Virtue is happy to pay the price of limited power for the blessing of being together with other men; fear is the despair over the individual impotence of those who, for whatever reason, have refused to "act in concert"... Fear as a principle of action is in some sense a contradiction in terms, because fear is precisely despair over the impossibility of action.
Thus the common ground upon which lawlessness can be erected and from which fear springs is the impotence all men feel who are radically isolated. One man against all others does not experience equality of power among men, but only the overwhelming, combined power of all others against their own... Out of the conviction of one's own impotence and the fear of the power of all others comes the will to dominate, which is the will of the tyrant.
Just as virtue is love of the equality of power, so fear is actually the will to, or, in its perverted form, lust for power... Power itself in its true sense can never be possessed by one man alone; power comes, as it were, mysteriously into being whenever men act "in concert", and disappears, not less mysteriously, whenever man is all by himself. Tyranny, based on the essential impotence of all men who are alone, is the hubristic attempt to be like God, invested with power individually, in complete solitude.
Hannah Arendt, On the nature of totalitarianism, in Essays in Understanding, Harcourt Brace & Company, New York, 1994, pp. 336-338.
Hannah Arendt comments here on the political theory of different forms of government (monarchy, republicanism and tyranny) formulated by Montesquieu (and "virtue" as love of the equality of power is his concept). But beyond political theory, this is one of the deepest insights into the nature of abusive relationships I have ever met... With a terrifying clarity this text makes the point: lawlessness that the one in control practices towards the weaker partner is the expression and consequence of his or her utter isolation beyond loneliness and despair over the impossibility of action. Sounds only too familiar.
Can one deal with it, be it on a personal or on a political level? Can the destructive power of fear be reversed, healed, can a tyrant be reconnected to the Body in a meaningful way, so that the real power coming from participation, not from domination, is restored to him? Hannah Arendt leaves the question open, and personally, I have no clue. "Leave it alone" (= "emigrate") has been the only advice I have ever received, and it does not aim to deal with the abusive partner but with the abused one.
A hard one to answer - but generally the tyrant feeds like a vampire from the abused. Those often who have been abused in the past in the future become the abuser. Look no further than the state of Israel as an example of those who suffered but who only understand the will to dominate -not much harmonious living with their neighbours there.
ReplyDeleteAs far as personal relationships are concerned its often at the debut of a relationship that the unwritten rules are written out. And if there is an inbalance of power then that is already a serious default : Because it is very difficult to adjust the power balance. As the one feeds through fear and the need for dominance they need this as their unhealthy leitmotiv then the other is abused.
What to do?
Personally I'd keep away from these kinds of people.