"In her 1945 essay, Arendt wrote that when she met people who told her they were ashamed of being German, she was always tempted to reply: 'I am ashamed of being human.'"
Careful how we behave post-Trump.
“Arendt wrote that when she met people who told her they were ashamed of being German, she was always tempted to reply: “I am ashamed of being human”. Post-Trump we should have the same reply, rather than “othering & scapegoating” says @samuelmoyn
Always read @samuelmoyn: "In her 1945 essay, Arendt wrote that when she met people who told her they were ashamed of being German, she was always tempted to reply: 'I am ashamed of being human.'"
‘In her 1945 essay, Arendt wrote that when she met people who told her they were ashamed of being German, she was always tempted to reply: “I am ashamed of being human.”’ prospectmagazine.co.uk/philosophy/han… via @prospect_uk
“the idea of a clean break with guilt was just another mode of convincing ourselves that we are exempt from universal responsibility. After a trip to Germany, Arendt observed that the people she met “developed many devices for dodging.””
Very smart piece by @samuelmoyn. Arendt’s understanding of totalitarianism was far more nuanced than is often appreciated these days
I have no idea what she would think of Trump, but it would presumably be more interesting than 99% of the takes out there
prospectmagazine.co.uk/philosophy/han…
Universal responsibility and not simply otherising the enablers of fascism is the way forward even in a post-Trump/Modi/Bolsonaro/Duterte era. What an essay!
Sam Moyn really is smashing it right now - one of the few American writers that has judged the Trump era and it’s antecedents with the requisite detachment.
“There is going to be an immense pressure to exact apologies, if not from Trump (who is incapable of them), then from those who enabled him. Not generalising responsibility, as Arendt demanded, but othering and scapegoating.” New from @samuelmoyn
Most of the citations I have seen of Arendt recently have been from the first two chapters of Part III, which aren’t about fascist regimes at all, but about fascist propaganda (hard to deny we are seeing that). So I’m missing the sting of this critique.