Totalitarianism in Society Before the State
In “The Decay of German Democracy” (Political Quarterly, October 1933), Dr. Franz Neumann explains that in pre-Nazi Germany, totalitarianism on a level below the government had become the norm. Once you get used to the idea of political parties attempting to structure everything in life, it’s not much of a stretch to accept the same thing occurring on a larger scale:
German Parties were — apart from one unimportant exception — based on a totalitarian philosophy (Weltanschauungsparteien) They laid claim to the whole of the individual. They were totalitarian parties. Literally from the cradle to the grave the party dominated the life of its members. Organisations for children and youth, for sport and for singing, for welfare work and for the care of the sick, for the provision of literature and arts, for jurists, doctors and teachers and — last, but not least — private armies, were included in the sphere of party competence. ...
This system of the domination of the party could not work well, because in the first place totalitarian parties do not suit patliamentary democracy and in the second place the radical totalitarian parties did not recognise the rules of the parliamentary game.
If one of the ingredients for a totalitarian government is the existence of political parties or other social organizations attempting to exert totalitarian influence at a level below the government, then that suggests an important antidote to totalitarianism: a wide diversity of civil institutions that exist for different purposes and which are controlled by different entities. By supporting a variety of institutions, instead of investing all of one’s energy into one organization, a trend towards totalitarianism may be avoided.
By the same token, any organization or political party which does show signs of trying to dominate all aspects of life should be viewed with significant suspicion. If a political party seeks to create organizations for the purpose of sport, music, private welfare, literature, or the education of children, this should be regarded as an early push toward totalitarianism: the desire to have total domination over all of person’s life.
Read More:
Comments
If a political party seeks to create organizations for the purpose of sport, music, private welfare, literature, or the education of children, this should be regarded as an early push toward totalitarianism: the desire to have total domination over all of person’s life.
Of course, religious institutions can be just as bad. There’s an evangelical church in my town which has invested huge amounts of money in building a youth hang-out spot attached to their church. It has a Starbucks-style drink bar, table seating, concert seating, a sizeable music stage complete with a drum set, electric guitars, and a professional mixer, big-screen plasma TV’s, and oh yeah, a baptismal bathtub off in one corner. (Specially made for baptizing, not just an ordinary tub.) These people want the youths not just to come, but to stay.
Why can’t freethinker groups do stuff like this? Oh yeah, no money. That, and the whole we-want-control-of-your-life thing that evangelicals insist on….
This is perhaps another reason to be concerned with religious organizations trying to get involved with politics. Some already try to dominate so many other parts of people’s lives; politics is one where they have no direct power.
Given what you wrote above, I think that you might be interested in this, posted in March.