极权主义是独裁统治的一个子集。
如果你是一个独裁者，你的主要任务是建立一个可以弯曲和改变一切的系统，这样你的统治就不会出现问题。你需要大量的间谍来寻找并消灭你的敌人，需要一支武装力量来平息公开的骚乱，需要顺从的法官和立法者——一个称职的暴君的完整蒙蒂。
如果你想要极权主义升级，你需要来自臣民的爱和奉献。如果没有几件对独裁者来说并非绝对必要的事情，你就无法做到这一点。
- 有魅力的领导。如果你不像希特勒那样天生具有催眠能力，没有毛泽东的气势，也不能像菲德尔那样一连说上几个小时，那么你就需要一台能干的宣传机器来为你制造公众形象。用你的肖像、名言和纪念碑来装饰一切，就像斯大林一样，或者让你的宫廷摄影师像普京一样经常拍摄你的裸胸、水肺潜水、枪击、露牙。
- 提出一个清晰、简单的愿景。你需要一个承诺每个人都能连续得到银铃铛、贝壳和漂亮女仆的事业。抢劫富有的邻居，除掉犹太人，消灭所有的蚂蟥和吸血鬼，给宿敌上一堂惨痛的课，这些都是屡试不爽的战斗口号。
- 确保每个人都全身心地投入到您的事业中。反对者和怀疑者是不允许的。24-7-365 到处都严格执行自我监管。邻里守望、私刑巡逻、工作场所小组确保每个人都爱你、你的愿景和你想要的祖国。艺术家、音乐家、作家、建筑师必须体验到一种深刻的灵感，才能大量生产出庆祝您统治的工艺品。三心二意、讽刺、懒惰是道德败坏的某些迹象，甚至可能是对人民敌人的同情。
- 如果不对那些不认同这一愿景的人造成严酷的后果，任何极权主义项目都是不可能的。没有工业剂量的恐惧就无法实现它。恐惧必须是发自内心的，无孔不入的。确保每个人都知道失败者的下场。高调斩首、ISIS 式或悄无声息的恐怖，人们只是消失得无影无踪，正如斯大林所喜欢的那样，由你决定。
下面是一幅捕捉极权主义本质的苏联绘画。斯大林在礼仪场合会见精英和平民。每个人的脸上都洋溢着浓浓的爱意和欣喜若狂。精心布置强调了极权统治者对一切事物的控制措施：即使被这一刻深深感动，人群中的每个人都知道他们的确切位置。斯大林散发的光芒是他的共产主义愿景的象征。经典的帝国内部象征着斯大林的无产阶级军团不可阻挡地迈向全世界平等和正义的胜利。
宗教极权主义将思想和情感的监管外包给上帝（下图）。宗教的优势在于，它为极权主义统治者提供了预先包装好的现成事业。然而，它为您节省了一些精力，同时也剥夺了您即兴发挥的空间。随着时间的推移，这也会让你的负责执行爱和监督真正信仰的人过于自满和懒惰：如果上帝在照顾事情，他们往往会在繁忙的日程中经常休息。
极权主义是独裁统治的一个子集。
如果你是一个独裁者，你的主要任务是建立一个可以弯曲和改变一切的系统，这样你的统治就不会出现问题。你需要大量的间谍来寻找并消灭你的敌人，需要一支武装力量来平息公开的骚乱，需要顺从的法官和立法者——一个称职的暴君的完整蒙蒂。
If you want a totalitarianist upgrade, you’ll need love and devotion from your subjects. You can’t do that without several things that are not strictly necessary for a dictator.
- Charismatic leadership. If you are not naturally hypnotic like Hitler, do not have the imposing presence of Mao, and cannot talk for hours like Fidel, you’ll need a competent propaganda machine that manufactures your public persona for you. Plaster over everything with your portraits, quotes and monuments, like Stalin, or make your court photographers shoot you regularly bare-chested, scuba-diving, gun-shooting, teeth-baring like Putin.
- Present a clear, simple vision. You’ll need a cause that promises everyone silver bells and cockle shells and pretty maids all in a row. Robbing some rich neighbor, getting rid of the Jews, crushing all the leeches and bloodsuckers, teaching an old enemy a few hard lessons are just some tested-and-tried rallying cries.
- Make sure everyone is profoundly dedicated to your cause. Dissenters and doubters are not allowed. Self-policing is strictly enforced everywhere, 24–7–365. Neighborhood watches, vigilante patrols, workplace cells make sure that everyone loves you, your vision and Motherland the way you want it. Artists, musicians, authors, architects must experience a deep-felt inspiration to churn out artifacts celebrating your rule. Half-heartedness, irony, laziness are certain signs of moral corruption, maybe even a sympathy for the enemies of the people.
- No grand totalitarian project is possible without harsh consequences for those who don’t share the vision. No way to make it happen without an industrial dose of fear. The fear must be visceral, all-permeating. Make sure everyone knows what happens to those who fail the Cause. High-profiled beheadings, ISIS-style, or hushed terror where people simply disappear with no traces left, as Stalin preferred it, is up to you.
下面是一幅捕捉极权主义本质的苏联绘画。斯大林在礼仪场合会见精英和平民。每个人的脸上都洋溢着浓浓的爱意和欣喜若狂。精心布置强调了极权统治者对一切事物的控制措施：即使被这一刻深深感动，人群中的每个人都知道他们的确切位置。斯大林散发的光芒是他的共产主义愿景的象征。经典的帝国内部象征着斯大林的无产阶级军团不可阻挡地迈向全世界平等和正义的胜利。
宗教极权主义将思想和情感的监管外包给上帝（下图）。宗教的优势在于，它为极权主义统治者提供了预先包装好的现成事业。然而，它为您节省了一些精力，同时也剥夺了您即兴发挥的空间。随着时间的推移，这也会让你的负责执行爱和监督真正信仰的人过于自满和懒惰：如果上帝在照顾事情，他们往往会在繁忙的日程中经常休息。
在没有快速升级到极权主义的情况下成为独裁者似乎是一个非常冒险的壮举。你知道任何存活超过 5 年的非极权独裁者吗？
Totalitarianism and Fascism are forms of authoritarianism, which is governance by an authority without the option of questioning whatever the authority orders. The distinctions between the three are mostly a matter of political theory; applying these labels is usually done very loosely and, in my opinion, badly.
An authoritarian government is any ruling political unit in which the person or group in power tells everyone else what to do, more or less without recourse. Monarchies without parliament and in which the monarch actually rules, as well as military governments and dictatorships of the l
Dictatorship describes a system of government. It stands in opposition to democracies, monarchies and so on. In a dictatorship, the dictator (and his henchmen) rules.
Authoritarianism describes the content of ruling policy. So a government is authoritarian if it is very heavy handed on law and order, has little respect for individual rights etc. It primarily stands in opposition to liberalism. There is no reason a democracy could not be authoritarian.
Totalitarianism is a particular sort of authoritarianism, and is about the scope of government. Under totalitarianism, there is no private sphere.
No almost never and it has to do with the fundamental breakdown of power and how it works.
So many would say that a good dictator would have advantages. They are far more efficient for instance as no votes are needed. A Dictator can do anything they want immediately while an elected official has to spend months getting other politicians to agree to any legislation.
However, Dictatorships are never better than Democracies. Even a dictatorship with a genius, caring, and capable dictator is worse than a bad Democracy, and here is why.
It’s power- all is power.
In any power structure- be it a local sc
Short answer: Because that's exactly what a communist government is intended to be.
Long answer (go fetch a cup of tea and some biscuits):
We must make a distinction between a proper "communist government" (indeed we should say "revolutionary government") and a government formed by a communist party. The latter is a democratic, elected government that will most likely abide by the Constitution and laws that are in place and will behave well, if not disturbed by reactionary agitation and "golpismo" (read my "huge, behemot answer" on What are the examples of democratic countries overthrowing their
Sort of.
Authoritarian systems do not seek to homogenize society, and instead allow some degree of pluralism. They will still allow some freedom(mainly economic). They seek to monopolize political power and maintain status quo. The social and economic institutions exist free from governmental control in authoritarian regime unlike totalitarianism. It chooses people apathetic about politics and use their fear to justify its rule. They use mass propaganda using media, political parties, mass organizations etc to make people follow them. They stand for political demobilization. Examples can be Sad
- Obama was far-left.
- Pro-choice people think fetuses aren’t alive.
- Democrats are less fiscally responsible than Republicans.
- AOC is a communist.
- Bernie Sanders is a communist.
- Ilhan Omar represents the Democratic Party.
- Liberals want to take away everyone’s guns.
- Democrats hate Christians.
- Liberals hate the military.
just to name a few.
ㅇㅇ
Totalitarianism is a form of government in which rule of law and individual rights are subordinated to the organs of state. The state controls or has override authority over all aspects of economic and civil life. Fascism (Nazism, Italian Fascism, Japanese Imperialism) is just a type of totalitarianism. So was Soviet-style "Communism," even though it pretended to be an economic system. There are differences between fascism and other totalitarian systems.
Fascism emphasizes real (ancient Rome), fictional (the white Aryan race), or rewritten (Bushido, as rewritten to include all castes) history,
A totalitarian government (socialism) is a tyrannical government that consolidated power and effectively enslaved the nation’s citizenry.
A “dictator” is a leftist propaganda term used to try to deflect from the atrocities of socialism by scapegoating one person for what the ideology (leftism) and the system of governance (socialism) caused.
……
If a government has a leader at the top of government but that government has its power properly restricted, then there is no problem. No matter how much leftists try to pretend otherwise; The problem is always tyrannical government. It is never the leader
The opposite is having a very high degree of decentralisation. A totalitarian state is one in which a single central authority seeks to impose total control on all aspects of society, to the point that minute points and personal space are both subordinated to the central authority.
A highly decentralised state does the opposite: the central authority gives up authority, retaining for itself only some broad prerogatives, such as foreign policy, and leaving the rest to a multitude of local authorities within the country.
An excellent example would be Switzerland. The Confederatio Helvetica is divi
You have mixed up so many terms here in the question but all basically are very similar. I'm sure that's why you asked to clarify the subtle differences.
Let's start with autocracy. One person holds the majority if not all of the power. This person could be a king, an emperor, tsar, pharaoh…or even more recent ones like Castro in Cuba, Hitler in WWII Germany, Kim in North Korea. There are several f
Are corporations similar to dictatorships?
Yes they are very similar, not exactly the same, but none the less, both are forms of autocratic organizations. Both operate on a strict hierarchy from top down and deviations or independence is often severely punished. Both are prone to irrational behaviors due to simple human fear and suspicions often resulting in consequences of injustice. Both will resort to private or secret police to enforce loyalty and regimented behavior of subordinates. Both are entirely reliant upon secrecy and total opacity as a fundamental feature essential to their operati
This is how building democracy looked like. Moscow, 1993, president had disagreement with parliament. After 2000 Parliament always agreed with the president.
沒有留言:
張貼留言
注意：只有此網誌的成員可以留言。