Imperialist expansion as a principle was inherently insane and contradictory to the human condition.

Evidence

“EXPANSION IS everything,” said Cecil Rhodes, and fell into despair, for every night he saw overhead “these stars …these vast worlds which we can never reach. I would annex the planets if I could.” He had discovered the moving principle of the new, the imperialist era (within less than two decades, British colonial possessions increased by 4½ million square miles and 66 million inhabitants, the French nation gained 3½ million square miles and 26 million people, the Germans won a new empire of a million square miles and 13 million natives, and Belgium through her king acquired 900,000 square miles with 8½ million population3); and yet in a flash of wisdom Rhodes recognized at the same moment its inherent insanity and its contradiction to the human condition. Naturally, neither insight nor sadness changed his policies. — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 340

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes expansion as the ‘moving principle’ of the imperialist era — a core concept the reader’s later Islamophobia readings will build on.
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: Arendt’s specific claim that expansion contradicts the human condition — what exactly is that contradiction in her framework?