Hannah Arendt was one of the leading American Jews during the period of history when anti-Semitism ruled the culture. She wrote numerous commentaries on various topics including politics, literature, and religion. Her book, The Human Condition, established her reputation as one of the foremost European theorists of the 20th century. Arendt’s concept of the human condition is the foundation for much of Continental Philosophy, and she is regarded as one of the precursors to Martin Heidegger. Arendt’s own concept of the human condition bears resemblance to Heidegger’s own concept of the human condition.
In her classic work, The Human Condition Hannah Arendt contends that only through its voluntary acceptance of certain basic principles and institutions can human beings enjoy freedom and live with their dignity. In this broad sense, a human being is said to be a member of a plurality or a community of individuals who are bound together by certain concepts or ideas. Arendt maintains that this political theory of the constitution of the nation states that “a free political life is the right of a majority of citizens to participate in the political life of the nation and to enjoy certain personal rights” (The Human Condition, chap. III).
According to Arendt, every human being has the right to participate in the political life of a nation as long as he or she does not infringe the equal right of other citizens to enjoy political rights. According to Arendt, the right of a majority of citizens to participate in the political life of a nation implies that they have legitimate rights which cannot be revoked by the majority in order to protect its interest in doing so. Arendt claims that the idea of the rights of a majority is not a conception of natural justice as the defenders of established authority claim it to be. They argue that the concept of the rights of a majority is nothing but a technicality used to mask the reality of political power and the privilege of members of the majority to rule over the masses by exercising unjust social control.
The concept of the rights of a majority is also used by Hannah Arendt to suggest that a political leader should be chosen by the people rather than by a group of experts who know more about attaining political power than actually doing politics themselves. Arendt maintains that in order for a political leader to be elected, the people must believe that they can be governed effectively and that they can decide what kind of government they want. The people thus decide whom they allow to govern them through their representative. Arendt thus criticizes those who think that power is inherent in the people and that any political leader can be chosen. Instead she argues that the government of a country can be best established by a political party which actually wins an election based on its performance and popularity at the polls.
Hannah Arendt then contrasts this with the concept of right of a minority, which she argues is the right of a group to take power in a democratic society against the will of the majority. Arendt thus argues that the need for a majority in a political society is therefore conditional since there may well be a minority which does not share the interests of the majority. The need therefore is to ensure that a minority can enjoy a participatory politics just as the majority does. Arendt thus suggests that in order for a political system to be effective and useful to the citizenry, there must be some form of constitutional compromise between the two factions. She further suggests that one such form of constitutional compromise is a popularly elected government.
Hannah Arendt’s concept of the right of the citizens is therefore very different from the one held by the modern political philosophers. According to these philosophers, a right to political freedom is a right that every human being should possess as long as they do not abuse their rights. Arendt however argues against this view. She contends that a right to political freedom is a right that everyone should have as long as they enjoy such freedom and do not commit injustices that go against the common good. Arendt therefore argues that if the government wishes to protect its citizens from political tyranny then it has to adopt the same concept of the right of the citizens that she did.
Arendt’s concept of the right of the citizens has indeed exercised great powers and influence in the shaping of today’s societal structure. In her masterwork ‘The Human Condition’, she poses the question ‘what is the use of right?’ and answers it by posing another such question ‘how is the use of right to be regulated?’ Hannah Arendt then proceeds to examine the concept of right through history and through the lens of contemporary politics. In so doing, she develops her critical thinking and methodology which would later in her life to be used in examining post-modern political theory and politics as well as in developing courses such as ‘Hegel’, ‘Lectures on Politics’, and’Philosophy and Publics’.
Right of the citizens is not to be abridged for any reason Hannah Arendt. In the case of political philosophy, Arendt holds to what she calls ‘the liberal conception of right’, which she regards as a concept that gives individuals and societies the freedom to pursue their chosen political paths, subject to the constraints of a just and equitable society. Consequently, when it comes to the right of the citizens, Arendt does not compromise with her original concept; rather, she insists on its full and immediate protection against the threats that may threaten its sanctity.