"There has never been true communism."

[Immanuel Can]

But socialists are opposed to dictatorial regimes.

Historically, not at all. They set them up every time. Mussolini got his start in the Italian Communists. Hitler was a National Socialist. Stalin inherited his dictatorship from Lenin et al. Look at what the Communists are doing to Hong Kong right now.

[Immanuel Can]

Jesus Christ was an advocate of charity...not Socialism.

I agree.

Okay. But that's not what you said.

He was handed over to Rome by His own people,

nonesense, Harrod may have handed him over...

Don't get me wrong: I'm not angry with Jewish people. Jesus Christ died for our sins...which means, in a deep sense, every one of us is responsible. So I don't hold His nation responsible, anymore than I blame only the Romans. But if you know the Biblical accounts, it was the Jewish religious authorities, including the Pharisees and the Council, with the help of Judas Iscariot who arranged Jesus' arrest, but lacking the means to crucify Him, they appealed to Pilate to do the job...which he did, on their behalf. The Romans actually had no particular interest in His death, unless it disturbed the Roman peace, which of course, it did.

Both Jews and Gentiles conspired in His death, it's true. But ultimately, it was I who needed the salvation for which He died, and I am the beneficiary of His death. How could I blame anyone else?

and the Roman governor tried to let Him go.

bullshit rewritting of history.

Luke 23: 16.

He was the one who said, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's." He was not at all interested in the government.

i've heard the quote, in which is it found?

Matthew, Ch. 22, Mark Ch. 12, Luke 20.

He also said, "My kingdom is not of this world."

both agree and dissagee with.

John 18:36.

Historically, government manages NOTHING efficiently or very well.

I agree with this, though think the more effiecent personal charity is not enough due to not enough persons are charitable, so the need for ineffiecent gov, assuming said gov is via the consent of the governed.[/quote]
Actually, personal charity works WAY better than government subsidies. It's true that some people are not charitable; but others are exceedingly so.

The stories of government waste are many and legendary.

Ideed they are Sir.

Then how can you advocate for government doing more things? You say that you know they're just going to be irresponsible with your resources. Why would you give them more?

[Ginkgo]

But socialists are opposed to dictatorial regimes.

Historically, not at all. They set them up every time. Mussolini got his start in the Italian Communists. Hitler was a National Socialist. Stalin inherited his dictatorship from Lenin et al. Look at what the Communists are doing to Hong Kong right now.

Not at all, Mussolini and Hitler were fascists. Mussolini founded Italian Fascism, while Hitler called himself a socialist, the socialists were his early victims of persecution. Hitler was also committed to private ownership of property.

[Immanuel Can]

But socialists are opposed to dictatorial regimes.

Historically, not at all. They set them up every time. Mussolini got his start in the Italian Communists. Hitler was a National Socialist. Stalin inherited his dictatorship from Lenin et al. Look at what the Communists are doing to Hong Kong right now.

Not at all, Mussolini and Hitler were fascists.

History Channel's "Nine Things You May Not Know About Mussolini"

"2. Mussolini was a socialist before becoming a fascist.
Born to a socialist father, Mussolini was named after leftist Mexican President Benito Juárez. His two middle names, Amilcare and Andrea, came from Italian socialists Amilcare Cipriani and Andrea Costa. Early in Mussolini’s life, for instance, those names seemed appropriate. While living in Switzerland from 1902 to 1904, he cultivated an intellectual image and wrote for socialist periodicals such as L’Avvenire del Lavoratore (The Worker’s Future). He then served in the Italian army for nearly two years before resuming his career as a teacher and journalist. In his articles and speeches, Mussolini preached violent revolution, praised famed communist thinker Karl Marx and criticized patriotism. In 1912 he became editor of Avanti! (Forward!), the official daily newspaper of Italy’s Socialist Party. But he was expelled from the party two years later over his support for World War I. By 1919 a radically changed Mussolini had founded the fascist movement, which would later become the Fascist Party."

Hitler called himself a socialist, the socialists were his early victims of persecution.

Hitler hated international Socialists (i.e. Communists), because he was a national Socialist(i.e. Nazi). It wasn't the Socialism he disagreed with: it was the scope of the Socialism, and who would run it...him, or Stalin.

You say Hitler was committed to private property. Apparently, only in some ways; in others, he was a typical Socialist. You can see he was into comprehensive social welfare and nationalization of key industries. Here's his whole program: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/1708-ps.asp.

[Ginkgo]

Historically, not at all. They set them up every time. Mussolini got his start in the Italian Communists. Hitler was a National Socialist. Stalin inherited his dictatorship from Lenin et al. Look at what the Communists are doing to Hong Kong right now.

Not at all, Mussolini and Hitler were fascists.

History Channel's "Nine Things You May Not Know About Mussolini"

"2. Mussolini was a socialist before becoming a fascist.
Born to a socialist father, Mussolini was named after leftist Mexican President Benito Juárez. His two middle names, Amilcare and Andrea, came from Italian socialists Amilcare Cipriani and Andrea Costa. Early in Mussolini’s life, for instance, those names seemed appropriate. While living in Switzerland from 1902 to 1904, he cultivated an intellectual image and wrote for socialist periodicals such as L’Avvenire del Lavoratore (The Worker’s Future). He then served in the Italian army for nearly two years before resuming his career as a teacher and journalist. In his articles and speeches, Mussolini preached violent revolution, praised famed communist thinker Karl Marx and criticized patriotism. In 1912 he became editor of Avanti! (Forward!), the official daily newspaper of Italy’s Socialist Party. But he was expelled from the party two years later over his support for World War I. By 1919 a radically changed Mussolini had founded the fascist movement, which would later become the Fascist Party."

Hitler called himself a socialist, the socialists were his early victims of persecution.

Hitler hated international Socialists (i.e. Communists), because he was a national Socialist(i.e. Nazi). It wasn't the Socialism he disagreed with: it was the scope of the Socialism, and who would run it...him, or Stalin.

You say Hitler was committed to private property. Apparently, only in some ways; in others, he was a typical Socialist. You can see he was into comprehensive social welfare and nationalization of key industries. Here's his whole program: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/1708-ps.asp.

Nothing you have posted here contradicts what I have said.

[Belinda]

But socialists are opposed to dictatorial regimes.

Historically, not at all. They set them up every time. Mussolini got his start in the Italian Communists. Hitler was a National Socialist. Stalin inherited his dictatorship from Lenin et al. Look at what the Communists are doing to Hong Kong right now.

If fascists is what you mean by socialists, then according to your description of socialists I am not a socialist.

[Immanuel Can]

Nothing you have posted here contradicts what I have said.

Well, for starters, you said Mussolini wasn't a Communist. He was. His Fascism was just an expression of his already-in-place Socialism. The History Channel calls that fact surprising...I don't.

[Immanuel Can]

If fascists is what you mean by socialists, then according to your description of socialists I am not a socialist.

Socialism includes both Communism and Fascism. I'm glad you're not either of those. But you've got to ask yourself why that's the way the worm inevitably turns.

[Ginkgo]

Nothing you have posted here contradicts what I have said.

Well, for starters, you said Mussolini wasn't a Communist. He was. His Fascism was just an expression of his already-in-place Socialism. The History Channel calls that fact surprising...I don't.

I didn't say Mussolini wasn't a communist. In fact I made no reference to his earlier life.

[Immanuel Can]

I didn't say Mussolini wasn't a communist. In fact I made no reference to his earlier life.

Okay, let's move on, then. The point is merely that squabbles among Socialists, Communists and Fascists are family squabbles. They are birds of a proverbial feather.

[Ginkgo]

If fascists is what you mean by socialists, then according to your description of socialists I am not a socialist.

Socialism includes both Communism and Fascism. I'm glad you're not either of those. But you've got to ask yourself why that's the way the worm inevitably turns.

The History Channel makes no reference to conflating Fascism and Socialism.

[Immanuel Can]

The History Channel makes no reference to conflating Fascism and Socialism.

The History Channel doesn't say a lot of things. But they do say that Mussolini was a Communist before he was a Fascist. The slide from one to the other is very, very short.

[Ginkgo]

The slide from one to the other is very, very short.

Fallacy of false equivalence.

[Ginkgo]

I didn't say Mussolini wasn't a communist. In fact I made no reference to his earlier life.

Okay, let's move on, then. The point is merely that squabbles among Socialists, Communists and Fascists are family squabbles. They are birds of a proverbial feather.

Again, fallacy of false equivalence.

[Belinda]

If fascists is what you mean by socialists, then according to your description of socialists I am not a socialist.

Socialism includes both Communism and Fascism. I'm glad you're not either of those. But you've got to ask yourself why that's the way the worm inevitably turns.

I hope it's not inevitable. Totalitarianism can be extreme right or extreme left, and characterised by complete central control of the masses who are kept in subjection by force of policing and lack of individual powers.
Putin's Russia is not exactly totalitarian, because the masses are controlled not by terror of an unpredictable state police but by misinformation and lies.

The following is from Encylopedia Britannica:

In the broadest sense, totalitarianism is characterized by strong central rule that attempts to control and direct all aspects of individual life through coercion and repression. Historical examples of such centralized totalitarian rule include the Mauryan dynasty of India (c. 321–c. 185 BCE), the Qin dynasty of China (221–207 BCE), and the reign of Zulu chief Shaka (c. 1816–28). Nazi Germany (1933–45) and the Soviet Union during the Stalin era (1924–53) were the first examples of decentralized or popular totalitarianism, in which the state achieved overwhelming popular support for its leadership. That support was not spontaneous: its genesis depended on a charismatic leader, and it was made possible only by modern developments in communication and transportation.

Adolf Hitler
Adolf Hitler
Adolf Hitler addressing a rally in Germany, c. 1933.
dpa dena/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images
Totalitarianism is often distinguished from dictatorship, despotism, or tyranny by its supplanting of all political institutions with new ones and its sweeping away of all legal, social, and political traditions. The totalitarian state pursues some special goal, such as industrialization or conquest, to the exclusion of all others. All resources are directed toward its attainment, regardless of the cost. Whatever might further the goal is supported; whatever might foil the goal is rejected. This obsession spawns an ideology that explains everything in terms of the goal, rationalizing all obstacles that may arise and all forces that may contend with the state. The resulting popular support permits the state the widest latitude of action of any form of government. Any dissent is branded evil, and internal political differences are not permitted. Because pursuit of the goal is the only ideological foundation for the totalitarian state, achievement of the goal can never be acknowledged.

Joseph Stalin
Joseph Stalin
Joseph Stalin.
Photos.com/Thinkstock
Under totalitarian rule, traditional social institutions and organizations are discouraged and suppressed. Thus, the social fabric is weakened and people become more amenable to absorption into a single, unified movement. Participation in approved public organizations is at first encouraged and then required. Old religious and social ties are supplanted by artificial ties to the state and its ideology. As pluralism and individualism diminish, most of the people embrace the totalitarian state’s ideology. The infinite diversity among individuals blurs, replaced by a mass conformity (or at least acquiescence) to the beliefs and behaviour sanctioned by the state.

Get exclusive access to content from our 1768 First Edition with your subscription.
Subscribe today
Know how Adolf Hitler secured and established his dictatorship in Germany
Know how Adolf Hitler secured and established his dictatorship in Germany
Learn more Adolf Hitler securing dictatorial power in Germany.
Contunico © ZDF Enterprises GmbH, Mainz
See all videos for this article
Large-scale organized violence becomes permissible and sometimes necessary under totalitarian rule, justified by the overriding commitment to the state ideology and pursuit of the state’s goal. In Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union, whole classes of people, such as the Jews and the kulaks (wealthy peasant farmers) respectively, were singled out for persecution and extinction. In each case the persecuted were linked with some external enemy and blamed for the state’s troubles, and thereby public opinion was aroused against them and their fate at the hands of the military and police was condoned.


Police operations within a totalitarian state often appear similar to those within a police state, but one important difference distinguishes them. In a police state, the police operate according to known and consistent procedures. In a totalitarian state, the police operate outside the constraints of laws and regulations, and their actions are purposefully unpredictable. Under Hitler and Stalin, uncertainty was interwoven into the affairs of the state. The German constitution of the Weimar Republic was never abrogated under Hitler, but an enabling act passed by the Reichstag in 1933 permitted him to amend the constitution at will, in effect nullifying it. The role of lawmaker became vested in one person. Similarly, Stalin provided a constitution for the Soviet Union in 1936 but never permitted it to become the framework of Soviet law. Instead, he was the final arbiter in the interpretation of Marxism–Leninism–Stalinism and changed his interpretations at will. Neither Hitler nor Stalin permitted change to become predictable, thus increasing the sense of terror among the people and repressing any dissent.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
This article was most recently revised and updated by Brian Duignan, Senior Editor.
LEARN MORE in these related Britannica articles:
Germany
Germany: The totalitarian state
The main purpose and goal of the Nazi revolution was to establish a Volksgemeinschaft. Its creation required the purification and increase of the German “race” as well as its biological separation from the Jews, whose infusion of evil into the German bloodstream, the…
Ramses II
diplomacy: Totalitarian regimes
Diplomacy was equally affected by the advent of totalitarian regimes with strong ideologies; more often than not, these regimes honoured established diplomatic rules only when it suited them, and they generally eschewed negotiation and compromise. The government of the Soviet Union, for example,…
Mussolini, Benito
fascism: Totalitarian ambitions
Although Hitler had not revealed the full extent of his totalitarian aims before he came to power, as Führer (“Leader”) of the Third Reich, he attempted not only to control all political power but also to dominate many institutions and organizations that were…
newsletter icon
HISTORY AT YOUR FINGERTIPS
Sign up here to see what happened On This Day, every day in your inbox!
Email address
Email address
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Notice.

Learn More!

Totalitarianism
QUICK FACTS
KEY PEOPLE
Hannah Arendt
Juan Linz
RELATED TOPICS
Political system
Ideology
Dictatorship
Single-party system