UC San Diego

In 2011 the wave of revolutionary upheavals in the Arab world and the ̀Occupy' protests in the industrialized West together resurrected important questions about the nature and morality of revolution that had faded from view following the benign, non-violent "liberal revolutions" of 1989 in Eastern Europe. In the troubled aftermath of 2011 and the chaos that followed the "Arab Spring," however, the novel alliance between political liberalism and democratic revolution witnessed over the last quarter century has suddenly become doubtful. The 2011 revolts produced new models of revolution, including "leaderless" revolution, that built upon the mythology of "velvet" revolution inspired by 1989. And in response to 1989 and 2011 scholars and activists alike have often turned to the political theory of Hannah Arendt either to bolster their normative political aspirations or to account for surprising revolutionary events. This dissertation contests many of these appropriations--most notably those which use Arendt to condone "leaderless" models of revolution and "horizontalist" principles of "non- representation" in revolutionary contexts. I argue that such appropriations not only misunderstand Arendt's theory of non-violent power, but their application in practice has undermined real projects of revolutionary democracy on the ground. In response to this I clarify Arendt's sociological understanding of political power and the foundations of political order, and place Arendt in conversation with major sociologists of her time. I also argue that Arendt's revolutionary theory is inspired principally by Lenin, who provides the model for Arendt of "real revolutionary" leadership. I then show how Arendt's sociological analysis of power and leadership illuminates the democratic failures of the recent Egyptian revolution, where revolutionaries confused force with power, and where the absence of responsible leadership created the opportunity for continued military dictatorship