Latest news with #TheOriginsofTotalitarianism
Boston Globe
28-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Boston Globe
Former ICA director: What is driving Trump's venom against the arts?
Museums, theaters, orchestras, and dance companies employ hundreds of thousands of people and serve communities across the country through inspiration, education, training, and convening. At the same time, artists individually are among the lowest-earning sectors of the economy — and In the federal budget, arts funding makes up an infinitesimal fraction of spending. The NEA's Advertisement Rather, the ineffable power of the sector lies in art itself, in the creative energy it represents and releases, and in the role it has played — over and over — in amplifying issues and movements that are part and parcel of resistance and hope. Advertisement Hannah Arendt, in her 1951 book 'The Origins of Totalitarianism,' examined Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia in a way that feels all too relevant today. We learn that authoritarianism flourishes on loneliness, it offers a simplified world view divided into 'us' and 'them,' and it uses control of history and the arts as strategies to reinforce and inculcate a message of fear and obedience. Contemporary art of all kinds, on the contrary, possesses a truth-telling power to shape and narrate our shared history — a power to change whose stories are told, and by whom. The arts can speak to audiences long excluded from our walls and stages. And they are particularly important for America's young people. Today across America, cultural organizations are tackling loneliness, pervasive since the COVID-19 pandemic. Museums, concert halls, and theaters offer space for collective learning and gathering. They present programs for young people and elders that foster social interaction and creativity. And they support artists as they make and share their work with others. I recently stepped down after 27 years leading the Institute of Contemporary Art in Boston. In my experiences at the ICA and with other arts organizations, I have long seen one key form of recognition of the power of arts: the recognition that almost everyone shares when they see their child, niece, or neighbor playing in the third-grade recorder concert, bringing home a drawing for the refrigerator door, or reciting a poem at school. It is the recognition of creativity at work. It is witnessing the joy of self expression. And it is the relief of knowing our children have the inner resources needed to cope with the complexity of their futures. Advertisement I trace my own career as a museum director to early exposure to the arts: first in after-school painting lessons, and later in visits to the Yale University Art Gallery in New Haven, my hometown — where my world exploded as I encountered painting and sculpture from around the world and across time. These were truly aha moments that have lasted a lifetime. That is one reason why programs for young people have been central to my work. The ICA launched its Many arts and museum education programs in the United States have long been supported by federal grants, now being dismantled by the Trump administration. Support for the arts is an investment in our nation's long-term creativity. It is vital for the immediate survival for many arts organizations and individuals and for the recognition that the arts sustain us all. Equally important, though, freedom of expression is a tested antidote to a single authoritarian voice, determined to isolate and divide us. That is why the arts, in all their glorious forms, are both so feared and so necessary.
Scientific American
16-05-2025
- Health
- Scientific American
Loneliness Is Inflaming Our Bodies—And Our Politics
Hannah Arendt has been on my mind a lot lately. The 20th-century German-Jewish political philosopher escaped the Nazi Holocaust, and won regard as one of the world's greatest public intellectuals at a time when few women were appointed to university faculties. She drew on history, literature and her own life to identify the conditions under which open and liberal societies turn into authoritarian states. Seven decades ago she made observations that still offer powerful insights today. In The Origins of Totalitarianism,Arendtemphasized one primary factor in the rise of authoritarianism that has little obvious connection to politics: loneliness. While we usually think of loneliness as not having our social needs met, Arendt defined the word as something deeper. Loneliness happens when there are no shared objective facts and no potential collective action to solve shared challenges. It's a state of being where you can't trust others. Loneliness, in Arendt's telling, inflames the connective tissues of a society. It weakens the body politic so that demagogues and despots can prey. 'What prepares men for totalitarian domination,' she wrote, '… is the fact that loneliness, once a borderline experience usually suffered in certain marginal social conditions like old age, has become an everyday experience.' Arendt—as far as I know—didn't use the word 'inflammation' to describe the effects of social isolation on a country or culture. But it's the metaphor that, to me, gets to the essence of her warning. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Inflammation is the body's response to a sense of threat—a protective, contractionary response that can extend even to the cellular level. It's a response that can inhibit healing. A community or society that faces a deficit of meaningful connectedness is similarly in a state of perpetual threat; people are unable to listen to one another, to trust each other, to maintain trust in shared institutions, or to collectively overcome divisions. This might sound familiar. From 2003 to 2022, face-to-face socializing among U.S. men fell by 30 percent. For teenagers, it was a staggering 45 percent. An estimated 12 percent of Americans report having no close friends, a fourfold increase since 1990. While social media was supposed to amplify human connection, the rise of comparison culture, social sorting into echo chambers and the rapid decline of in-person social connection have instead coincided with unprecedented levels of anxiety, depression and distrust. It should therefore come as no surprise that, in America, we're seeing democratic backsliding like Hannah Arendt warned of—including mass polarization, intentional disinformation and a politics of fear, retribution and rage. Loneliness inflames societies. It just so happens that loneliness inflames the body, too. Two decades ago, researchers Louise Hawkley and John Cacioppo at the University of Chicago demonstrated in a landmark study that loneliness acts as a chronic stressor that triggers the body's innate stress-response systems. Social isolation keeps the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in a constant state of arousal, driving persistent cortisol release. This hormonal imbalance heightens inflammation. And this can, in turn, weaken the immune system, compromise cardiovascular health and worsen vulnerability to mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety. In short, the absence of meaningful social bonds can literally recalibrate the body's physiological mechanisms toward greater stress and illness. Over the past two decades, further studies have only reinforced the link between loneliness and inflammatory pathways. George Slavich of the University of California, Los Angeles, underscores that experiencing social disconnection can mimic physical threats in how our brains and immune systems respond—magnifying the release of inflammatory agents. From an evolutionary standpoint, sustained isolation disrupts our primal need for social integration—leading to inflammation and a whole host of downstream consequences. It's easy to downplay the loneliness problem. When former U.S. surgeon general Vivek Murthy warned of the dangers of social isolation and proposed solutions, no meaningful government interventions ensued. Likewise, when the U.K. government appointed a minister for loneliness in 2018, many likened the move to a Monty Python sketch rather than seeing it as a serious policy intervention. But the medical, social and even political costs of growing social isolation mean that we can no longer afford to ignore it. Some solutions are straightforward. Medical innovators are now addressing social isolation through practices like ' social prescribing '—wherein health professionals connect patients who are lonely with nonmedical community services, volunteer programs, exercise groups and arts activities to improve their well-being. Instead of writing prescriptions for pills, doctors can prescribe a free pass to a museum, an invitation to join a gardening club, or a support group for people facing similar struggles. A recent multiyear evaluation of nature-oriented social prescribing in the U.K. found that programs significantly helped participants reduce anxiety and improve happiness. Other solutions are more systemic. When Pete Buttigieg ran for president in 2020, he laid out an agenda for ' belonging and healing '—emphasizing new funding and policies around mental health and addiction as well as national service to rebuild community institutions and promote environmental restoration. Leaders should propose scaling up 'belonging infrastructure'—transit, green spaces, cultural venues, and mental health centers—while expanding purpose-driven national service programs like Americorps and investing in local journalism through public grants or tax incentives to restore trusted information sources and restore important foundations of community life. This should be a bipartisan cause. Conservatives and liberals alike have an opening to address the crisis by leveraging faith and veterans' groups–for example, granting tax incentives or small federal matches that could help churches, synagogues, and veterans' groups build mentoring initiatives, addiction recovery support and efforts to revitalize parks, libraries and civic spaces. There's also growing bipartisan recognition of the role of social media in the crisis. In tackling big tech's impact on youth, leaders across the ideological spectrum should push toward full algorithmic transparency, restrictions to exploitative design features, and mandates for robust digital well-being protections for children. Like inflammation in the body, social isolation weakens our civic 'immune system,' fueling polarization and making us more susceptible to authoritarian impulses. But Hannah Arendt emphasized that the condition is reversible. By investing in the foundations of shared belonging, we can restore our adapt to adapt to the challenges we face—from wildfires to pandemics to misinformation. It's time to get serious about our healing.
Yahoo
12-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Letters to the Editor: The 'banality of evil' described by political theorist Hannah Arendt is taking hold in the United States
To the editor: I read with deep sadness the article by Jackie Calmes reflecting on the writings of Hannah Arendt ("What Hannah Arendt saw in Hitler's Germany, we can see in Trump's America," April 10). As a former teacher of American History, I taught my students about the Constitution and the rule of law. My students were instructed on what happens when the balance of power is out of control. My eighth-graders learned about Nazi Germany and what led to the rise of Hitler. My classes often would ask how people just stood by and watched as the ugliness of genocide unfolded. Never could I have imagined the possibility of that happening in our country. But we are living in times that suggest that we value one-man rule instead of democracy. We must be part of the solution of saving our valued institutions or we too will be held responsible for our democracy's demise. Micki Wood, Fullerton .. To the editor: In Calmes' excellent column about Arendt, she does not explicitly mention Arendt's important concept of the "banality of evil," which observes that evil can be perpetrated and assented to by ordinary people, not just monsters, through thoughtlessness, ignorance, disinterest or lack of critical thinking. It can also be allowed to take hold because of the unquestioning obedience to a leader of bureaucrats who may not be inherently evil but have other selfish interests that cause them to overlook or disregard the dangerous intents of the person they serve. We must all become more aware of the warning signs. Lewis T. Rosenthal, Los Angeles .. To the editor: Reading the column on Arendt's writings about Hitler's rise to authoritarian power, I was reminded of the saying by philosopher George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." We may be here again, only nine decades later. Evelyn Goodman, Culver City .. To the editor: I'd like to congratulate Calmes on her article. She nailed it! Everything that President Trump is doing is the start of a dictatorship. Everyone should read this column. It's fantastic. Hopefully, I'll watch the PBS documentary on Arendt on June 27. Lolita Coffey, Torrance .. To the editor: Arendt's "The Origins of Totalitarianism" is a far more encompassing analysis of authoritarian, freedom-denying regimes than Hitler's Germany. Upon reading, it's easy — if not more likely — to conclude that Arendt's much greater fear would be of today's Democrats and it's Marxist wing (progressives), both culturally and economically, and supported by academia, the entertainment industry and much of the media. Kip Dellinger, Santa Monica This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
12-04-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: The ‘banality of evil' described by political theorist Hannah Arendt is taking hold in the United States
To the editor: I read with deep sadness the article by Jackie Calmes reflecting on the writings of Hannah Arendt ('What Hannah Arendt saw in Hitler's Germany, we can see in Trump's America,' April 10). As a former teacher of American History, I taught my students about the Constitution and the rule of law. My students were instructed on what happens when the balance of power is out of control. My eighth-graders learned about Nazi Germany and what led to the rise of Hitler. My classes often would ask how people just stood by and watched as the ugliness of genocide unfolded. Never could I have imagined the possibility of that happening in our country. But we are living in times that suggest that we value one-man rule instead of democracy. We must be part of the solution of saving our valued institutions or we too will be held responsible for our democracy's demise. Micki Wood, Fullerton .. To the editor: In Calmes' excellent column about Arendt, she does not explicitly mention Arendt's important concept of the 'banality of evil,' which observes that evil can be perpetrated and assented to by ordinary people, not just monsters, through thoughtlessness, ignorance, disinterest or lack of critical thinking. It can also be allowed to take hold because of the unquestioning obedience to a leader of bureaucrats who may not be inherently evil but have other selfish interests that cause them to overlook or disregard the dangerous intents of the person they serve. We must all become more aware of the warning signs. Lewis T. Rosenthal, Los Angeles .. To the editor: Reading the column on Arendt's writings about Hitler's rise to authoritarian power, I was reminded of the saying by philosopher George Santayana: 'Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' We may be here again, only nine decades later. Evelyn Goodman, Culver City .. To the editor: I'd like to congratulate Calmes on her article. She nailed it! Everything that President Trump is doing is the start of a dictatorship. Everyone should read this column. It's fantastic. Hopefully, I'll watch the PBS documentary on Arendt on June 27. Lolita Coffey, Torrance .. To the editor: Arendt's 'The Origins of Totalitarianism' is a far more encompassing analysis of authoritarian, freedom-denying regimes than Hitler's Germany. Upon reading, it's easy — if not more likely — to conclude that Arendt's much greater fear would be of today's Democrats and it's Marxist wing (progressives), both culturally and economically, and supported by academia, the entertainment industry and much of the media. Kip Dellinger, Santa Monica
