"Political action may not attain the good, but it can resist evil, like maintaining a garden—you can't force the flowers to bloom, but you can work on the weeds that would choke them out." Well put and inspiring. I think Arendt would have liked it.
After courage, I think she valued forgiveness as the highest public virtue. Political action, that hallmark of Arendt's notion of public life, requires forgiveness because we can seldom know everything that will result from our actions. But like so much of Arendt's theory, it's hard for me to understand its function among a citizenry removed from regular public life by a system of representative governments. (Of course, in On Revolution, she advocated for something like Jefferson's plan for civic involvement "every day.")
Free elections are the only universal expression of public life we have in America. Elected rulers are better than autocrats, of course, but I often reflect on the unfortunate binary thinking (particularly with exactly two major parties) elections reinforce in public discourse. However, the need to choose between two evils--not an uncommon conundrum in public and private life--can at least help to wean us from innocence. That is, unless we adopt a political ideology that helps us retain our precious innocence.
"Political action may not attain the good, but it can resist evil, like maintaining a garden—you can't force the flowers to bloom, but you can work on the weeds that would choke them out." Well put and inspiring. I think Arendt would have liked it.
After courage, I think she valued forgiveness as the highest public virtue. Political action, that hallmark of Arendt's notion of public life, requires forgiveness because we can seldom know everything that will result from our actions. But like so much of Arendt's theory, it's hard for me to understand its function among a citizenry removed from regular public life by a system of representative governments. (Of course, in On Revolution, she advocated for something like Jefferson's plan for civic involvement "every day.")
Free elections are the only universal expression of public life we have in America. Elected rulers are better than autocrats, of course, but I often reflect on the unfortunate binary thinking (particularly with exactly two major parties) elections reinforce in public discourse. However, the need to choose between two evils--not an uncommon conundrum in public and private life--can at least help to wean us from innocence. That is, unless we adopt a political ideology that helps us retain our precious innocence.