Existentialism and Phenomenology Revision

19th century Hegel and Kant were influential

In the 20th century all this changed. Existentialism was the fashionable school in continental Europe. 

Existentialism was led by Stare (left wing) in France and by Heidegger in Germany (right wing) 

Kant’s ideas influenced phenomenology. He said that the noumena should be distinguished from the phenomena. He was agaisnt the copernicus revolution .
Kant was also against Descartes and his cartasien dualism.  Phenomena was a metal reasoning, Noumena is the unperceived object. All objects are noumena. 

Freud
Influenced anglo american philosophy in the 20th century. He looked at brain anatomy- psychoanalysis ( therapy) the exchange of words between patient and doctor, free association. He linked mental problems back to childhood. In his ‘interpretation of dream’ he looked at peoples dreams to reveal the underlying problems. He also wrote ‘ ego, the id and the super ego’ 
To have no mental problems the three would have to be in harmony and balance. Super ego is where society implements how you should act.- Existentialists would say this is bad faith (Sartre's term) where you shouldn’t let others determine your choices. 

Husserl
Like Freud he looked at the human mind. Both Husserl and Freud fell victims of the Nazi anti-semitism, they were both Jews. 

Husserl’s interest in philosophy begun when he was influenced by his lecturer in Vienna Franz Brentano who wrote ‘Psychology from an empirical standpoint’. The book explained that the Data of Consciousness came in two kinds. 

The physical and the mental phenomena. 

Husserl’s first book looked at mathematics, ‘Philosophy of arithmetic’ he tried to explain our numerical concepts and identified them as mental acts that were their psychological origin. He tried to find a basis for maths in empirical psychology by was forced to some conclusions that some disagree with. He said that one and zero are not numbers. Frege later rejects this. 

In Husserl’s ‘Logical investigations’ like Frege he maintained a sharp distinction between logic and psychology. Frege focused on analytic, Husserl focused on the logical side. 

Phenomenology was developed in the first decade of the 20th century. 

Phenomenology is an approach that only concentrates on the mental experiences

Husserl’s Phenomenological Reduction focuses on the mental phenomena. Your experience of seeing something or hallucinating it is the same experience. It doesn’t matter if it is real or fictitious. 

He says that any kind of thought is phenomena, even emotions like love or hate. 

Husserl looks right back to Descartes, he’s an ontological thinker too. Descartes central concern is being ‘I think therefore I am’ and Husserl’s concerns over being too. 

Husserl says that all phenomena is internal to the mind. The main type of phenomena is intention. I want to pick up a cup. This would be my intention. Without having that intention I would not care about the cups phenomena. When you have intention to use it then you become aware of it. 

Heidegger’s existentialism
He became the father of existentialism because he said the essence of dasein is its existence. 

Heidegger rejects Decartees Cartesian Dualism- two things in the universe- mind and body spirt physicality. 

Hiedegger says this was a disaster. People shouldn’t believe this. 

If these two things are completely differentness how do they react? it’s like a ghost lifting a chair- two different substances cannot react. 

Heidegger just addressed consciousness. 

-His book ‘Sein and Ziet’ ‘Being and time’ - being precedes consciousness. 

-He coined the term Dasein. Which is ‘Being in the world’ a carpenter relates to the world using a hammer. This would be him engaging with his dasein. 
-We are thrown into the world and into a certain culture. This ‘throwness’ is facticity of dasein. But you must not let where you are born and who you are around determine your choices as where you live should have no impact on them. (Football team example: Just because you live in England doesn’t mean you have to support England) 

• The activity of dasein has three aspects. 

1. Attunement- your reflection on your past
2. Being for itself- the present mode but without focusing on your dasein you would suffer from boredom
3. Directedness- This is the future, people fear the future. 

Dasein is the ‘ability to be’ what I am aiming for in life determines the significance of my present situation. 

Existentialism- The school of philosophy that says I am what I freely take myself to be. To be authentic I must make my own life in full awareness that there is no ground for the choices I make. 

-Heidegger’s existentialism in right wing. Where as Jean Paul Satre in France led a left wing existentialism. 

Satre

• Perception and imagination have no difference. 
• His book ‘Being and nothingness’ 
• Being just is. ‘Being is without reason, cause of necessity’
• Satre accepts the concept of nothing. When we look at things in the world we use negation. e.g: If I divide the world into red then the rest of the world would be... ‘not red’ and I distinguished between a chair and a table. The table would be ‘not a chair.’ In Alice and Wonderland, Alice says, she sees nobody in the road. “I only wish i has such eyes to be able to see nobody.” 

Creative Commons: quicheisinsane (Flickr) 

• Essence precedes essence.
• A life is not determined in advance Humans have the chance to decide what kind person to be. This is freedom of choice. If our choices are made on morality/society or religion we are living in ‘Bad Faith’ 

Simone De Beauvior: “One is not born a women but becomes a women.”

Kierkegaard 

First existentialist writer. 

His book: “The sickness unto death’

Kierkegaard picks up on Schopenhauer's themes and rejects objectivity of the enlightenment. Schopenhauer does this in the ‘World as Will and Representation’ he was an atheist with buddhist and hindu symphonies. 
Kierkegaard passionately embraced christianity. He likes the figure of Christ and eternal suffering. 
He says the starting point for all knowledge is despair. In sickness unto death he says that despair is the fact to life, you will always be in despair/longing/seeking is an ontological fact to life. 
Life is despair is like Nieztsche’s view. Nietzsche said we must transcend it. Kierkegaard believes we should be passionate about something as this will help you transcend life. For Nietzsche it was the ubermensche who were the closest to transcending life.

Albert Camus
'The Stranger' his novel has ideas of free choice and could be viewed as an existentialist text. 

The protagonist Meursault appears emotionless and makes his own choices without the opinion of others. The death of his mother provokes little in the way of emotional response from him. Consideration of others has no effect on his choices. 
"I felt like I wanted to smoke, he hesitated, I didn't know if I should do it with mumma there, i thought about it, it didn't matter.'
Thoughts like these contributed to his sentencing to which he showed no reject. Eventually he is condemned to death for a murder. 

He makes his own choices without the opinion of others. Satre would say this is living in good faith. He hasn't let others influence him. 

The New Industrial State, continued.

Existentialism vs Nihilism. 

-Nihilism would be to say there is no point to anything. Subside or life as a monk/num would be the conclusion to nihilism. 

Whereas Existentialist say the ‘point’ of things is subjectively defined a social activity like a political stance or a relationship is freely entered into and engaged for oneself. Not for the sake of others or fitting in with the social norms. A relationship gives a point to life rather than a religion for a religious person who doesn’t really believe in it. But you can get existentialist religious people, like Kierkegaard. They would have to fully believe in the religion and that would have to be your passion. There is no point to something unless you are passionate. 

The New industrial state 

by John Kenneth Galbraith 

He explores the economics of production and the effect of development on the state. The role of the book was to provide us with an understanding of the world dominated by large corporations and industrial firms.

The "technostructure"a term created by economist John Kenneth Galbraith which refers to a group within an enterprise who have considerable influence in its economy. They are run by people from technocratic universities, the leadership of these organisations also dominated by Lawyers, scientists, economists. 

The modern industrial society is a planned economy. The production decisions are taken not in response to consumer demand rather by the producers of these large global companies. These decisions are reflected by the prices that are set in the market and by further steps that are taken to ensure that people will buy what is produced. 

The ultimate influence is authority-

this is like Hobbes’ social contract he believed we need authority from the Leviathan should influence all from right and wrong as humans are aggressive.  

Wherever the private coportations cannot do the job the state comes in and performs the required function. Private firm cannot fix maximum prices so we have the state setting, a page and wage freeze. The state can manipulate taxes, public spending and bank lending to implement modern Keynesian policy. 

Galbraith does criticise this technocratic society however, he like Heidegger, says that there is essentially no point to the society. If the state and large copororations are making the crucial decisions the planning of the economny that what are individuals doing? The majority of people aren’t actually needed to do anything other than sit around and have their needs provided for. This creates boredom in society, a sense of pointlessness to people’s lives, why bother getting up if you have everything provided for you? Existentialist would say we have to make the decisions not the state or the large corporations, if people all live their lives having everything provided for them and never making any decisions they would be, as Sartre would say, living in "bad faith." To overcome this technocratic state someone like Fanon would say we need a revolution and violence would be the best way to express our freedom. 

This technocratic society is creating pointlessness to peoples lives. And to feel there is no point to anything in life is very Nihilistic. 

Review of Radical Chic: That Party at Lenny’s

Review of Radical Chic: That Party at Lenny’s 

by Tom Wolfe

June 8, 1970, New York Magazine

So before reading this article published in the New York Magazine (1970) I wanted to understand what it is Tom Wolfe is writing about. 

Radical Chic’ a term coined by journalist Tom Wolfe. Describes the adoption and promotion of radical political causes by celebs, socialites and high society. Wolfe uses the term radical chic to ridicule composer Leonard Bernstein and his friends for they hosted a fundraising party for the Black Panthers ( A black revolutionary socialist organisation)

The article begins with some vagueness. The time is mentioned vaguely ‘ 2 or 3 or a.m,’ and the date which is precise. The sentence is complex with lots of commas used. It is in first person and you can already sense the writers voice. The an adjective has already been used to describe the way somebody woke up ‘wild alarm.’ 

From reading three lines of this article it already makes me aware that Tom Wolfe was more of an author and enjoyed writing in detail and in a format that is much more flexible that the news writing we have practiced on winol. 

News articles typically start with Who, What, Where and when. Wolfe has stated when ( the date and time) and who ( Leonard Bernstein) and finally what (He’s woken up) 

There are further details about the persons actions of waking up and that Leonard Bernstein could see himself as an ‘ Egregio maestro’ Italian? Spanish? I’m not too sure!

Description is then used to describe ‘Lenny’s’ thought/dream of the morning. That he performs a and electrifies a concert audience with antiwar appeal. 

He describes a guitar using a metaphor he says its ‘like an accordion’ and uses humor ‘learn to play in eight days e-z diagram 110-IQ 14 year olds of Levitown’ 

Wolfe goes on to use the word ‘Negro’- taboo? 

‘Mmmmmmm’ sounds non words. 

More adjectives used like ‘very’ and ‘dry’ the women protagonist ‘Felicia is ‘beautiful’ ‘pale blond hair’ 

Lots of dialogue- This gives the protagonist a voice and personality. 

Logic and Mathematics continued

Epistemology ‘the theory of knowledge’: developed by two Empiricists: Mill and Newman

John Stuart Mill
In Mill's 'System of Knowledge' he states that all knowledge derives from experience, including mathematics. Mill believed that logical propositions were a posteriori, affirming his support towards empiricism. 

On mathematics... Mill said that each number involved an assertion of a physical fact: one being singular, two being a pair, twelve being a dozen etc, 
and that the numbers two, three, four etc all denote physical phenomena, and connote a physical property. 

But Mill admits that senses find it difficult to distinguish big amounts. Smaller numbers are easier. He says that '102 apples and 103 apples' would be difficult to distinguish. 

Mill’s thesis: arithmetic is an empirical science. 
He claims that a principle like: ‘The sums of equals are equals’ is an inductive truth. 

(An inductive truth is a generalization based on a individuals experience.) 

But the inductive truth isn't always true. For one pound weight is not equal to another. 

John Henry Newman 

He was part of the same empiricist tradition as Mill, he believed that the only direct contact we have with things outside of ourselves is through our senses. 

Reason does not perceive anything, the exercise of reason is to assert one thing on the grounds of another thing. When we reason Newman said we use two functions:

1. Interference 
2. Assent (agreement) 

To infer...you must start with a proposition which then you led you to a conclusion to why your statement is true. 

With assent (agreement) you can conclude to the wrong conclusion if your evidence is wrong. 

Newman makes a distinction between simple assent and complex. Simple accent may be unconscious and rash. Complex accent involves three elements; it must follow on proof, it must be accompanied by a specific stones of intellectual contentment and it must be irreversible. 

Agreed among philosophers is this: If i know p, then p is true. But I may be certain that p and p be false. 

Frege on Logic, Psychology and Epistemology

‘Begriffsschrift’ is Frege’s book on modern logic. 

Frege wanted epistemology to be linked to logic rather than the empiricist tradition to link it with psychology. 

Frege adapted Kant’s distinction between a priori and a poseriori knowledge. How do we first come to believe a proposition and how we come can justify it. 

Frege said we need knowledge a priori ( a priori knowledge does not rely on experience)

A priori truths are known before experience, they are true by definition

e.g All Bachelors are unmarried men or All Triangles have 3 sides- geometry is a priori 

There is no such thing as an a priori mistake as we can only know what is already true, otherwise we don't know anything at all. 

Frege's definition of a posteriori knowledge is that it's a judgement based on the fundamental ground of proposition that we believe to be true, in other words, the evidence.

A mathematical proposition must be justified by maths says Frege. It cannot be a psychological matter of process. A mathematician has a sensation and mental image when calculating. But images are not what arithmetic is about. Mathematicians may associate the different images with just one number. 

-Arithmetic is concerned with the truth of the proposition not the psychology. 

Simply Frege explains Psychology concerns the cause of our thinking and mathematics is the proof of our thoughts. 

In Frege’s late essay ‘Thoughts’ he maintains the distinction between logic and psychology. He highlights the ambiguity inherent in the statement that logic deals with ‘laws of thought’ 

Both Descartes and Frege accept a division between a public world of physical things and a private world of human consciousness, they appeal to the third world in away that rejoins what was separated.

Mathematics 

Natural numbers: are the words used to count thing.

 ‘to count’ is to use an abstract category creating words and abstract symbols for plural categories (10+) needs a system of number words and logical syntax to put together for further numbers. 

Attitudes towards languages and syntax number systems: 

1. They are natural and can be empirically observed
2. They are instincts of a harmonic platonic other world. Like pythagoreanism.
3. They are abstract logical objects constructed from syntax (Frege) 

Syntax: a set of rules of modifying a meaning of one logical object or another adjectives and nouns have syntactical forms. 

Evolutionary psychology/ Numerical naturalism:

Apes and stone age ancestors appear to be able to jude simple empirical plurality like this:

0= absence of an object ( no bananas) 

1= one object ( a banana)

2= a lot of bananas

Other empirical plurality: in everyday life you walk into a room and if there is more than one person in that room you can notice that using simple plurality using logical relations. If there is 6+ people in that room you may have to count. 

Addition and multiplication: plurals of plurals.

If a football ground is full you wouldn’t count how many people are there you would say its nearly full or busy. 

Pythagoreanism/ Platonism

focus on prime numbers. The prime numbers are seen as logo’s- languages of God. Platonists would say prime numbers show necessary pre conditions for consciousness. 

Orphic Religions:

Nietzsche’s god of music, harmony of the spheres.

The behavior towards the number three is abnormal, it is treated differently than a word. In Christianity three has significance ‘the father, son and holy spirit,’ rises on the third day’ 

The greek’s fear zero and no.1- counting began with two and saw it as though it is naturally impossible to have nothing.

In Islam they love the number one. There is only one Allah. 

Frege’s method. 

His axiom: ‘ all things that are identical are equal to themselves’ 

• he followed that all things that are pairs are identical to all other pairs. 

New Journalism

The New Journalism & American Journalism

The Penny Papers 
It America the Penny Papers was a tabloid style newspaper produced in the United States during the mid- 19th century. The paper was deeply partisan, often controlled by political parties and business men. The articles put forward a point of view and sometimes there could be useful information in them. 
The Penny Papers were writing material for people who were not highly education. Tapping into regular public.

Objectivity became a factor in journalism in the mid 19th century. Different political parties in each allegiance. The only way you can sell news to a variety of people is to make it true and objective and neutral. Rather than just the party line. Objectivity wasn’t at the beginning of journalism but it did developed. 

The Yellow Press- (late 19th Century New York) 
Yellow Journalism or the yellow press is a type of journalism that presents crime stories, emotive headlines and big striking pictures to make people read it. The paper focuses on using eye catching headlines and images to draw in readership. The news in the yellow press made readers react in a sensual way whether it be shock or loss.  The stories would be of human interest stories, to make us react and care about the stories and along side this Big pictures were used to gain readers interest and simple tabloid words were used. The Sun on Sunday- is the Yellow Press it’s tabloid journalism. 

Some people will describe The Yellow Press like a "frozen television." But it was the first New Journalism. It was a radical shift. 

Many called Yellow Journalism the New Journalism without a soul. All the stories were about sin, sex and violence.- Good investigative journalism carried out by the yellow press. 

The world of William Randolph Hearst of the new york journal and Joseph Pulitzer of the New York World

America of 1960s and 70s- similar to the time of Hearst and the Yellow Press. There was a great deal of political and social upheaval fighting the foreign wars, with even more serious military threat building overseas. 

Journalists record the events of the day in a normally in a formulaic way. Who What Where When Why. The News Pyramid, very formulaic. Always have two sources of information etc. Attempt to reflect what was happening at the time but recorded in a more accurate and true sense. - Tom Wolf. They wanted the event to bleed into the copy. 

Political and Cultural scene

1960s was particularly turbulent. JFK gave great hope and wanted to represent the American Dream. His assignation was a moment of soul searching for America. 

The disastrous Vietnam War. They drafted into the army to go to Vietnam but the wealthy could avoid it. Muhammad Ali refused to be conscripted. 

Political repercussions then took place. 

The Baby BOOM: They was a shift in the make up of political America and there was a boom in the amount of babies that were born. The youth culture became a phenomena and the elite had to deal with it. The generation clash- the young became created political change. 

Sexual Revolution: In the mid 60s it was becoming legally excepted to use the contraceptive pill. Sexual revolution- sexual freedom, the pill, Reichian free love. Women could take control of their reproductive system. It taps into Existentialism and the rights to freedom. Reich was very influential at this time. This tied into feminism. 

Universities became the center of radical politics. The police shot students and thousands of students would march for equal rights. Women and Black people were too fighting for equal rights. 

The use of LSD introduced by the CIA to access altered thinking of counterculture. LSD scooped into the campus/student life to escape hierarchy. 

The prohibition of drugs created subcultures- Hippies, communes and collectives etc. Youth culture was deviant. The CIA created the need for LSD and created arguably a drug culture but the gov. fought this. “Turn on, tune it, drop out”- they wouldn’t get involved in society. 

Music was central to this. Sartre though jazz was authentic, the music was true and not in bad faith. Musical 1960s was an attack on the norm. Drug fueled (Doors) and the anti establishment (Bob Dylan)- with the aim to subvert and be political. 

Influence on Existentialism

Ideas informed by existentialism- Heidegger’s authenticity, Sartre’s Bad Faith.

Frantz Fanon 
He believed an act of violence of extreme expression of choice. Violence will be the way to push to freedom. Key ideas are the freedom of choice for example Fanon’s view of a path to freedom via accelerated choice (violence) 

There is no super structure to life you have to create meaning through your choices and actions. If you had an existentialist machine that scans you- it wouldn't bring up your past. It would just see the choices that you’ve made. The most interesting choice is your next one. 

Attack on existentialism: If everyone has their own meaning isn’t it just anarchy? - It is essentially about someones freedom and if you limit a persons freedom then that is bad faith on your behalf. 

Malcolm X, Human rights activist, cut of his past. This is very much an existentialist view that we are not our past. He agrees with Fanon- violence is the way to freedom. 
Anti established feeling of “there is a policeman inside your head he must be destroyed” began to steep into journalism. 

Journalists question whether basing stories on press releases, conferences and official statements made by the establishment was really objective- and more importantly a true reflection of events? 

• You can’t say everything is great when they are not. 

New forms of journalism started to emerge. 

Journalists turned away from police or anyone and began to focus on setting, plot, feelings direct quotes. Lets try and reflect whats happening in an accurately as we can. They still worried about facts and truth. As a features writer you went out of the office and worked like a crime reporter. Truman Capote, Tom Wolfe and Norman Mailer are examples of this new breed. 

This alternative Journalism was personal and expressed an individuals “point of view” to be subjective. 

The articles were unconventional, disagreeable and unfriendly.- This is good to be awkward as a journalist. 

We move away from telling to seeing. It’s about the setting, how a person is sitting and what words they use. 

Marshall McLuhan’s Hot and Cool media. 
Hot media is explicit about what its telling you, very daily mail. No choice about what you are reading. 
Cool media is the “man men” its ambiguous you have to interpret the media. You see whats happening but you make the decision on what is happening. 

New journalists are less worried about objectivity but they were focused on remaining accurate throughout their work. They thought that the most effective news was be one where the reporter underwent subjective experience. 

Tom Wolfe
American author and journalist, Tom Wolfe is well known for his association and influence over New Journalism.
explains the setting/ surroundings but the reader can feel closer to the scene.
It was all about natural realism. He was a fan of Emile Zola. One of the greatest writers of natural realism. She fascinates about the small detail of the setting. 

The New Journalism (collection of essays of the art of what Tom Wolfe describes) 

Wolfe enters journalism and highlights the competition that surrounds it. 

Dialogue was beginning to be used, like a novel. Tom Wolfe seeps into the world of features using dialogue. There was a dramatic shift to replicate what was happening in the real world and replicate it on paper. 

It takes more time as you have to interview lots of people, soak up the scene of where you are writing and focus on the detail. Focus on your interviewee. To get his sort of material you have to  invest a lot of time with the subjects.  P.46 & 47- read if you want to get into features. 

1. When you write a feature you describe scene by scene not narrative. “Scene by Scene construction” 

1. You would have to reflect the dialogue and scene. “realistic dialogue” involves the reader more than other single devise. 
2. third person point of view- giving the reader the feeling of being inside the interviewee’s mind. 
3. Record everyday gestures, habits, manners, customs, styles of furniture, modes of behavior towards children, superiors, inferiors and other symbolic details that might exist within a scene. Symbolic people’s status life. 

Ultimately a New Journalism piece is Fear and Loathing... “Gonzo Journalism”- Journalist Louis Theroux

Seminar Paper: Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarians

Hannah Arendt was an German-American political theorist. Published in 1951, her most famous book “The Origins of Totalitarianism” challenges why totalitarianism started. It was written after world war two and after Hitlers death.  Arendt wanted to give her readers a sense of phenomenal reality of totalitarianism. Totalitarianism is; An imposing government that exercise absolute control over all aspects of life in a State, with an aim to eventually dominate the World. There will be zero opposition to a totalitarian ruler. In the chapter “Ideology and Terror”Arendt tries to sum up exactly how totalitarianism worked in the cases of Stalin's Russia and Nazi Germany.

Hannah Arendt reveals that terror is at the center of a totalitarian government, and that this terror is based upon ideology. 

This type of terror exceeds fear. Totalitarianism dominated many governments during the twentieth century. Unlike other forms of government that oppress its people; a totalitarian form of government escapes the boundaries of definition. It is commonly mistaken as a tyranny or dictatorship. Arendt explains that this is because it must begin as a tyranny, an oppressive government, to lift the dividing line of the laws. Arendt uses two particular governments as examples to help clarify the nature of a totalitarian government; fascist Germany and communist Russia. According to Arendt, the totalitarianism that rose in Germany was based upon the ideology of racism. 

Hitler's idea of the ideal Aryan; fitting the profile of fair skin, blue eye, blond skin- to be the desiring race to populate Germany. By creating this ideology of the strong race he wiped out an entire race and religion of Judaism, hence came about genocide.  
Underlying the Nazi’s law of race is Darwin’s idea of the man as product of natural development. Bolshevik’s beliefs in class struggle is like Marx’s notion of society as a gigantic historical movement which races to its own law of motion to the end of historical times when it will abolish itself.

She speaks about law in some detail, something that totalitarian regimes do not succeed purely through aggression and ruthlessness but through a shift in the way the people consider law as a whole. She says that this is where totalitarians law differs from other forms of law. Totalitarians didn’t replace laws. It simply defies laws, and makes clear that it can do so. In the interpretation of totalitarian laws Arendt goes on to say that all laws have become ‘laws of movement,’ neither nature or history was the stabilising source of authority for the Nazi’s or the Russians Bolshevik’s, for the mortal man they are simply movements in themselves. She adds that previous governments used positive laws as the only way to express the difference between right and wrong. In a totalitarian body, positive laws are replaced with terror. Terror ceasing to be solely used for the oppression of any opposition.

She speaks in great length about rule by fear. Totalitarianism destroys human morality and eradicates ideas such as guilt and empathy. Fear was the hazardous element. “Guilt and innocence become senseless notions; “guilty” is he who stands in the way of the natural or historical process which has passed judgment over “inferior races”, over individuals “unfit to live,” over “dying classes and decadent peoples.” 

This is by far the most terrifying aspect of totalitarianism. To make people feel guilty for not doing something. This links to the Milgram experiment where people would take the step further giving the innocent person higher levels of electric shocks every time they are asked to simple ‘carry on’ with the experiment. The only thing the authoritative figure tells you is that ‘you must go on’ and this was sufficient enough for people to carry on. 

Hannah Arendt explains that the totalitarians developed ideologies to impact the masses. There are three types of totalitarian ideologies. Firstly it is that ideologies are based on motion and that the subject matter of an ideology is history. She then adds that ‘Ideologies explain not what is but what becomes’ this links to the idea that ideologies are orientated towards history. This method of thinking could be linked to Hegel’s idea of the zeitgeist, where we are living in a world where we started with a thesis-antithesis and eventually a synthesis will be reached where we result in a euphoria society. 

Secondly ideological thinking becomes independent of all experience. Which it cannot learn anything new even if it is a question of something that has come to pass. Hence why ideological thinking becomes liberated from the reality that we perceive with our five senses. 

Thirdly ideologies have no power to transform reality. 

Ideology is the logic of an idea, the subject matter is history. She went on to explain that Ideological victory of racism and communism over all other isms was decided before the totalitarian movements took hold of precisely these ideologies. All other ideologies have totalitarian qualities but they are only developed by totalitarian movements.

Hannah Arednt goes on to say that the propaganda of the totalitarian movement also serves to set free the thought from experience and reality and that there is a “secret meaning into every public event.”

She sights the the work of Hitler and Stalin as “ideologies of great importance.”  For they did not add a single new thought to the ideas and propaganda slogans of their movements. 

Totalitarian governments could not exist without destroying the realm of life, by isolating men. Total terror leaves no space for private life and the self coercion of totalitarian logic destroys man’s capacity for experience and thought. Isolation can happen in a world whose chief values are dictated by their work, all human activities turned into hard labor. The isolation then becomes loneliness. 

Epictetus, the slave philosopher of Greek origin was the first to distinguish loneliness and solitude. "When you close your doors, and make darkness within, remember never to say that you are alone, for you are not alone; nay, God is within," Epictetus

She concludes that in history we can see that solitary men have always been in danger of loneliness, this came to light in the nineteenth century. For philosophers solitude is a condition of work philosophy is only for the few, they begin to insist that nobody understands them. In Hegel’s deathbed he stated that “Nobody has understood me expect one; and he also misunderstood.” 
Nietzsche, also a lonely man, found himself and started thinking dialogue of solitude in his Sils Maria and Zarathustra. It’s loneliness that causes the loss of one’s self. 

A new form of government who essence is terror and whose principle of action is the logicality of ideological thinking. Such a combination was never used before in the varied forms of political domination. 

Like Hobbes’ social contract, totalitarian regimes are controlled by a figure of authority. In Hobbes’ contract this is the Leviathan. He believed that it is ‘every man against every man’ in society. This is similar to the totalitarians view but their ideology removes man from all his freedom and liberty and for the existentialists this is the key problem. Freedom is the most important factor for man according to the existentialists. Totalitarian regimes removes freedom from society. 

Totalitarianism Lecture

All of the questions faced with totalitarianism: How could it happen? How could these rich countries act in this certain way?- the responsibility of it is hard to find. Writer Hannah Arendt tried to explain how  "The Origins of Totalitarianism" 

Language control, if you get rid of a word then you are vanishing the meaning of the word. 

Hannah Andret said that 20th century totalitarian regimes were different to anything that had come before. Pre WW1 things were relatively peaceful and then huge aristotcats such as Russia, China and Germany introduced their totalitarian regimes. 

They went agaisnt Plato’s republic. They controlled every aspect of peoples life. Even Hobbes had a low opinion on humanity- state controll is needed. 

Contray to this Locke said we need a government but freedom and liberty is essential. But for the totalitarian regimes freedom was the least likely thing you would expect from them. totalitarians wanted to strip away individuality. 

“Everything we know of totalitarian....”

-It was new

Benito Mussolini, leader of the national Fascist party, believed individuality should be destroyed. The state is everything and the state should connect everything. He explained these regimes: Imperialism that had come before created totalitarianism. totalitarian regimes took racism as a foundation, the “supior race”  was based on genes and not what they had achieved. 

Once established ways of thinking could be applied to your behavior : think General Kitchener.

Kitchener was a British military leader and statesman who, as secretary of state for war in the first years of World War One, organised armies on an unprecedented scale. He was also depicted on the most famous British army recruitment poster ever produced.

The two methods used to destroy individuality was terror and ideologies, according to Hannah Arendt. 

Ideology and terror limits your capacity to think. Because an ideology literally puts you in a place where the phrase 'it's just the way it is' applies, because you think you cannot change the ideology you just have to live with it. 

Orders are part of an ideology from the state. They absorb you from any responsibility. 

"Dont think, follow" frees you from common sense. 

Hitlers perfect race would mean he had to remove all the Jewish citizens. They saw them as a master race. 

What is your personal responsibility in a dictatorship or in Totalitarian regimes? 

Would you collaborate? 

Hannah Arendt reported on the Eichmann trail. Eichmann was put in that position, he drove the trains that the jewish people were transported on during the genocide. Without this stage of the Jews journey they would not of been killed, therefore Eichmann was committing a crime, alongside all the other Nazi's. 

But when Eichmann went to trial for this he said he was just a law abiding citizen. Eichmann was put to death either way for his crime. 

But Hannah Arendt highlights that his true crime was the crime of "not thinking" he was doing what he was told to do. 

From an existentialist point of view he didn't choose and it choice that is the biggest importance to an existentialist. 

Satre: Bad Faith. 

Disobedience is exactly what Eichmann needed. 

USA 1950s/60s: The New Industrial State

In the United States of America, "the Sixties" went through new, radical, and subversive events and trends of the period, which continued to develop in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and beyond. In Africa the 1960s was a period of radical political change as 32 countries gained independence from their European colonial rulers.

Weber was a German and political economist. He was interested in Germany and how the state worked, he particularly looked at social research. After the Paris commune in 1871, the German states authority raised and so did social democracy.

England, France and the USA copied this modern bureaucracy idea that Germany had created, known as Keynesianism economics. And then leading onto the first world war.

After the Paris Commune Germany had become the first modern Bureaucratic state. A bureaucracy is an organisation of non-elected officials of a government or organisation who implement the rules and laws of their institution.

Weber and Marx were Kantian's, they followed the same ideas that Kant had speculated about ' the truth'. Weber would say that humans do not know the objects in themselves, there is no absolute reality, we only have a mental picture.

There is no absolute truth as a Journalist but you can be honest.

Weber was very much anti-political, he just wanted to see what people got up to in the bureaucracy.

He was interested in power and why we follow rules set out by certain people. He looked at social actions,

"an Action is 'social' if the acting individual takes account of the behavior of others and is thereby oriented in its course."

Whats wrong with the Bureaucratic state? - Cultural exhaustion, the rationalism of religion. Our workers ability is becoming less skilled over the years, it would be impossible to build something like Winchester cathedral now.

' In the modern world nobody lives outside of the state' 

The 1950s ‘American prosperity.’ 

Keynes the great God. 

Neo-classical economics is a museum piece, and not taken seriously especially particularly on money policy.

During Eisenhower’s era ( President of the United States from 1953 until 1961) Americans achieved a level of prosperity they had never known before. While other parts of the world struggled to rebuild from the devastation of World War II, citizens of the United States saw their standard of living surpass what previous generations had only dreamed about.

Eisenhower himself deserves a good deal of credit for this economic growth. He found the right combination of low taxes, balanced budgets, and public spending that allowed the economy to hum along at a steady clip. He also benefitted from steady growth in spending on new homes and consumer goods as citizens turned away from older notions of thrift and began to buy on credit.

But this managed society was critiqued as a new form of “soft” totalitarianism. The Keynesian agreement is attacked from both the left and the right sides. 

The Far Left / Far Right: Heidegger and Sartre, Maoism, Franz Fanon. 

American “civilization” is “bureaucratic-technological militaristic nihilism”. It is bound for disintegration, probably violent.

Left: Maoism, third world-ism, ecology, feminism, transvaluation. Anti-globalisation as anti-capitalism, green movement

Right: Racial disintegration, cultural decadence, economic parasitism, loss of national identity, Globalisation as disintegration, relative and absolute economic decline of the west for example the American journalism Mark Stein “After America.”

The Social-Democratic (‘Liberal’) left: JK Galbraith, The New Industrial State (plus existentialist-type cultural criticism in the US, the counter-culture, etc, on the vapidity of existence.

The New Industrial State

by John Galbraith 

“The Military Industrial Complex” (Eisenhower)

The Social-Democratic ‘Liberal’ left: JK Galbraith, The New Industrial State

John Galbraith wrote the new industrial state which explores the ins and outs of this new economic system sweeping through America throughout the post war period. The system itself is described as nihilistic because there is no real point to it or its survival and was also seen to be technological-bureaucracy.

Galbraith suggests that it is the ‘technostructure’ that controls everything and that they subordinate the government for their own progression and self-esteem. ‘Those who run the corporations own no share of enterprise; they are selected narcissistically by boards that have been chosen by the owner.’

What is the aim of this system? None – it is essentially nihilistic, pragmatic “technological-bureaucratic” predicted Heidegger. If you look at all the nuclear weapons and military spending you would agree it is extraordinarily violent and essentially decadent and doomed. What is Galbraith’s recommendation?- managed decline?

The prevalence of conspiracy theories, having a grain of truth in terms of there being interlocking bureaucracies. Interlocking complex relationship with newspapers and television – “false reality” and “false consciousness”

The New Industrial State describes a world Weber’s bureaucracy built. The bureaucracy, by its nature, will destroy those that oppose it. This links in with the Vietnam War and the idea of bureaucratic, economical warfare. - The idea of Vertical integration also allows prolonged loss making.   

Galbraith asserts that within the industrial sectors of modern capitalist societies, that the traditional methods of supply and demand is replaced by the planning of large corporations, using techniques such as advertising and vertical integration. Advertising and vertical integration. Vertically integrated companies in a supply chain are branded together through a common owner. Usually each member of the supply chain produces a different product and the products combine to satisfy a common need. It is contrasted with selling the product in different markets- known as horizontal integration. 

Apocalypse Now

Apocalypse Now is a 1979 American epic war film set during the Vietnam War. (More notes to come)