Totalitarianism Seminar

The Origins of Totalitarianism – Hannah Arendt

Totalitarianism is completely different from other forms of political organisation. It develops an entirely new political institution and destroys all political, legal and cultural traditions of the country. It transforms the classes into masses and strips people of their individuality. Totalitarianism is so different from what has come before it’s difficult to predict their course of action. Some may try to compare totalitarianism as some modern form of tyranny but the difference is that tyranny is entirely lawless but totalitarianism believes that there’s a higher law.

Totalitarianism defies all positive law, even those it has established itself. Positive law= Statute and common law, laws that are developed by society. Totalitarian law is derived from the law of history or the law of nature. Arendt uses the examples of Nazi Germany and Communist Russia to demonstrate different types of totalitarian societies. Nazi Germany followed the law of nature, using biology, as the basis for their laws. The race struggle and segregation of the Jews was based on Darwin’s idea that man is a product of natural development. Whereas Stalin’s Communist Russia was based on Marx’s teleological view of history, that history is working towards something. Engels referred to Marx as the “Darwin of History”.

Totalitarianism is prepared to sacrifice everyone’s interests to follow the letter of the law. You remove people’s individuality so they can’t break away from the regime. It has total bureaucracy so that if one person goes against the ideology then there is always someone above them to punish them. Because totalitarian regimes invade every aspect of society there are no public spaces for people to express their feelings or exchange ideas of rebellion, so people begin to feel isolated, which prevents revolution.

Terror and ideology strips away peoples responsibility and ability to choose as they depend on the authority to take the responsibility. An example of this is the Milgram experiment.
You don’t have to be inherently evil to do bad things, Arendt identifies this as the “banality of evil”. An example of this is the Stanford Prison Experiment, where Professor Zimbardo created a prison atmosphere using student volunteers who were assigned the role of prisoner or guard for two weeks. Zimbardo took the role of prison officer. He gave the guards the position of total power but they weren’t allowed to use physical violence. By day 2 some of the prisoners chose to rebel by barricading themselves in their rooms with their bed. The professor didn’t expect them to rebel so early but they were rebelling against the status differences. The guards were given reflective sunglasses so they couldn’t see their eyes which reduced their humanity. The prisoner at the head of the rebellion was put in the “hole” which was a completely dark, small, cramped space. The guards would wake the prisoners up in the middle of the night to disorientate them and force them to do menial tasks and hard physical work, whilst they hurled insults at them. One prisoner asked to leave, at which point the professor (acting as prison officer) offered him instead the option to act as a snitch. The prisoner then took this as he was not allowed to leave and he returned to tell the other prisoners that they weren’t permitted to leave. The prisoner then pretended to be crazy but this soon began to turn into real mental issues, at which point he was allowed to leave the experiment. After he left rumours began that he was going to return to free the other prisoners. The professor reacted to this as a prison officer and saw this as a real threat so chose to relocate the prisoners. Zimbardo was questioned about the legitimacy of the experiment but he was by this point more concerned about the prison than the experiment.  The rumoured jailbreak never took place which they took out on the prisoners. The prisoners then lost their unity and didn't stand by one another. Prisoner 819 went to leave the experiment but when he was leaving he heard the other prisoners shout “prisoner 819 did a bad thing”. This made 819 not want to go as he didn't want to be a bad prisoner and the professor had to remind him that this wasn't a real prison. As time went on the guards became more creative with their evil. Prisoner 416 went on a hunger strike and by da 5 was put in the hole. The prisoners were offered the option to give up their blankets in return for 416 being allowed to leave and none of the prisoners agreed to this. The prisoners completely lost any sense of unity and sided with the guards view of 416. By day 5, 4 prisoners had broken down and been released. Another professor went down to see the experiment and she was disgusted by the suffering of the young men. The next day the experiment ended.

There are three types of ideology:
1) Based on motion based on history.
2) Becomes independent from experience/reality
3) Individuals perceptions of reality always changes

Propaganda removes the reality from experience. Terror is the realisation of the totalitarian movement. The totalitarian regime claims to transform human beings into unfailing carriers of law, which before they were just subject to. 

Totalitarianism

How can good people do evil things?

Totalitarianism is all about control. Hannah Arendt argued that the 20^th century totalitarian regimes were utterly different from anything that had come before. “Everything we know of totalitarianism demonstrates a horrible originality”. Everything is in the state, the state controls everything and there is nothing outside of it. The aim is to completely strip away any individuality, you are all one thing. Arendt saw imperialism as a predecessor to totalitarianism because it contained so many traits that new regimes could use. One trait of imperialism was racism, undermining their individuality to undermine their humanity. The concentration camps used by the British were the model that the Nazis used.

You destroy people’s individuality as it makes them hard to control. There are two methods to destroying peoples individuality:
1) State Terror- destroys their ability to act against the government.
2) Ideology – Eliminates the capacity for individual thought and experience.

Ideology is also a type of specialist knowledge and is also used a justification for the authority of rulers. It is a way to avoid responsibility and gives people “the total explanation of the past, the total knowledge of the present, and the reliable prediction of the future”. Ideology frees you of common sense and reality. The breakdown of the stable human world means the loss of the institutional and psychological barriers that normally set a limit to what is possible.

For Arendt the first move the Nazis made on the road to the “Final Solution” was to deny Jews citizenship. Remove their rights, you remove their humanity. Nazis saw Jews as a rival master race, a model to be emulated and over taken.

Totalitarianism highlights the fragility of civilisation and how quickly groups and people can fall through the cracks, even in the heart of Europe. To be civilised human beings we need laws, freedom, rights and shared experience.

If you control language you can control thought. Thought takes place in purely linguistic terms and mind control is possible through the manipulation of language, e.g. George Orwell 1984 “newspeak”. This is demonstrated in modern day through the implementation of “PC” language which prevents negative connotations.

What is your responsibility in a totalitarian regime? Would you collaborate? An example of this is the Eichmann trial. Eichmann was a Nazi fugitive who stood on trial in Jerusalem. His main responsibility during the Holocaust was to organise the transport for millions of Jews across Europe to concentration camps. For Arendt it was a shock to see Eichmann as he was proud to be a law-abiding citizen. This just highlights the point that you don’t have to be an evil person to do evil things, Arendt called this the “banality of evil”. Arendt believed that Eichmann’s greatest crime was not thinking. She holds the existentialist view that he had a choice to make and he didn’t make it, as far is Sartre is concerned Eichmann was acting in bad faith by not choosing. Eichmann was just doing his duty and following the categorical imperative of Kant; he was just following the rules. If everyone else is doing it that’s no excuse, you have to choose, you have to think. You cannot giveaway your responsibility by following the law. Sometimes disobedience is our responsibility.

WINOL - Week 9 - The Budget 2013

This week I went to Westminster to cover the 2013 Budget for WINOL. As the budget was released on the Wednesday this obviously made my deadline very tight as I had to get to Westminster, film, get an interview with MP Mike Thornton, and get back in time to edit my package for WINOL at four. It was a fantastic experience if a little bit stressful, but one I would definitely be keen to re-live.

My Package:

Extended Interview with MP Mike Thornton:

WINOL - Week 8 - New Forest Mystery Toxin Causes Dog Deaths

Hampshire Vets are investigating a mystery toxin in the New Forest that has caused the death of eight dogs over the past three months.

The source of the toxin is still unknown but the New Forest District Council have stated that they will be leaving the investigation to the vets as they await results from samples they have sent to America.

It is thought that the toxin finds its way into the dog’s bloodstream after they get cuts on their legs and paws. A few days later the dogs then go into kidney failure, which can be fatal.

One of the theories behind what is responsible is that there could be toxins in the soil, which have been eroded by recent heavy rainfall. This then makes its way into rivers and puddles and dogs that have suffered cuts would then become infected by going into this water.

Dog owners have expressed their fears and some have even changed the route where they would usually walk their dog. 

The council are advising dog walkers to avoid the Latchmore Brook area near Fordingbridge and to see their vet if they have any concerns.

 Video Report:

Existentialism

There is no point to anything, there is no right or wrong, there is no moral compass. It is all about choice. Choice is crucial to the existentialist point of view, you use your own internal morality to make choices. The brave decision to choose to do something even though it is ultimately pointless.

Nietzsche – “God is dead” this marks the end of certainty. We are faced with a crisis and we need something else to sustain us. Nietzsche thinks this crisis is fantastic because it means complete freedom. It gives us the freedom to find value for ourselves as there is no hierarchy to tell us what is right and wrong. “Our ships can at last put out to sea in the face of every danger”. Human nature is not universal; people’s natures are different so we all have different moralities. The Ubermensch over comes what has so far defined us. The Ubermensch will define himself and ignore the rules.  

Heidegger - Claimed he wasn’t an existentialist. His book, “Being and Time”, is all about human existence. Heidegger is interested in what it means to exist and consequently, the problems of human life. What is it to exist? What even is this “exist”? Heidegger mainly attacks Descartes and his Cartesian-Dualism (mind and body). Heidegger thinks this is nonsense, how do these two things interact? If my mind is one thing, and my body is another, how do I control my body and interact with the world? In place of consciousness and subjectivity, Heidegger simply talks about Dasein. Dasein=being in the world. It is not a spatial relationship, Dasein is our interaction in the world, it denotes a certain amount of engagement. For Dasein to exist it must exist in the world, there is no Dasein without the world. All we are is our interaction with the world, and we are defined by our choices. If you make and face your decisions then you are living an authentic life. If you follow social constructs then you are living and unauthentic life, you are a slave. You should not be defined by your facticity (your past e.g. your upbringing). We are thrown into the world, it’s nothing but blind luck. There is no reason to it. Transcendence is your reaction to your facticity, you can re-create yourself, it is your potential.

Sartre- Existence precedes essence, we create our own purpose. Simone De Beauvoir “one is not born a woman, but one becomes one”. There is no guiding spirit, no teleological driving force, stuff just happens, good and bad, without reason. Life is in its own way absurd and ridiculous. Heidegger’s existentialism is right wing, and Sartre's is much more left wing. The life of a person is not determined in advance. The only thing I cannot escape is the need to choose. This is frightening and people will try to avoid this freedom which is “bad faith”. We are not defined, we define ourselves.

Existentialism is the reaction to the realisation that there is no reason to anything.  

WINOL - Week 6 - Eastleigh By- Election

The Eastleigh by-election was triggered by the resignation of Eastleigh MP Chris Huhne after he pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice.

Fourteen parties took part in the race for the MP seat:
Party - Candidate
Liberal Democrat - Mike Thornton
Conservative - Maria Hutchings
Labour - John O'Farrell
UKIP - Diane James
Independent - Danny Stupple
Monster Raving Loony Party - Howling Laud Hope
Elvis Loves Pets - David Bishop
National Health Action Party - Dr Iain Maclennan
Beer, Baccy and Crumpet Party - Ray Hall
Christian Party -  Kevin Milburn
Peace Party - Jim Duggan
English Democrats - Michael Walters
Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts - Daz Procter
Wessex Regionalist - Colin Bex

However, despite the many parties in the race, the main contenders were the Lib Dems, Conservatives, Labour and UKIP. Eastleigh had been a Lib Dem constituency since 1994, but after the Huhne scandal they had their work cut out to regain the trust of the voters. Prior to 1994 the Eastleigh seat was held by the Conservatives, so the Conservatives were keen to reclaim Eastleigh, making this a real battle between the co-alition partners and threw Eastleigh into the media spotlight. For Labour the by-election was a chance to bring their party policies south as they are typically a party more popular in the northern parts of England, and they were pushing for Ed Milibands "one nation" Labour. UKIP saw this as their opportunity to be taken seriously, as a relatively new party this was their chance to compete against the three big parties and get their policies heard.

As part of their campaign all of the parties brought out the biggest names they could to help appeal to the voters. The Lib Dems brought Nick Clegg, the Conservatives brought David Cameron, UKIP brought Nigel Farage and Labour brought Ed Miliband.

The Conservatives came under some criticism that their candidate, Maria Hutchings, was not in the media light enough and wasn't interacting with the voters. This was something I found to be true as WINOL had a real struggle trying to get in touch with her prior to the election. I managed to interview her at one in the morning, after sitting through what can only be described as the longest housing meeting ever. However she only agreed to the interview out of sympathy for our student dedication and we were warned to only ask her about the housing development. On reflection I should have just asked her about her policies anyway, what were they going to do?

WINOL produced "The South Decides" on the night which was our Eastleigh by-election special. Our show went live at 10pm until 12pm and then it transferred to the radio show until about 1am when the show went live again as the results show.
 For the by-election special I produced a package on housing and I was also the political correspondent reporting from the count in Eastleigh.

Housing package:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2K2K8KNfcU

The OB Team:
Louis, Kirsty, Ellen and myself.

Unfortunately on the night things didn't go quite as smoothly as we would have hoped. Producing live OB's from the count was optimistic but we felt that we were prepared. Originally we planned to link a camera and gun mic to a laptop and use Skype, however we soon learnt that we couldn't get the laptop to register both so we decided to compromise on the visual quality by using a web cam and the gun mic. We tested this system in the news room and it worked perfectly without any hiccups so we were sure it would be fine on the night, we had even practised with the exact equipment we would be using. What could go wrong? ... Everything.

We were the first of the media to arrive at the count, despite one lone BBC camera man and his never ending collection of wires. We decided to set up immediately and make sure everything worked. It didn't. At first we couldn't get the microphone to connect to the laptop so when we tested Skype Nicole couldn't hear anything. We tested all of the equipment and it worked separately, but refused to work together. We believed the source of the problem was the wire which connected the gun mic to the USB port so Lou ran to go and buy another. Once he returned we attempted Skype again and this time the laptop wouldn't recognise the web cam. By this point time was running out and we had been forced to move from our set up point as we were in the BBCs allocated space.

After many failed attempts our only workable solution was to Skype via iPhone... professional. But we made the best of a bad situation and gave live OBs whenever we were thrown to. We also managed to announce the result, although it didn't go as smoothly as production probably would have liked. We were unsure when the results would be announced so we were dependent on rumours and guess work. When Mike Thornton was announced as the winner of the Eastleigh by-election he was greeted with a cheer and a chorus of "we like Mike". We filmed the candidates giving their speeches and we managed to get reaction interviews with all of the candidates except for Maria Hutchings who refused all media interviews.

There was a fantastic atmosphere within the count, the hustle and bustle, grabbing people for interviews, trying to get as much information as we could from people, and being a part of the media scrum. The pressure of speaking on a live OB is the scariest thing I have done and the pressure was like no other. Fighting through the sheer exhaustion and running off of nothing but caffeine really gave us the feeling of being real journalists.

I was also lucky enough to be interviewed by Sky. I expected them to ask me about WINOL or our journalism course but no, they asked me about the election and the parties policies. Fortunately I had been following the by-election religiously so I could answer their questions, but it was unbelievable terrifying. I am currently badgering them to send me the footage, so I will upload it as soon as I get it.

All in all the by-election was a fantastic experience for us and provided fantastic material for us to report on. We were incredibly lucky that it was right on our doorstep, but I don't think I will be rushing to Eastleigh again anytime soon.

An edited version of the South Decides:

Fleet Street Fox visits WINOL

Fleet Street Fox has revealed herself as Susie Boniface and her subsequent lack of anonymity means that she was able to pay a visit to us in the WINOL news room. (We're not that wonky in real life - promise!)

She highlighted the importance of identity as a journalist and the identity of the Fleet Street Fox is structured right down to the colour of her clothes and even to her unique style of eyeliner. Some may consider it to be vanity, but appearance is crucial when you want to be take seriously. Even the simplicity of choosing to wear heels over flats, or deciding to be clean shaven with a tie, as opposed to rough and ready stubble, can really make a difference. Red, white and black- these are the colours of success. Their eye-catching combination is used throughout the industry with the red masthead on a tabloid paper, and even in the Fox's dress sense.  

Make the most of the internet! Twitter is your friend and you should make the most of it. It is important to understand who your audience is and what they will be interested in reading. The same applies for Blogger, Facebook and anything else you can use to your advantage. 9am, 2pm, 4.45pm, 8pm, 10pm.. these are the peak reader traffic times and the moments when you should really be plugging your work!

She was brutally honest when asked about the balance between personal life and journalism life and the forecast did not leave any of us with high hopes! The points she made were valid, but they were also ones few of us had ever considered. The constant dependancy on your phone, incessant nosiness, and never being able to switch off can be very draining on your relationships. The novelty of the journalist life will wear off on others around you. 9-5 hours do not exist in the journalist world but your passport will accumulate an awful lot of stamps. I think it honestly depends on the type of journalist you want to be, but if you want to be one of the big dogs then the family life probably isn't a realistic dream to have.

On the upside there appears to be an awful lot of jagermeister in this line of work.