Social Construction

Yet should human nature be in the question regarding system constructed. For many man is too fickle and prone to violence and that states should be above nature or based on principles rather than universal values. Social Darwinism frequently over history has been used justify many social injustices or the most awful of tragedies. The nature of man is called into question frequently by Hannah Arendt who states that Himmler constructed terror “on the assumption that most people are … first and foremost jobholders, and good family men. … [who] for the sake of his pension, his life insurance, the security of his wife and children, … was ready to sacrifice his beliefs, his honour, and his human dignity.” (Arendt, 1963). This brings into question

The fact that Eichmann states “Where would we end up if everyone would have his own thoughts?” (ardent 1963) is telling in the way in which states are constructed. For Ardent most of the population is not the ‘extraordinary individual” that Schmitt describes leading a population to glory. The question is therefore how a formerly law-abiding member of the middle class deemed psychologically “normal” not driven by any personal vengeance or ideology could be persuaded to run concentration camps and help the mass administrative murder purely by ‘middle class ambition’ this for Arendt is because man doesn’t have the ability to think beyond cliché. Undermining the entire concept of individualism and self determination. Ardent takes issue with Aristotle’s conception of society by stating who was ‘the first to claim that interest … that which is useful for a person or for a group or for a people, does and should rule supreme in political matters. Claiming that this was natural for man. What also is not natural for man is some of the results that inappropriate use of social Darwinism produces furthers the case why human nature should not be used to deduce political