Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “O násilí” as Want to Read:
O násilí
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

O násilí

3.83  ·  Rating details ·  2,501 ratings  ·  182 reviews
Autorka v souboru tří esejů analyzuje povahu, příčiny a působení násilí v druhé polovině dvacátého století a přezkoumává vztah mezi válkou, politikou, násilím a mocí.
Paperback, 87 pages
Published 2011 by Oikoymenh (first published March 11th 1970)
More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about O násilí, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about O násilí

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30
Average rating 3.83  · 
Rating details
 ·  2,501 ratings  ·  182 reviews

More filters
Sort order
Start your review of O násilí
Apr 13, 2009 rated it did not like it  ·  review of another edition
This book makes clear that Arendt is amazingly well read... Though, given 50 years, I am always amazed at how much more we are supposed to read (and often how much less we do) as modern academics and students rather than academics in the 1950s and 60s.

While I can see the relevance of Arendt's writing on this subject in reference to the time the book was published and in response to authors like Sorel and Fannon, unlike many of the other reviewers I am not a fan of this book. Her, at times polem
Sidharth Vardhan

"Violence can always destroy power; out of the barrel of a gun grows the most effective command, resulting in the most instant and perfect obedience. What never can grow out of it is power."

Arendt refuses to define power as mere ability to do violence as some of the old authors she quotes has defined it to be. The book is written in times of cold war and during fears of mutually assured destruction. Arendt refuses to see violence as something that goes along with political power. She seems
I can feel myself slowly falling in love with Arendt. I already respected her, having been in the process of reading her "Origins" book for some time now. But in these shorter works of hers, you can really see her reasoning power and witness how perfectly balanced her turns of phrase are. What I most like about "On Violence" is that I can detect the research that has gone into writing this small essay. Her sentences are very compact, so in the end even a few of them can relay a lot of informatio ...more
Justin Evans
Had this been written by Joan Bloggs, it would be out of print and almost certainly ignored. But it was written by Hannah Arendt, so it's in print. And given the lack of books on violence, that's probably a good thing. Unfortunately I suspect that it can easily be misread. The historical context here is everything: Arendt isn't writing about violence, she's writing about violence at the end of the 'sixties and start of the 'seventies, when for a brief moment fairly large numbers of people though ...more
May 05, 2011 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
This was a really great work of political theory by Arendt. It explores violence, mostly through the lens of the 1960s when she was writing this book. It looks at the student rebellions across the world, in both democracies and communist countries. The coincidence of the uprisings is interesting, and she posits that they are both protesting for the same reason, albeit in different manifestations. Students around the world were looking for freedom. The students in communist countries were looking ...more
Aug 18, 2012 rated it liked it  ·  review of another edition
Now, this was disappointing!
Part I is clearly dated, I was ,nevertheless, surprised from Arendt's trivialization of black student movement, and generally from here "lumping" of the Neo-Leftists student movements across both sides of the Atlantic.
Part II, Arendt introduces here definition of Power, Strength, Force, Authority and Violence. Her definition of Power seemed simplistic to me (Where's Gramsci in all of this I kept asking). In this part she introduces the basic premise of the book
Robert Wechsler
Feb 13, 2014 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: nonfiction
Although structured as a three-part essay, this is essentially two intertwined essays in one. Each is interesting in a different way. The ideas of one, focused on the engagé moment, come out of the student revolutions in Europe and the U.S. (and, to a lesser extent, black power). This essay takes the reader back (if old enough) to an interesting moment that turned out not to have had a great effect, politically, on the future (its greatest effect, especially in the U.S., has been the reaction to ...more
Apr 25, 2007 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
A fantastic treatise on the nature and function of violence, particularly in the modern period. However, the focus is overwhelmingly from the political dimension. Divided into three parts, parts 2 and 3 are essential reading. Part 1 oftentimes comes off as dated in its examples and outlook. But it is Part 2 that makes the entire book. In it, Arendt carefully delineates and differentiates definitions for "Power", "Strength", "Force", "Authority", and "Violence". All of which are useful if not nec ...more
Rock Lamanna
May 05, 2014 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
While examining why the student movements of the '60s reached a boiling point, something I didn't expect when I first opened the cover, Arendt disentangles Mao Zedong's axiom that power grows from the barrel of a gun. By clearly and concisely distinguishing terms like power, violence, and authority, words we tend to use synonymously in political discourse, the true source of power is revealed--political action conducted in concert with others--which she then extends to explain the collective fee ...more
Benoit Lelièvre
Oct 22, 2016 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
In order to appreciate this book, you have to understand Hannah Arendt here is thinking of violence in political terms: war, uprising, rebellion, etc. That said, some of her points are applicable on the complete spectrum of human violence. The fact that it is a mean and not an end for example. That is served as a theater for the cause it is serving and that is what makes it terrifying when properly used. Arendt also wisely draws a line between purposeful violence and emotional violence, which he ...more
Jon(athan) Nakapalau
Hannah Arendt does an excellent job of tracing the thread of violence through the quilt of violent acts.
John David
Oct 07, 2010 rated it liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: philosophy
Arendt’s book begins by commenting on the paradoxical nature of violence during the Cold War. She says, “The technical development of the implements of violence has now reached the point where no political goal could conceivably correspond to their destructive potential or justify their actual use in armed conflict.” She is, of course, referring to the advent of the atomic age. In an age, then, when the victory of one party of another means the virtual annihilation of both, what political and id ...more
Dec 08, 2008 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Recommended to Jessica by: John . Bova
[Violence] phenomenologically… is close to strength, since the implements of violence, like all other tools, are designed and used for the purpose of multiplying natural strength until, in the last stage of their development, they can substitute for it.

pt 3 kinda fucked on race.

pg. 81
The crucial feature in the student rebellions around the world is that they are directed everywhere against the ruling bureaucracy. This explains what at first glance seems so disturbing – that th/>The
Mar 30, 2008 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: academia
Arendt's long essay/short book "On Violence" notes that war has become unglamorous and ineffective as a political force, yet it remains because we have not found an adequate replacement for this. This is perhaps understood as a more politically-minded equivalent of William James's idea 60 years earlier that we need to find a "moral equivalent of war" that will harness the cooperation and personal altruism that war can elicit, but without the horrific consequences that far outweigh the benefits.< ...more
Jonathan Norton
Written in 1969, this is Arendt's brief appraisal of the 1968 student upheavals, and the civil disorder occurring across American cities at the same time. Some of it repeats ideas from "On Revolution" a decade earlier, but there is new commentary from her engagement (mostly sceptical) with the student literature. She didn't think much of Fanon, though acknowledged that he wasn't deeply studied by his self-declared disciples. Black Power movements also get a harsh assessment, though she recognise ...more
Stephen Ullman
Sep 15, 2008 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
A rebuttal of Mao's famous statement that "Power grows from the barrel of a gun." Arendt distinguishes between power and violence and in social and political terms places them as isolated presences. Where there is power there is no violence, where violence occurs, it is a sign of weakness. This book is only getting more relevant.
Aug 08, 2013 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: philosophy-books
Hannah Arendt's short book of political philosophy, On Violence, is a simple, fulfilling and digestible text that poses interesting questions for understanding politics, history, revolution and the State. While her writing is less than perfect - she often wrote in a rush and then had her books 'englishified' - her exposition and discussion of political concepts is both insightful and challenging. This book is certainly worth reading, and in all likelihood will not occupy more than an afternoon; a short, ...more
Joseph Devine
While Hannah Arnedt may indeed have some great analysis and theorising about the relationship of power and violence in this book (mostly in chapter 2), which is definitely worth reading, it is just a huge shame that the book is so deeply marred by her dismissive and tone-deaf treatment of race, specifically the issue of black americans, to the extent one wishes she hadn't mentioned it at all. It is best - or rather worst - exemplified in her astonishingly pedantic quibbling over Frantz Fanon's s ...more
Wei Chang
It is necessary to mention here that Hannah Arendt is not a philosopher but a political scientist. It is important because we have to notice that she was talking about violence in a political perspective, which, is rather about the conducting of violence by the state apparatus. To be more specific, she was focusing very much on the mass conflicts between the state and the political activists in the western world, mainly the US and Europe, and thus her conclusion may not be applied to other incid ...more
Apr 20, 2018 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
Although On Violence is Hannah Arendt’s most well-known analysis of violence in the “century of wars and revolutions”, the theme of violence can be encountered throughout her other political writings, such as The Origins of Totalitarianism, The Human Conditions and On Revolution. Arendt’s reflections on violence emerge out of her experience of some of the most traumatic chapters of the twentieth century, including the rise of totalitarianism in the West, the persecution of the Jews and Nazism’s ...more
I find Arendt's analysis on the use of violence for political aims to be a rather refreshing one. The three interconnected essays nicely lay down an analysis of the events taking place in 1968, which do have some similarities with today's protesters on campuses in the world. It's only ironic that people haven't learned anything and get reduced to violent screeching and window-smashing again and again. That's not how one gets people to listen; taking out your frustration on the police or public p ...more
Oct 29, 2017 rated it it was amazing  ·  review of another edition
Hannah Arendt can be described as an agnostic in the religious war of the left versus the right. This war raged on after the second world war, and across the globe through student movements when she wrote this essay. It was in the middle of what she herself describes as the "apocalyptic chess game”, the cold war. In this essay, she attacks Marxist philosophers that egged on the students in the late '60s towards violence. She points out how these intellectuals shifted their beliefs from peaceful ...more
Nov 26, 2011 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
This is the second Arendt book I've read, the first being Eichmann in Jerusalem. Both of them are top-notch. This is an incredibly even-handed treatment of the subject of violence. Arendt essentially dispels the left's worst ideological excesses when it comes to violence–both those who are against it no matter the context and those, like Mao, who wrote that "power grows out of the barrel of a gun." It's particularly impressive that she wrote these two essays in the middle of the massive upheavals of the N ...more
Will Staton
Mar 11, 2016 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
More of a treatise than a book, it still took me over two weeks to make it through 90 pages. This is a good thing b/c Arendt is brilliant, but I had to reread pages, paragraphs, and sometimes even sentences multiple times to fully comprehend them. Every time I read something by Arendt, I feel as though I learn something new, and that I'm being pushed in my thinking. "On Violence" is no different, although it is a bit more disjointed and less comprehensive than some of her other work.

Most compel
Jan 05, 2015 rated it it was ok  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: non-fiction
While there are a number of key insights to be had in this slim, late work and her formulation of the inverse relationship between power and violence is fascinating, it's all bogged down in cringe-inducing racism -- for instance, her assertion that black student activists who were unqualified to attend university supposedly misused their power to demand courses in "nonexistent subjects" such as African literature, or her assertion that yes, of course reverse racism is a real thing and that black ...more
Nicholas Gunter
Fascinating political philosophy examining the differences between power and violence. She claims power and violence are antithetical. Violence comes in the absence of power.

Also, there is a movie coming out about Hannah Arendt! Very excited to see the portrayal of Arendt's philosophy, coming out of World War II, on the big screen!
I am throwing in the towel on Arendt altogether. (I went back and finished this, and it got worse.)
What I have learned is that Arendt was given a pass on her outright anti-black racism due to being a Jewish refugee. Her repeated statements that "negro students" admitted to universities in the 60s due to integration politics "without academic qualifications" were responsible for nearly all violent outbursts in student uprisings, that the Black Power movement subverted the system in order to
Tom McInnes
Written around the time of the many and varied student riots of the late-60s, this is an interesting (if brief and largely inconclusive) meditation on the nature of violence as it relates to power.

The book is most compelling when it is defining and delineating between violence, power, authority, force, legitimacy etc.; and Arendt’s assertion that violence is not an aspect of power but actually its opposite is certainly worth pondering.

But unlike the Eichmann book, which framed real-
mimosa maoist
Her critiques of the New Left have a kernel of truth in them, like student movement's valorization of violence and Sartre's reading of Fanon opening the way to lumpen fetishization -- even if it's based on a misreading of Marx. Basically, Arendt says everybody else conflates violence with power, especially Mao, where she claims violence should be conceptualized as an instrumental category, and therefore where violence is abundant, power is absent; and power is based on agreement, not the exercis ...more
Sarah Hannah
lol who tf would ever call this "written with clarity" that's ridiculous

This woman is such a bitch when it comes to black people and so offensively not-Jewish-seeming with her sense of ethics (says this Jew, at least) that I couldn't even get behind the few good points she did make, because I was already so angry. Fuck this. On to the next one.
« previous 1 3 4 next »
topics  posts  views  last activity   
ملتقى الفكر التقدمي: في العنف 4 46 Nov 25, 2013 01:38PM  

Readers also enjoyed

  • Violence: Six Sideways Reflections
  • Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life
  • The Wretched of the Earth
  • Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection
  • The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction
  • Power: A Radical View
  • A Dying Colonialism
  • State of Exception
  • Zur Kritik der Gewalt und andere Aufsätze
  • Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty
  • Murmur
  • Hatred of Democracy
  • The Concept of the Political
  • To Bedlam and Part Way Back
  • Against the Double Blackmail: Refugees, Terror and Other Troubles with the Neighbours
  • Black Skin, White Masks
  • The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House
  • La rose la plus rouge s'épanouit
See similar books…
Hannah Arendt (1906–1975) was one of the most influential political philosophers of the twentieth century. Born into a German-Jewish family, she was forced to leave Germany in 1933 and lived in Paris for the next eight years, working for a number of Jewish refugee organisations. In 1941 she immigrated to the United States and soon became part of a lively intellectual circle in New York. She held a ...more
No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »
“These definitions coincide with the terms which, since Greek antiquity, have been used to define the forms of government as the rule of man over man—of one or the few in monarchy and oligarchy, of the best or the many in aristocracy and democracy, to which today we ought to add the latest and perhaps most formidable form of such dominion, bureaucracy, or the rule by an intricate system of bureaux in which no men, neither one nor the best, neither the few nor the many, can be held responsible, and which could be properly called the rule by Nobody. Indeed, if we identify tyranny as the government that is not held to give account of itself, rule by Nobody is clearly the most tyrannical of all, since there is no one left who could even be asked to answer for what is being done. It is this state of affairs which is among the most potent causes for the current world-wide rebellious unrest.” 14 likes
“In a fully developed bureaucracy there is nobody left with whom one can argue, to whom one can present grievances, on whom the pressures of power can be exerted. Bureaucracy is the form of government in which everybody is deprived of political freedom, of the power to act; for the rule by Nobody is not no-rule, and where all are equally powerless, we have a tyranny without a tyrant.” 6 likes
More quotes…