The Origins of Totalitarianism Paperback – March 21, 1973

“ IT IS ALMOST impossible even now to describe what actually happened in Europe on August 4, 1914. The days before and the days after the first World War are separated not like the end of an old and the beginning of a new period, but like the day before and the day after an explosion.’’This work focuses on the post WW1 period. Nevertheless, covers the development of European thought after the French Revolution. Uses anti-semitism to illustrate the degrading of human life and loss of human dignity. Detailed analysis of the Dreyfus affair and the role of Disraeli in England. Outstanding!“Yet this figure of speech is as inaccurate as are all others, because the quiet of sorrow which settles down after a catastrophe has never come to pass. The first explosion seems to have touched off a chain reaction in which we have been caught ever since and which nobody seems to be able to stop. The first World War exploded the European comity of nations beyond repair, something which no other war had ever done.”The central role of 1914 in history is key in understanding present.“Inflation destroyed the whole class of small property owners beyond hope for recovery or new formation, something which no monetary crisis had ever done so radically before. Unemployment, when it came, reached fabulous proportions, was no longer restricted to the working class but seized with insignificant exceptions whole nations.’’Anger and despair.“Civil wars which ushered in and spread over the twenty years of uneasy peace were not only bloodier and more cruel than all their predecessors; they were followed by migrations of groups who, unlike their happier predecessors in the religious wars, were welcomed nowhere and could be assimilated nowhere. Once they had left their homeland they remained homeless, once they had left their state they became stateless; once they had been deprived of their human rights they were rightless, the scum of the earth.’’This loss, (denial) of human dignity, personal value, comes up again and again.“Nothing which was being done, no matter how stupid, no matter how many people knew and foretold the consequences, could be undone or prevented. Every event had the finality of a last judgment, a judgment that was passed neither by God nor by the devil, but looked rather like the expression of some unredeemably stupid fatality.’’Her bold opinions make this work very interesting!“Before totalitarian politics consciously attacked and partially destroyed the very structure of European civilization, the explosion of 1914 and its severe consequences of instability had sufficiently shattered the façade of Europe’s political system to lay bare its hidden frame. Such visible exposures were the sufferings of more and more groups of people to whom suddenly the rules of the world around them had ceased to apply.’’Creating a new world culture, society.“Hatred, certainly not lacking in the pre-war world, began to play a central role in public affairs everywhere, so that the political scene in the deceptively quiet years of the twenties assumed the sordid and weird atmosphere of a Strindbergian family quarrel.’’Who can doubt it?“Nothing perhaps illustrates the general disintegration of political life better than this vague, pervasive hatred of everybody and everything, without a focus for its passionate attention, with nobody to make responsible for the state of affairs—neither the government nor the bourgeoisie nor an outside power. It consequently turned in all directions, haphazardly and unpredictably, incapable of assuming an air of healthy indifference toward anything under the sun.’’Nobody understands what to do.Another theme is the misuse of ‘science’. . .“ Science in the instances of both business publicity and totalitarian propaganda is obviously only a surrogate for power. The obsession of totalitarian movements with “scientific” proofs ceases once they are in power. The Nazis dismissed even those scholars who were willing to serve them, and the Bolsheviks use the reputation of their scientists for entirely unscientific purposes and force them into the role of charlatans.’’Man, this seems so . . . so . . . current!“ But there is nothing more to the frequently overrated similarities between mass advertisement and mass propaganda. Businessmen usually do not pose as prophets and they do not constantly demonstrate the correctness of their predictions. The scientificality of totalitarian propaganda is characterized by its almost exclusive insistence on scientific prophecy as distinguished from the more old-fashioned appeal to the past. Nowhere does the ideological origin, of socialism in one instance and racism in the other, show more clearly than when their spokesmen pretend that they have discovered the hidden forces that will bring them good fortune in the chain of fatality.‘’‘Old fashioned prophecy’ shows how came true in past. This explains the past, more important than understanding future, which can’t be done. She, Jewish scholar, knew this.“ Totalitarian propaganda raised ideological scientificality [scientism] and its technique of making statements in the form of predictions to a height of efficiency of method and absurdity of content because, demagogically speaking, there is hardly a better way to avoid discussion than by releasing an argument from the control of the present and by saying that only the future can reveal its merits. However, totalitarian ideologies did not invent this procedure, and were not the only ones to use it.’’How true! Avoid proof by using the future!“Scientifically of mass propaganda has indeed been so universally employed in modern politics that it has been interpreted as a more general sign of that obsession with science which has characterized the Western world since the rise of mathematics and physics in the sixteenth century; thus totalitarianism appears to be only the last stage in a process during which “science [has become] an idol that will magically cure the evils of existence and transform the nature of man.”And there was, indeed, an early connection between scientificality and the rise of the masses.“The “collectivism” of masses was welcomed by those who hoped for the appearance of “natural laws of historical development” which would eliminate the unpredictability of the individual’s actions and behavior. There has been cited the example of Enfantin who could already “see the time approaching when the ‘art of moving the masses’ will be so perfectly developed that the painter, the musician, and the poet will possess the power to please and to move with the same certainty as the mathematician solves a geometrical problem or the chemist analyses any substance,” and it has been concluded that modern propaganda was born then and there.’’She connects a warped ‘science’ as instrumental in Hitler and Stalin throughout this book.“ Underlying the Nazis’ belief in race laws as the expression of the law of nature in man, is Darwin’s idea of man as the product of a natural development which does not necessarily stop with the present species of human beings, just as under the Bolsheviks’ belief in class-struggle as the expression of the law of history lies Marx’s notion of society as the product of a gigantic historical movement which races according to its own law of motion to the end of historical times when it will abolish itself.’’What’s the connection of Marx and Darwin?“The difference between Marx’s historical and Darwin’s naturalistic approach has frequently been pointed out, usually and rightly in favor of Marx. This has led us to forget the great and positive interest Marx took in Darwin’s theories; Engels could not think of a greater compliment to Marx’s scholarly, achievements than to call him the ‘Darwin of history.’”Engels knew!“If one considers, not the actual achievement, but the basic philosophies of both men, it turns out that ultimately the movement of history and the movement of nature are one and the same. Darwin’s introduction of the concept of development into nature, his insistence that, at least in the field of biology, natural movement is not circular but unilinear, moving in an infinitely progressing direction, means in fact that nature is, as it were, being swept into history, that natural life is considered to be historical.’’Now this explains much. Neat!“The “natural” law of the survival of the fittest is just as much a historical law and could be used as such by racism as Marx’s law of the survival of the most progressive class. Marx’s class struggle, on the other hand, as the driving force of history is only the outward expression of the development of productive forces which in turn have their origin in the “labor-power” of men. Labor, according to Marx, is not a historical but a natural-biological force—released through man’s “metabolism with nature” by which he conserves his individual life and reproduces the species.’’How significant?“Engels saw the affinity between the basic convictions of the two men very clearly because he understood the decisive role which the concept of development played in both theories. The tremendous intellectual change which took place in the middle of the last century consisted in the refusal to view or accept anything “as it is” and in the consistent interpretation of everything as being only a stage of some further development.’’Explains why leftists want to be called ‘progressive’.Table of contents (linked)Antisemitism Antisemitism as an Outrage to Common SenseThe Jews, the Nation-State, and the Birth of AntisemitismThe Jews and SocietyThe Dreyfus AffairImperialismThe Political Emancipation of the BourgeoisieRace-Thinking Before RacismRace and BureaucracyContinental Imperialism: the Pan MovementsThe Decline of the Nation-State and the End of the Rights of ManTotalitarianismA Classless SocietyThe Totalitarian MovementTotalitarianism in PowerIdeology and Terror: A Novel Form of GovernmentAnother keen insight is the change to rule by ‘experts’. . .“ Rule by decree has conspicuous advantages for the domination of far-flung territories with heterogeneous populations and for a policy of oppression. Its efficiency is superior simply because it ignores all intermediary stages between issuance and application, and because it prevents political reasoning by the people through the withholding of information.(Hiding the facts)“It can easily overcome the variety of local customs and need not rely on the necessarily slow process of development of general law. “(Ignore moral principles)“It is most helpful for the establishment of a centralized administration because it overrides automatically all matters of local autonomy.”(Local insight ignored)“If rule by good laws has sometimes been called the rule of wisdom, rule by appropriate decrees may rightly be called the rule of cleverness.”(Clever vs wise)“For it is clever to reckon with ulterior motives and aims, and it is wise to understand and create by deduction from generally accepted principles.’’(Right! I know that guy!)I hope these few slices provide a sense of this historical explanation. And make no mistake, this is an explanation, a narrative, an analysis that grows into a synthesis.Historical, psychological, philosophical, theological insights — yep, it’s all here. Nevertheless, although erudite, academic, scholarly; is not obtuse, confusing or evasive. Clear, dense, compelling and persuasive. Countless references, detailed analysis of documents, tremendous scholarship!And even though written over half a century ago, I felt this presentation gave me added insight into current thought that seems to dominate present worldwide society.Amazing!Includes three added prefaces from the sixties. These are with the price of this book by themselves!I listened to the audible version. The reader did outstanding job. Slight English accent, and paused just . . . a little at end of every sentence. This really did help, since this is not light material.Great!Thousands of references in bibliography (not linked)Amazing!Hundreds of footnotes (linked)Tremendous!Extremely detailed index (linked)Overwhelming!Anyone wanting explanation, understanding of current political thought, insight into prevalent academic doctrine, discernment of popular movements, can find marvelous explanations here.In fact, so clear . . . so . . . convincing, that the joy of new understanding might be eclipsed by the sadness of new insight.

This is a dense book. By dense I meant that the amount of information, concepts ans ideas per paragraph is very high. One must stop every so often and think about and organize in your own mind what you just read. The book was written right after WWII and published in 1951. There have been 70 years of history since then and 70 years of scholarship devoted to the history and politics since then. The reader needs to remember that you are getting an interpretation from the point of view of someone born in first decade of the 20th century and who has lived through the two world wars and the holocaust. When written Stalin was still alive Germany was a divided and little more than pile of rubble, the British Empire was still intact and so on.The book is divided into three parts: "Antisemitism", "Imperialism" and "Totalitarianism".The first part, "Antisemitism" deals with the role Jews played in European history from Roman times up to WWI. In her interpretation Jews found safety in making themselves essential to ruling monarchs and ruling classes. This was by providing financial services. Quite a bit of attention is devoted to the Rothchilds. In the present time any historical account that focuses on the the Rothchild family and Jewish moneylenders can make the reader uncomfortable and fear they one is about the encounter nutty conspiracy theories. Arendt can do this but it still discomfits this reader. Her overriding premise is that the rise of the European nation-states following the French Revolution and the development of civil service establishments in European countries made Jewish financial service no longer essential. At the same time Jews "decision" to remain separate and not to assimilate into European social structures left vulnerable to become a target. (This is, of course, a gross over simplification of Arendt's analysis - but this is a review not a book!)Part two, "Imperialism" explore the expansion in the late 19th century of British and European power in to Africa and other non-white regions of the planet. This involves an intense analysis of 19th century UK and European social/political history and economic history. American readers may have trouble the the social/political history as it is either unknown to us or conceptually somewhat alien. Further, although Arendt was (as far as I know) a Marxist but her analysis of the period is couched in Marxist concepts and vocabulary. I won't comment about the social/political aspects but since I have a modest familiarity with economic history I have to say I can't buy her analysis on that score. In the 70 years since 1951 the study of economic history has taken a highly quantitative direction and an likely looks at the issues from a very different direction.. . . TBC

Hasn't been typeset since 1977 mass market/pocket edition. Really irritating.

What can I say? This is an absolute classic that couldn't be more relevant. This is the ultimate classic work on the subject that is timeless. The only thing I can say even close to a criticism is that it's really long and each individual probably doesn't need everything in the book. This is where a critical approach to the topic starts.