Oblivion lets history repeat itself

The slogan “above the parties”, the appeal to “men of all parties”, and the boast that they would “stand far removed from the strife of parties and represent only a national purpose” was equally characteristic of all imperialist groups, where it appeared as a natural consequence of their exclusive interest in foreign policy in which the nation was supposed to act as a whole in any event, independent of class and parties. p. 250

[…] because no definite goals or programs could be deduced from the sentiment of tribal belonging, […] made a virtue of this shortcoming by transforming parties into movements and by discovering that form of organisation which, in contrast to all others, would never need a goal or program but could change its policy from day to day without harm to its membership. […] For the only thing that counts in a movement is precisely that it keeps itself in constant movement. p. 260

[…] began to appeal to the same growing masses outside all class strata […] None of the old parties was prepared to receive these masses, nor did they gauge correctly the growing importance of their numbers and the growing political influence of their leaders. p. 262

[…] it would be wise not to pay too much attention to nationalist slogans which the movements occasionally adopt for purposes of hiding their true intentions, but rather consider […] that the rank and file is not disturbed in the least when it becomes obvious that their policy serves foreign-policy interests of another and even hostile power, and that denunciations of their leaders as fifth columnists, traitors to the country, etc., do not impress their members to any considerable degree. p. 266

The origins of totalitarianism, Harcourt, Ch. 8, III

Hannah Arendt wrote this in the 1940s (published 1950), and was describing “movements” that appeared at the turn of the 20^th century, and more notably after 1918. “These men began to tell the mob that each of its members could become such a lofty all-important walking embodiment of something ideal if he would only join the movement.” (p. 249). Movements were replacing parties that had represented class and sectorial interests. They rose to power across Europe to produce one-party regimes or totalitarian ideologies. They took over the state apparatus or destroyed it. Movements are back in vogue and taking centre stage. Donald Trump won the presidency thanks to a movement called Make America Great Again, while the Republican Party climbed awkwardly onto the band wagon. And French president Emanuel Macron was also brought to power by a movement that he had the presumption to call “En Marche”, which shares his initials, means “in motion” or simply “Forward!”, and refers to the refrain of the French national anthem (1). If these two mature republics succumb to the attraction of motion without direction, then the rest of Arendt’s description may apply, especially after another financial collapse.

1.

Aux armes, citoyens
Formez vos bataillons
Marchons, marchons!
Qu'un sang impur
Abreuve nos sillons!