Seminar Paper

Totalitarianism

Chapter 13: Ideology and Terror: A New Form of Government

The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt

Totalitarian governments strive for omnipotence, a means by which they can assert their own ideologies and models for the future upon a nation. Garnering support and realising control is achieved through an elaborate process. Gathering a substantial following is tantamount to the instigation of a successful totalitarian autocracy. Hannah Arendt considers how a population could knowingly opt to join a totalitarian state and how they are influenced.

If we consider the Nazi’s rise to political power; it is evident that many peripheral factors contributed to a peoples forsaking of a democratic Government and a shifting of their allegiances. Hitler’s cynicism echoed that of most of the nation, fed up with a weak constitution, bitter about the First World War and suffering from severe economic conditions. The beleaguered people become impressionable; seeking a new leadership, bringing with it a new set of values. But for the population to adopt such a repressive and dictatorial change they must be moulded. The classes must become the masses; furthermore obedience amongst the masses must reign supreme. Individualism must be yielded from the people and replaced with universal thinking and a ubiquitous identity.

Arendt alludes to two ways in which this is achieved. ‘State terror’; the essence of fear being created by the state, a comparative example of this is exemplified in capital punishment; people refrain from committing an act of crime through fear of extreme repercussions. The idea of state terror is to eliminate, not just the act, but even the thought of a defiant act. Secondly, the totalitarian ideology is imparted to the masses, convincing people of an escape from the burdensome constraints of conscience and common sense or as Arendt puts it ‘a suicidal escape from reality’. It entails the loss of the individual self and the ability to fully reason with one’s self; ultimately becoming ‘one man’ with the masses and part of a universal self. Subsequently, a human’s actions will not be ‘free’; opposition, sympathy and spontaneity will all be repressed, facilitating people to carry out heinous actions.

It seems incomprehensible that numerous amounts of ordinary people can lose their individualism and morality and conform to a totalitarian state. A Freudian model would claim that the irrationality of man combined with the manifestation of the aggression we suppress could be a justification for committing immoral acts. Deplorable economic or social conditions can lead to helplessness and vulnerability, rendering people very impressionable. Hitler used this malleability to manipulate and control. The successful suppression of reason, morality and conscience could be generated by scaremongering, terror and propaganda by the state.

Another idea as to why ordinary people committed atrocities with such banality was deduced from experiments conducted by Stanley Milgram. He concluded that under pressure and under the the weight of authority, people act out of character and transgress their typical boundaries just to remain obedient. This striking obedience may indicate the subject projecting their responsibility onto someone else, namely the authoritarian. This theory could again be applied to Nazi Germany, but on a larger scale; an entire nation passing the responsibility of their actions to the state. 

Once mass cooperation has been achieved, what do totalitarian states intend to accomplish? Totalitarian states disregard the iuris consensus, the subjective rights of man, with the claim of making man the embodiment of the law. Totalitarian regimes therefore attempt to make every man an unfailing, faultless character of the law; unlike with the existing social contracts we are accustomed to, for example in the United Kingdom, whereby people are passively and reluctantly subjected to the law.

Positive laws are replaced by ‘total terror’. Fear of death or other repercussions leaves people powerless and renders a state independent of all opposition. With this omnipotence, the state can work towards its primary endeavours. Nazism’s objective was to produce a Germanic master race. This involved the accelerating of the movement of natural laws to a speed they would never reach independent of human intervention. Darwinistic fundamentals state that we continue to evolve into aesthetically and biologically stronger beings and that the weak will perish in a struggle of ‘survival of the fittest’. It is a belief of totalitarians that inferior, weaker beings and races delay and hinder this necessary process. Totalitarianism asserts that accelerating natural selection eliminates individuals for the sake of an entire species and that we must sacrifice ‘parts’ for the sake of the ‘whole’; parts that nature has already pronounced a death sentence for.

Arendt counters this by saying if we defy nature and eliminate everything deemed unfit to live; it will consequently be the ‘end of nature itself’. She says we cannot use the laws of nature or history as they are not ‘stabilizing sources of authority’ and that ‘man is a source unto himself’. The line between man and law, and legality and justice are very indistinct. The totalitarian rejection of positive laws and the implementation of total terror defy the voice of conscience. The apparent execution of the laws of nature do not consider right and wrong and are not representative of a social contract common to the sentiment of all men.

Sigmund Freud

Sigmund Freud was a deeply inspired man, living in repressed times. His surroundings and personal alienation lead to his macabre theories. He witnessed both WWI and the Great Depression, the indelible influence of these hard times permeate his discourse.

            Freud was well versed in the work of other philosophical scholars, but was cynical about much of their work, notably he challenged the Enlightenment scholars. His deep pessimism and dark vision of humanity lead him to believe it was impossible for humanity to ever discover and understand the extent of the universe. He alleged that the sub-conscious controlled humankind, therefore making development and progress impossible.  

            Although Freud attacked the content of Plato’s tripartite self, he valued the concept and utilised it to create the ‘Freudian Personality’.

The first part of Freud’s personality was the ‘Id’. The Id is the dominant,

demanding division of the tripartite. It is the amalgamation of sex and aggression, seeking only to gain pleasure and avoid pain. The malevolent and insatiable Id has been ominously described as the ‘reservoir of the unconscious’ and a ‘cauldron of seething excitations’.

            The Id relentlessly besieges what is known as the ‘Ego’ or ‘Self’. This is the voice of reality and reason; endeavouring to placate and gratify the incessant demands of the Id.

            From the ‘Ego’ stems the ‘Superego’. This is the ‘impossible standard of perfection’ we strive for; we impart idealistic social appropriations based around structures, standards and morality to the superego; hence this acts as the ‘policeman in our heads’. An individual’s superego can also be governed by the ideologies of religion. Powerful teachings such as ‘Love your Enemy’ can cause internal conflict between Id and superego. As a consequence of falling short of the ‘impossible standard of perfection’ the superego punishes with guilt.

            Freudian Philosophy, like much modernist art and writings was dark and cynical in its approach. He supported this cynicism by defining his personal reasoning for it. Freud’s ideas are centred on the ‘irrationality’ of man, this is tantamount to Freud’s pessimism; he believes this irrationality makes man just inclined to hurt one another. He says this combined with our constantly decaying bodies, bad fortune and human interaction justify his pessimism. He asserts that our subconscious effectively controls us, but we live under the guise of a ‘collective superego’. His views have echoes of Rembrandt; whose work invariably portrayed a glimpse of light surrounded by blackness and overshadowing.    

            Freud noted ways in which man could cope with the Id’s insatiability. Sublimation of bodily urges can be attained by focusing attention onto something such as sport or work, although this is a mild solution. Less recommended methods such as intoxication (something Freud engaged in frequently, being a notable cocaine user) and isolation; the alienating yourself from society. The latter method is something that appealed to Freud and it alludes to his philosophy that ‘hell is other people’.

            Freud conducted his ‘psychoanalysis’ through various methods. He used hypnosis as well as free association. This allowed people to talk freely without any influence from the analyst; Freud believed this was key to uncovering the subconscious. In addition to this he also asserted that dreams were fundamental to the understanding of the ID. He believed dreams were a method of ‘wish fulfilment’ and each had intrinsic sexual connotation. Dreams working as a manifestation of the ID can help to sublimate the ID’s dominance.

            Freud was a contentious psychologist and has had many critics since. Many proclaimed Freud as a charlatan and a plagiarist, claiming his idea were falsified, stolen or lacked a scientific basis. William Reich’s criticisms denounced Freud’s doomy outlook, claiming humans were innately good and sex was key to good human nature.