Conference Agenda

In 1959, Hannah Arendt received the Lessing Prize from the Free Hanseatic City of Hamburg. She traveled from New York to deliver her acceptance speech, which was given in German, titled "Von der Menschlichkeit in finsteren Zeiten: Rede über Lessing," on September 28, 1959. The text was published in English as "On Humanity in Dark Times: Thoughts about Lessing."

There Arendt interprets Lessing's humanity not as a moral virtue, but as a certain attitude toward society. It entails the willingness to expose oneself to what should be considered as true, even when it is uncomfortable. This attitude, she argues, is particularly vulnerable and, at the same time, outstandingly necessary in dark times.

Arendt’s speech is not a literary-historical analysis of Lessing, but rather a philosophical reflection on his enduring significance. She presents Lessing as a key representative of the Enlightenment. He embodies a superior ideal of humanity. Lessing’s person and work is discussed in broad terms, without engaging with specific elements of certain pieces of his work. However, his plays Nathan the Wise and Minna von Barnhelm would be especially well suited to deepening certain interpretations of Arendt’s approach, or to enriching a more nuanced understanding of humanity.

One aspect that remains somewhat underexplored in Arendt’s speech is the question of how humanitarian ideals and practices might be endowed with greater legitimacy and translated more effectively into action—particularly in what she terms “dark times.” The two above-mentioned plays offer valuable insights into this issue. My contribution seeks to examine these dimensions more closely. Ultimately, my reflections are intended to lend humanistic political psychology greater theoretical rigor and impact.

Crises have historically influenced the development of the international system, but recent crises differ in their scope and impact. These current crises are global and significantly influence the system's structure, creating a narrative of Dark Times characterized by uncertainty, complexity, and fear. Hannah Arendt describes the Dark Times as a “historical moment of horror,” posing challenges for political theorists to understand the role of theory amid such critical moments. It is vital to reconsider how theory helps interpret these crises that define the Dark Times. The emerging field of Comparative Political Theory (CPT) can contribute to this discussion by encouraging consideration of diverse Non-Western traditions, which have helped identify shared elements affected by Dark Times worldwide. Since the concept of Crisis is primarily Eurocentric, aligned with Western modernity’s vocabulary and concepts, applying CPT can reshape our understanding of the role of theory during these times. This approach highlights the importance of political theory in addressing crises and their effects on the international system. Through CPT, several questions emerge: what can Non-Western philosophical traditions reveal about Dark Times and crises that differ from Western narratives? How might incorporating these traditions transform crisis thinking concerning security, global challenges, and system stability?

Imagination is a double-edged sword. It is often heralded as an essential force of resistance in dark times – mobilising people in the fight against ecological collapse or colonial temporalities. Yet it can also be weaponised as an instrument of oppression and governance, as when migration officers are instructed to break down people’s dreams. If power operates in and through the imagination, then studying the battleground of the future requires asking: who gets to imagine the future, and for whom? While it is possible to trace these questions retrospectively by examining, for example, the subversive potential of art, it is more difficult to follow how power exerts itself incrementally upon people’s imaginations in close to real time, especially in increasingly restrictive contexts.

I explore how people imagine the future within a context where the imaginative horizon – that is, the realm of (im)possible imaginations – is encroaching and becoming progressively exclusionary. Based on a longitudinal analysis of online diaries written over more than two decades, combined with two rounds of patchwork ethnography and qualitative interviews, I trace how several diarists’ imaginations have developed from Trump’s announcement of his candidacy to the period following his second election victory. I show how their imaginations of the future have become bleaker, with some interludes of hope, and their sense of powerlessness has grown. As a result, they develop different strategies, such as turning towards the present – towards what remains within their control. From there, I discuss the challenges of generating and presenting theory under these conditions.