human beings (Hann 2016). Arendt believes that rights are a sign of dehumanization especially when a human being’s value is related to political affiliations rather than by virtue of being a human being. Primarily, Arendt implies that dehumanization leads to ethnically motivated human abuse just like post-war era and especially during the holocaust where she was a victim.
Arendt’s critique of human rights is convincing since she clearly states how the doctrine of human rights was responsible for most evils that happened in the post-war era. The issues minorities faced show that humans did not have rights by being human but rather the rights depended on political affiliations and hence recognition (Hansen 2013). Her critique still applies in the present day; most states reject refugees and treat them horribly in violation of their rights since they do not recognize them as citizens. The rights designed over the years were formulated to give individuals protection within communities and as such, they do not apply where communities do not exist. Arendt believes that human rights should apply to human being by the virtue of being human rather than recognition.
Arendt’s critique has significant implications on leadership today. Leaders should be able to apply human rights on the citizens by virtue of being human rather than by recognition. The government leaders should rule through democracy rather than totalitarianism where they control citizens private matters. Rights should apply regardless of race, country of birth, ethnicity or political affiliations. Although some leaders and countries recognize their forms of government as democratic, most of them often choose to apply human rights based on recognition. That is evident in the United States where the rights of immigrant children are violated since they are not recognized as Americans. Their right to have rights is denied by virtue of recognition. Arendt’s critique provides valid thoughts that should be considered by leaders and decision makers. Her thoughts on the stateless and minorities provides guidance on the pressing issues of refugees.
References
Arendt, H. (1973). The origins of totalitarianism (Vol. 244). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Gündogdu, A. (2014). Rightlessness in an age of rights: Hannah Arendt and the contemporary struggles of migrants . Oxford University Press.
Hann, M. (2016). Introduction. In Egalitarian Rights Recognition (pp. 1-15). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Hansen, P. (2013). Hannah Arendt: Politics, history and citizenship . John Wiley & Sons.
Kang, T. (2013). Origin and essence: The problem of history in Hannah Arendt. Journal of the History of Ideas , 74 (1), 139-160.
Sigwart, H. J. (2016). Political Characterology: On the Method of Theorizing in Hannah Arendt's Origins of Totalitarianism. American Political Science Review , 110 (2), 265-277.
