Thus, power in the public realm is, by definition, a manifestation of the people, and it is the people who have the power to change the government's rule if they so desire. Although Arendt's definition of the relationship between violence and power offers an explanation into how the cruelest of dictators can remain in power, her book, the Human Condition, Arendt also makes a case for the importance of speech in securing that public power that will allow rule in the public realm. To make this argument, Arendt begins by summarizing Aristotle, who stated that just two facets were "necessary and present in human communities" -- speech and action. Arendt suggests that from these necessary facets arose the "realm of human affairs" (25). Furthermore, Arendt describes the importance of speech in the early Greek democracy, in which words were...

In fact, it was speech that made the distinction between those who lived in society and those who did not, as the lowest of the low -- "slaves and barbarians" -- signaled the fact that they were not included in the society by being "deprived, of course, not of the faculty of speech, but of way of life in which speech and only speech made sense and where the central concern of all citizens was to talk to each other" (27).
According to Arendt, therefore, both the difference between power and violence and the importance of speech are important in defining the role of power in the public realm. While power can only be manifested by the many, it is the power of speech that aids in an acquisition of this power and distinguishes those who are a part of the public…