Is history cyclical?

Co-written by Aphra Jikiemi-Pearson and Lia Moskov

This is a question that has been asked many times, over the course of many different political climates, but the opinions are always differing. In short, we think it isn’t. We’re not dealing today with issues that were prominent in the 19th Century, such as whether everyone has the right to vote or whether all people should have the right to rule themselves: some issues, once settled, do not re-occur. But there are also some aspects of politics that will always be continued, for example the question if what is the best economic model for the well-being of a country or population - a question that, arguably, still hasn’t been answered.

Ultimately, the mix of issues that are being dealt with at any given time will have echoes of the past, but this is not necessarily the same as repeating it. The slogan of the British Legion is ‘lest we forget’. It’s the slogan they’ve had since their formation post World War 1 and seems to express the concern that history could repeat itself - and to express the sentiment that we can ensure history does not repeat itself. The current rise of the far right suggests that the lessons of the past have not been learned, or they have been forgotten, or that current day leaders believe they can execute them ‘better’, For example, the holocaust was rooted in widespread hatred of ethnic minorities, and the Nazi’s both harnessed that hatred and gave it legitimacy. In our view, something similar is happening today with the way modern day politicians are legitimising the same hatred towards ethnic minorities or immigrants and validating the citizens who already harboured it. These politicians are utilising and weaponising the concept of ‘the other’ who can no longer be feared from afar, but also from within peoples own countries. This can comically also be seen in Bram Stokers 19th Century Dracula.

In that sense, History does seem to be repeating itself. But in the 1930’s, much like many other historical periods, extreme opinions were brought to light by extreme conditions. As current GCSE History students, a phrase we hear often from our teachers is ‘desperate times make for desperate people’ in terms of turning to radical politics. These desperate conditioned do (to an extent) excuse for their actions. The Nazi’s rose to power because of the war, and its impacts on a vulnerable nation. That is not the case nowadays, however. A parallel can be drawn between those trying times and the living and housing crisis that many developed Western countries are currently experiencing, and it can be argued that these conditions are forcing people into political extremes. Although we hardly think that these are comparable to the living standards of 1930s Germany.

When deciding what to write for our first publication, and researching this question a little more, we can across the idea that there is ‘nothing new under the sun’ when it comes to politics. 2024 was politically dismal, and largely discouraging for nearly everyone except politics students, who we are sure felt like they were watching a case study unfold in real time. Social media has allowed for the developments of populism and demagoguery in entirely new ways.

Social media has made it possible to create a bubble that is insulated from the rest of the world in ways that were never possible before, which is dangerous. Similarly, the internet enables messages, good or bad, to be relayed around the world in entirely new ways. Hitler had smatterings of devotees in other countries, but links between groups who are geographically far apart - whether it be fascists or pacifists - was never as easy as it is now. The same could be applied to the civil war in Russia between the Red’s and the Whites, and the White’s consequential failure due to their lack of effective communication which was partially due to the fact they were just too far apart to communicate at all. So, although there are some similarities with the past, there are also notable differences which are not always for the best.

Technological advancements have disrupted any notion of history being cyclical by altering the fundamentals of how societies operate and interact. While some political patterns may resemble that of the past, the tools available to governments, movements, and individuals have transformed the way history unfolds. Mass surveillance, AI, and data-driven political campaigns have given modern leaders unprecedented power to manipulate public opinions and suppress any potential dissent. Social media algorithms create platforms that reinforce extreme views, making political polarisations more intense and difficult to break. Rather than viewing history as a cycle that inevitably repeats itself, it may be more accurate to see it as a continuous evolution shaped by changing circumstances.

In summary, we do not subscribe to the idea of history being cyclical. The rise of the right does not seem to us to be part of a cycle that will naturally pass. Instead, it should be recognised as a real threat with potentially millions of victims and, hopefully, it will prompt a movement to resist its most damaging policies.