Starting from his theory of communication，Habermas interprets Arendt’s concept of action and believes that she analyzes the form of intersubjectivity generated in the praxis of speech as the basic feature of cultural life. He praises that Arendt read off of the formal properties of communicative action（or praxis）the general structures of an unimpaired intersubjectivity. But at the same time，Habermas points out：Arendt stylizes the image she has of the Greek polis to the essence of politics as such. This is the background to her favored conceptual dichotomies between the public and the private，between state and economy，freedom and welfare，political-practical activity and production-rigid dichotomies which modern bourgeois society and the modern state，however，escape. Habermas also suggests：Arendt rightly insists that the technical-economic overcoming of poverty is by no means a sufficient condition for the practical securing of political liberty. But she becomes the victim of a concept of politics that is inapplicable to modern conditions when she asserts that the “intrusion of social and economic matters into the public realm，the transformation of government into administration” necessarily frustrate every attempt at a politically active public realm. A politics which is cleansed of socio-economic issues is unimaginable for any modern society.