Against All Totalitarianisms

by Michael Walker

The Escapee by A. Paul Weber

Michael Walker argues that while liberalism is often viewed as the antithesis of totalitarianism, it is itself a totalitarian system that uses the individual’s “right to choose” to undermine the collective rights of peoples to choose their own paths, enforcing a singular worldview under the guise of “freedom”.

This essay was first published in The Scorpion, issue 10, autumn 1986.

We often hear totalitarianism condemned. Even those of the ‘extreme left’ or ‘extreme right’, whose programmes are totalitarian in the commonly accepted sense of the term, do all in their power to deny the charge. To be ‘totalitarian’ in politics is to be undemocratic, power-mad, inhuman, to be evil made flesh; but we are in danger of slipping into a futile syllogism when we talk about totalitarianism. It is this: “all totalitarian systems and ideologies are evil; all that is evil politically stems from totalitarianism; therefore totalitarianism is the term given to all manifestations of evil in politics.” Such reasoning helps no one to understand totalitarianism. The term becomes void of content, but a useful term of abuse against those who seek to organise a ‘revolutionary’ opposition to a given philosophical, scientific, economic or political system.

So far as totalitarianism is concerned, it is important to identify the phenomenon objectively, in terms of precise criteria, if we wish to be able to recognise it. It is a ‘form of polity’ (O.E.D.) which brooks no opposition, which seeks to occupy the totality of life of all, from cradle to grave. In order to achieve this totality it seeks to reduce all aspects of life and all variation in life to a single phenomenon, one total truth, immutable and which cannot be questioned. It is naturally easier to identify totalitarian systems from totalitarian thought. A thinker proposes and by doing so places himself in opposition to other thought. For the outside reader or listener it is easy to see two arguments or propositions as mere alternatives which can be evaluated in a way that by definition excludes a totalitarian perspective. Systems, the putting into effect of proposals, are more easily identified as seeking to become totally powerful and brooking no opposition. The power of a system enables totalitarianism to be realised. Where the power is obviously oppressive in a direct physical sense, shored up by secret police, death squads, executions without trial, torture, concentration camps, the political control of the judiciary and even the medical profession, then the ‘totalitarian’ nature of the regime becomes evident. Physical intimidation by the state, a sense of physical insecurity, induces the great majority to acknowledge the ‘truth’ which the government imposes. The logic of this is the silencing of the dissident.

Propagandists for systems which correspond to this kind of totalitarian ideology are anxious to disguise their ‘dark side’, although ever keen to expose the dark side of their ideological adversaries. The Soviet Union and national socialist Germany were both strongly influenced by their origins in a national resentment against defeat (“military betrayal”). A substantial military component in both the national socialist and Bolshevik revolutions, coupled with the religious nature of the two movements, ensured that they were ruthless and brutal once total power had been won. For the same reason, however, they were breeding grounds of human qualities as well as defects. To quote Michael Power, the national socialist regime was responsible for many superb achievements but also many unforgivable things. It is proof of the lack of a spirit of enquiry in the liberal consensus of the day that only the negative aspects of national socialism are recognised. Like Marxism and national socialism, but with less honesty than either, liberalism also has its myths and irrational dogmas. It too seeks to reduce the history of the world to one point: in this case the struggle of the individual to express himself as freely as possible.

That was the S.A. by Elk Eber. All totalitarianisms are intolerant of dogmas other than their own and are merciless in exposing their iniquities and shortcomings. Totalitarian liberalism is no exception. It overlooks the heroism and high-mindedness evoked by non-liberal creeds, particularly when they are “reactionary” or “racialist”; but all ideologies create heroes as well as villains — a human truth which no totalitarian perspective will allow.