DNF

I'd been looking forward to reading this book for years. I'd heard great things, and the reviews on here got me even more excited. Unfortunately I found this book not only boring as all get out but also very out of date.

My main beefs:

She gets imperialism and anarchism confused, which definitely isn't easy to do.

She refers to the American continent as a place that had no culture or history before white people showed up.

Eventually, halfway through the second of three parts, I skipped to the final part. In the first paragraph she talks about how fascist leaders are instantly forgotten, and uses the example of Hitler. She claims that Hitler is irrelevant to neo-nazi and neo-fascist groups, which is one of the most out of touch statements I've ever read.

I'm gonna put this book back on my shelf and listen to some podcasts about it ( )

Not quite the work I was expecting. The first third, a history of European anti-semitism deserves to be its own, separate study. The next third is a history of 19th century Imperialism through the First World War, and seems again to be loosely related, if at all, to what follows.

Finally, the final third addresses totalitarianism, and is a product of its time - the echoes of the second world war still ringing. Confusingly, some of it speaks of Stalin's USSR in the present tense, and some parts are edited later after his death.

What should have been the books strongest chapters instead ramble as poorly organized lecture notes. Four times in the final section Arendt describes the SS as the 'transmission belt' of the Nazis. Perhaps it is a translation issue. 'Driving force' or to stick with the analogy, simply 'ratchet' would make more sense. It really stood out to this reader as a loosely organized set of notes after the 2nd repetition, let alone the fourth.

Her closing argument that loneliness lies at the heart of totalitarianism seems indisputable. ( )

Hannah Arendt was a brilliant philosopher, activist and writer. This book is very dense for one such as I who is a layman in this area, but by taking the time to retrace and reread it was understandable and impressive. I learned a lot of history, political ideas and anthropology, and found it a joy to read such a great thinker/writer describing and explaining difficult material. The book is great. ( )

I can only dream that I could write as well as Arendt. ( )

the first two volumes have a host of problematic issues that make them difficult to consult or reference without quite a lot of filtering and external qualification. they make many arguments that r either dubious or unoriginal (or both)

the third volume, while somewhat flawed in various ways, is an essential masterpiece ( )