This is World Civilization.
My name is Dr. Long; this video is about the
concept of totalitarianism.
During the 1920s and 1930s, several countries
– such as the Soviet Union; Italy; and Germany
– saw their governments taken over about
political parties that many scholars in the
20th and 21st centuries have labeled totalitarian.
Benito Mussolini, the leader of the fascists
in Italy, was the first to use the term totalitarian,
and Mussolini used it in what he thought was
a positive manner, to describe his own regime.
The term totalitarian, however, has come to
have very negative connotations since then.
During the late 1940s and in the 1950s – in
the early years of the Cold War – many scholars
in the West came to use the term totalitarian
to describe certain types of governments – and
the most famous example this was the scholar,
Hannah Arendt.
Hannah Arendt was a Jewish, German philosopher
and political theorist, and she actually escaped
Nazi Germany to the United States in 1941
and later became an American citizen.
So she had direct experience with the Nazi
regime.
Hannah Arendt was most famous for her 1951
book, The Origin of Totalitarianism, which
is one of the first major works to describe
the totalitarian regimes of Nazi Germany and
communism the Soviet Union, and to compare
and contrast those two regimes.
And in her view, to denote common characteristics
between the two that made them both totalitarian.
For Arendt, totalitarian movements and regimes
emerged in the aftermath of the First World
War with the breakdown the nation-state, the
class system, and traditional political parties.
Arendt saw the state use of terror, and especially
prison and concentration camps as key elements
of all totalitarian regimes.
As she puts it in her book, The Origins of
Totalitarianism – concentration camps are
quote, “the true central organization of
totalitarian organizational power.
Now Arendt went on to describe several other
aspects of totalitarian regimes, especially
comparing Nazi Germany under Hitler and the
Soviet Union under Stalin.
Racism, and especially anti-Semitism – hatred
of Jews, was central to Nazi ideology.
The Nazis viewed Aryans – people they considered
Northern Europeans, such as Germans – as
racially superior.
Nazis, under Adolf Hitler, sought to create
a racially-pure community, free of Jews; Slavs;
and others they considered racially undesirable.
During the Second World War, Nazi ideology
and the desire of the Nazi state to conquer
Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, and to
settle it with Germans, lay behind the Holocaust
– the systematic genocide of 6 million Jews
as well as of millions of other Slavs and
gypsies.
The concentration counts the Nazis used were
a key part of the Holocaust.
Now likewise, the Soviet Union – under the
rule of dictator, Vladimir Leni, and especially
under Joseph Stalin – sought to purge the
nation of all class enemies – or class enemies
at least according to Marxist-Leninist ideology.
Now these class enemies included nobles; factory
owners; bankers; merchants; members of the
clergy; and those defined as wealthy peasants
– or kulaks, as they were called.
Under Stalin, any member of the Communist
Party itself – who he saw as potentially
challenging his power – were forced to confess
to false charges of treason, in what were
called show trials.
So Stalin even had members of his own party
put up on trial on charges.
Stalin had millions of people executed or
sent to prison camps, called the gulags, in
Siberia – to work as slave laborers.
Stalin's economic policy of seizing grain
from peasants, in order to industrialize the
country, and his punishment of them for resisting
– led to a mass famine in the early 1930s,
that killed millions in the Soviet Union;
the famine was particularly severe in the
Ukraine, where several million died, and many
Ukrainians considered a genocide they called
the Holodomor.
Now Hannah Arendt – comparing and contrasting
Nazism and communism in the Soviet Union –we’ll
describe several other aspects of totalitarian
regimes and ideologies that she found both
true for the Nazis and the communists.
For instance, totalitarian ideologies tend
to believe that human nature is malleable
and changeable, and can be reshaped – so
because of that, their desire is to totally
remake society and even human nature, hence
the term totalitarian – the idea of totally
remaking human nature and human society.
Totalitarian movements thus want to draw everyone
in their society, into their movement, to
support them – including after they take
control of the government.
Now this is what makes totalitarians different
than a military dictatorship, or even an absolute
monarchy.
In a military dictatorship or an absolute
monarchy, as long as one pays taxes; obeys
the government; and does not attempt to overthrow
it one can live one's life in peace.
However, under a totalitarian rule, this is
not the case; the government seeks to make
you part of its movement, to bring you into
what it's attempting to do.
So totalitarian movements and governments
are ultimately much more far-reaching into
all of society – including even those who
simply want to mind their business and live
their lives.
Now as part of their project to entirely remake
society, totalitarian governments want the
state to do the work.
So they seek total control over state and
society, seeing the state as key and often
glorifying the state.
And control of the state means one-party rule
– all of the political parties are banned.
In politics, once totalitarian movements take
power all other parties are made illegal and
their members are arrested and put in prison.
Now naturally, you know, this leads to the
party and the state sort of blending in the
totalitarian state.
Naturally totalitarian regimes are anti-democratic.
They may hold elections, but if so – the
results are rigged and predetermined.
There are never fair elections in a totalitarian
state.
Likewise, civil liberties are severely repressed.
The state sees private organizations – from
sports clubs, to unions, to churches, and
on and on – as competitors to the state
itself, and therefore seeks to ban them or
take them over and remake it and remake them
in its own image.
Totalitarian regimes use heavy propaganda
in the media and in public places to convince
people that they offer the best form of government
and that what they say is true – and this
is this is to convince the people of their
viewpoint and to make sure that people are
loyal to them.
Schools under a totalitarian government, likewise
using indoctrination to shape the next generation
– even turning them against their parents
if need be.
Now, as such, totalitarian governments break
down people's deep-seat loyalties to family
and to friends and in Arendt’s terms, they
automatize society – isolating individuals
from natural groupings such as family, and
completely reshaping their loyalties.
Totalitarian movements and governments generally
have one leader, a dictator – and this dictator
is praised in propaganda, almost made into
a god of sorts, and is seen as someone who
can solve all the nation's problems.
And all of the propaganda built up around
the dictator is called the cult of personality.
Finally, as Arendt notes – terror is a key
part of any totalitarian regime.
Totalitarian regimes have large secret polices,
such as the Gestapo – the secret police
in Nazi Germany, or the NKVD – later known
as the KGB in the Soviet Union.
Now the purpose of a political police, of
a secret police rather, is not to deal with
regular crimes such as assault or robbery
or the like – rather, the purpose of the
secret police is to root out any potential
political dissenters and as such, the secret
police have no restrictions on what they can
do – this includes spying and torturing
– and they don't need a warrant.
They don't need any confirmation; they do
as they please.
Secret polices often built up entire prison
networks for potential opponents of the regime,
where prisoners are taken for torture, for
forced confessions, and are sent to concentration
camps or work camps or to be executed.
Now this kind of police as political or secret
police is used to terrorize the population,
because no one knows who could be arrested
by them next and no one knows what could happen
to those individuals.
This sort of terror breeds fear in the population
and keeps people from speaking out against
a regime because you never know who's next
and we'll be targeted by the secret police.
Now besides Hannah Arendt, several other political
philosophers and historians in the 20th and
21st century have likewise addressed the issue
of totalitarianism.
For instance, another German-born philosopher,
Erich Voegelin, focused on the utopian aspects
of totalitarian movements.
In
Voegelin’s terminology each totalitarian
movement and regime has their own unique view
of utopia, their own unique version of a perfect
world you might say.
For the Nazis, their version of utopia – a
perfect world – is a racially pure state,
free of Jews, who they see as racially corrupting.
For the communists, a utopia, a perfect state
is a classless utopia as spelled out by Marx.
But in any case, as Erich Voegelin notes – the
attempt to create a perfect society is based
on the notion that this is possible in the
first place.
In Voegelin’s view, this is almost a quasi-religious
perspective, and he made the made the comment
that totalitarian movements seek to create
a heaven on earth – or in his view, to immanentize
the eschaton – kind of a fancy way for putting
‘bringing heaven down to earth’ – for
Voegelin, totalitarian movements – such
as the Nazis and communists – are political
religions or pseudo religions – as they
have a great deal of religious trappings.
Interesting enough, they also dress their
ideas in bogus scientific claims as well,
meaning that they also are pseudo-scientific.
Now another important scholar who writes about
totalitarianism was a sociologist, Zygmunt
Bauman.
Bauman was influenced by Arendt.
In his important 1989 book, Modernity and
the Holocaust, Bauman argues that the Holocaust
was an entirely modern phenomenon – a product
of modern society – and not a throwback
to a barbaric past, as some thinkers supposed,
and this included both liberals and Marxists.
For Bauman, the Holocaust and by extension,
totalitarian regimes, were products of the
Enlightenment – although, perhaps the bastard
children of the Enlightenment.
Now Bauman, in his work, uses the analogy
of the gardening state and what he means by
this is that totalitarian states seek to prune
society of elements they see as undesirable
in an effort to make a – in their view – a
utopia or a beautiful garden.
Now this pruning naturally means extreme violence
in the name of progress to root out undesirable
elements, whether it's on racial or a class-based
model.
Other scholars have also written about totalitarianism.
A French historian, Francois Furet, who wrote
a great deal about the French Revolution,
traced totalitarianism in the West back to
the French Revolution – even to the utopian
ideas of Enlightenment thinker Jean-Jacques
Rousseau, with his idea of a social contract
in people living in small communities or communes
together, on an equal level.
For Francois Furet, the most extreme phase
of the French Revolution – the Jacobin rule
of France and the reign of terror from 1793
to 1795 – so the Jacobins attempt to completely
remake French society and destroy any elements
of the old regime.
Now this involved extreme terror and violence
– including mass executions and using the
guillotine.
For Furet, the Jacobins were a forerunner
of regimes such as the communists and the
Nazis.
Historian Michael Burleigh also traces totalitarianism
back to the Enlightenment in the French Revolution.
For his part, Burleigh stresses that totalitarian
movements are political religions that create
utopian, political ideologies that amount
to new religions – religions intended to
replace traditional religions and the current
political order.
Now while many political historians and political
theorists and sociologists have written extensively
about totalitarianism, the content set of
totalitarianism has likewise influenced works
of literature.
There are particularly 2 British authors,
who have written about totalitarianism in
fiction,
The first is Aldous Huxley, particularly with
his 1932 novel, Brave New World.
Now Huxley, in his novel, Brave New World,
sets out what he thinks might be a future
totalitarian government that would rule much
of the world – and in his view of a future
totalitarian rule, the regime would rule the
population through pleasure, not through terror.
In other words, this totalitarian regime in
Brave New World uses drugs and sex to keep
the people docile and inundated by pleasure
so that they will not oppose the regime – and
so they do not use terror, they use pleasure.
It's an interesting view of how a totalitarian
regime might manipulate and control people.
On the other hand – another famous British
author, George Orwell, wrote to 2 novels – also
in fiction – documenting how he thought
a totalitarian regime might operate.
His novel, Animal Farm – for instance – depicts
a fictional group of animals taking over a
farm and the pigs becoming the totalitarian
rulers.
Likewise, his 1949 novel, entitled 1984, describes
a totalitarian government ruling much of the
world in the year 1984.
In Orwell's account in 1984, the future totalitarian
government were ruled by fear and terror,
and by changing language – and this government
is known as Big Brother.
In 1984, Orwell says that describes this totalitarian
government as using newspeak, a language with
a limited vocabulary and terms made up by
the regime to control how people think.
So what are some examples of totalitarian
regimes in the 21st and 21st centuries?
I know I focused a lot on theorists and works
of fiction so far.
The Nazis under Hitler and the
Soviet Union under Stalin are clear examples
of totalitarian regimes, with secret police;
terror; lack of civil liberties; mass persecution;
a particular type of utopia; and so forth.
Many Eastern
European governments during the Cold War were
likewise communists and in part, copied Stalin.
The Romanian government, under Nicolas Ceausescu,
was particularly brutal and could be described
as a totalitarian government.
Likewise, the East German government had a
secret police – and it was a communist secret
police, the Stasi, that was notorious for
spying on its own people.
An estimated one-third of the population under
East German communist rule were employed by
the Stasi, as spies of the secret police – and
this included ordinary people reporting back
to the Stasi as they would spy their friends;
their neighbors; their families; their co-workers;
and so forth.
In China, from 1949 until the death of Mao
Zedong, the Chinese communist regime could
likewise be described as totalitarians.
As with Stalin, Mao Mao's agricultural policies
in the 1950s led to millions of deaths due
to famine.
Also, in the 1960's and 1970's, China – under
Mao – underwent what was called the Cultural
Revolution.
In the Cultural Revolution, all traditional
aspects of Chinese culture – such as religion
and family traditions – were purged in an
effort to wipe away everything in the past
and replace it with communist ideology, and
this included glorifying peasant work and
massive indoctrination or re-education, with
young people even denouncing their elders.
It also featured a great deal of terror – arrests,
public execution, people sent to prison camps
and work camps in forced labor.
Now the Cultural Revolution came to an end
with the death of Mao in 1976 and a lot of
his extreme efforts were rolled back by the
communist government leadership that followed.
Another example of a totalitarian regime was
the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, under the rule
of Pol Pot, in the 1970s.
The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia in the 1970s
and they instituted a Maoist-like regime,
based on the form of communism that Mao used.
The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia glorified manual
labor, peasant work – and they advocated
a communal agrarian utopia, with everyone
in Cambodia living on farms and small communes
together.
They also, while glorifying the agrarian life,
disparaged anything that differed from it.
So to make everyone into farmers, they did
things – the Khmer Rouge – did things
such as shut down schools and hospitals and
banks and banned religion.
They banned private property.
The Khmer Rouge in Cambodia even banned money
and wearing glasses, as they were seen as
associated with education and a non-farming
way of life.
Anyone with an education – and even people
who could remotely oppose them – were considered
at anti-revolutionary.
This led to book burnings; mass persecutions;
prison camps; and mass executions until the
Khmer Rouge was finally run out of power in
Cambodia in 1979.
Now the Khmer Rouge’s totalitarian communist
rule of Cambodia, for a brief period in the
1970s, resulted in the deaths of 1 million
people – perhaps up to one-third of the
population in Cambodia at the time.
Now today, hardline communist regimes – such
as North Korea and perhaps Cuba – could
still be labor totalitarian.
Likewise, extremist Islamic regimes – such
as Isis or the Taliban – might be labeled
totalitarian as well.
So in a sense, totalitarianism has not gone
away with the end of the Cold War.
So let's draw a few conclusions.
Totalitarianism is a product of the modern
world.
As described by a number of scholars, it features
political movements and regimes with utopian
ideologies –ideologies that are often, in
large part, pseudo-religious and pseudo-scientific.
Totalitarians all have a specific utopia in
reality, that they can't fully or realistically
implement.
Lenin once said that to make an omelet you
need to break some eggs.
Unfortunately in the case with many totalitarian
regimes, many eggs are broken but an omelet
has never made.
So totalitarians do not recognize any limits
to what they can or should do and in power
they were often willing to use the powers
of the state – including extreme violence
– to achieve them.
Now because of the incredible destructive
influence of totalitarian governments, whether
they're communist or Nazi or Italian fascist,
many different scholars – as well as important
works of literature – have written about
of totalitarian movements, comparing and contrasting
and showing the similar characteristics of
these sort of regimes.
Now certainly there is a limit to this concept
of totalitarianism, but it is a very useful
concept in looking at these various regimes.
The heyday of totalitarian regimes was arguably
the 1920s to the 1970s.
However, as previously mentioned, arguably
– totalitarianism has not gone away – and
to one degree of the other may simply be part
of the modern world, or as Zygmunt Bauman
and other scholars have suggested –is a
product the modern world.
So I'll stop with this observation about totalitarianism
in the modern world.
Thank you for watching.
