Read on Twitter
Given all the talk about Hannah Arendt alleged racism (?), nazi apology (??) or even white suprematism (???) i decided to do a thread about it. https://www.jpost.com/opinion/hannah-arendt-white-supremacist-456007
Much of the attention about Arendt's supposed racism originated from this piece on the Little Rock crisis of 1957, where she defends segregation in schools.
https://www.normfriesen.info/forgotten/little_rock1.pdf
2/
https://www.normfriesen.info/forgotten/little_rock1.pdf
2/
Arendt argument is based on the distinction of 3 domains: 1. the political (law, civil rights, citizenship, state foundation), 2. the social (where we actually live outside of home most of the time), 3. the private (family, friends). 3/
For Arendt the political is the domain of equality (we're all equal before the law), the social of discrimination (we can associate with whoever we please, excluding others), and the private of exclusiveness (the people in the innermost circle are unique for us) 4/
The political domain can never allow discrimination because it'd undermine the constitution of the state itself and the place of citizens in it. Consequently, Arendt believes that POC should fight first and foremost against laws that discriminate against POC before the law. 5/
Since the social domain allows discrimination, and people tend to form groups including some and excluding others the issue here is more nuanced. In case of public services (transportation, "hotels and restaurants in business districts") there shouldn't be any segregation. 6/
In other cases, like "vacation resorts restricted according to ethnic origin", Arendt believes that laws and states cannot be forced not to discriminate, because it'd be a transpass of the political in the field of the social and thus a suppression of freedom of association 7/
A law telling you with whom you must associate would be as illiberal as a law telling you with whom you must not associate. That is just not state business. Unless we live in a totalitarian regime 8/
In the private domain is all the more wrong for the law to impose with whom you can or cannot establish a private bond. Thus, for Arendt the banning of mixed marriages is one of the most outrageous violations of civil rights. 9/
Regarding schools, Arendt believes that they are part of the social domain. Moreover, they are the initial entry from the private family into society. So, it is important to let parents have the freedom to decide with whom the kids will be associated. 10/
Philosophically, one can agree or disagree with Arendt regarding: 1) the distinction between the political, the social and the private in general; 2) the application of said distinction (what falls in each domain); 3) the consequences she draws from such distinction 11/
For example, Marx notoriously criticized the idea that we can only have equality in the political abstract domain, stating that we must achieve equality in the social concrete domain as well. 12/
Personally, I agree half agree with both Arendt and Marx, insofar as I can accept Arendt tripartition, but would have a larger concept of what's the domain of political equality, including in it more social rights, and not just citizen rights. 13/
In any case, I disagree completely with the consequences drew by Arendt about vacation resorts and schools falling into the right to free association and therefore the social liberty to discriminate. 14/
However, many critics of Arendt do not question her position on philosophical grounds, but accuse her of bad faith, insofar as all her argument is supposed to be a justification for her underlying racism. 15/
Since I do not agree with Arendt either, I can ask myself: why did she hold such a wrong position? But the more obvious reason is not racism against POC, rather her being a jew, moreover a refugee from Nazi Germany. 16/
Jew often willingly formed separated (segregated) groups inside states, and this was precisely one of the main (more theoretical and "refined") arguments that fuelled their persecutions, because they did not want to fit and blend into society. 17/
If there is something unspoken (but still quite evident for whoever reads her paper trying to understand the history of the woman, rather than looking for reason to feel outraged) it is her concern for the peculiar role of jews inside society and state, not her racism. 18/
In conclusion, one can completely disagree with Arendt on her position about segregation in schools, while acknowledging the legitimacy of her philosophical reasoning and the comprehensible grounds even behind her mistakes, which are not due to racism 19/19.
