In The Origins of
Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt distinguishes totalitarianism form the
more familiar forms of tyranny known to us as dictatorships. Totalitarianism is
a term reserved for Nazism and Bolshevism, as seen under Hitler's Germany and Stalin's
Soviet Union. Arendt stresses that totalitarianism is not to be confused with
fascism, and points out that the Nazis themselves were keen to distinguish
Nazism from fascism, and looked down with contempt on Mussolini's fascist
Italy. While dictatorships have often been driven by totalitarian movements,
once they acquire power they seize the power structure of the state. By the very maneuver with which they seemingly take on complete control they
straight-jacket themselves; dictatorships are characterized by a complete
takeover by the state, but also a containment within the state. They satisfy
themselves with the bureaucratic confines and enter into a state of
equilibrium. The totalitarian drive is extinguished. Conventional dictatorships
are not unfamiliar, and while they are oppressive and brutal, the Western world
has never been adverse to dealing with them. Operating as they do within the
state structure they offer a degree of stability and predictability1.
Totalitarianism, by
contrast, is what happens when the movement is not contented and extinguished
by the state but refuses the structure of the state altogether; it occurs when the
movement refuses any structure at all.
