Totalitarianisms The Closed Society And Its Friends A History Of Crossed Languages

It is striking that the main political concept coined by the century of democracy has been totalitarianism. Since its birth in fascist Italy in the 1920s, the term has made a long journey throughout different countries and periods. After representing the fascination for dictatorships during the interwar years, totalitarianism became a key concept of the ‘war of words’ waged between democracy and communism until the fall of the Berlin Wall. It was ‘a hot word for a Cold War’, as termed by the author of this book to convey the importance of this contest of crossed languages, which also included images, symbols and other forms of ‘senso-propaganda’. The Closed Society and Its Friendshighlights the role played by language in the building of a dystopian civilization conceived as an alternative to the open society created by liberalism. The book analyses the dimension of totalitarianisms, from fascism and Nazism to communism, as political religions with some common features, such as the cult of personality and the conception of society as a community of believers. This fascinating essay on the dark side of the 20th century ends with a disturbing epilogue: ‘Is totalitarianism back?’

This edited volume promotes a comparative and transnational approach to the complex and ambiguous relationship between West European socialism and the contemporary state over the longue durée. It encourages a better understanding of socialism while also casting an original light on the history of the contemporary state in Europe. Socialists have been a prime political force since the late nineteenth century through to the present. Through their strength, their presence at the heart of societies, their dynamism, inventiveness, and influence, they have left their mark on the European physiognomy and helped to forge part of its identity. This is particularly true where the welfare state is concerned, and the role played by the state in constructing, embedding, and extending this social model. Surprisingly, there has been no research aiming to systematically analyse the relationship between socialism and the state. This volume fills a gap in knowledge by rejecting the media simplification and political polemic maintained by opponents of socialism – and sometimes by socialists themselves – which systematically links socialism with “statism”. It focuses on numerous case studies involving France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Austria, Germany, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Scandinavia, and highlights the diversity of organisations within European socialism. Ultimately, this book demonstrates that the fate of this political culture depends on the socialist parties themselves but also on any new configurations that states may assume. Conversely, the future of states will also depend partly on the choices made by socialists, if they still exist and still have the means to shape decisions and make their voices heard.

The first political theory of post-Communism examines its implications for understanding liberty, rights, transitional justice, property rights, privatization, rule of law, centrally planned public institutions, and the legacies of totalitarian thought in language and discourse. The transition to post-totalitarianism was the spontaneous adjustment of the rights of the late-totalitarian elite to its interest. Post-totalitarian governments faced severe scarcity in the supply of justice. Rough justice punished the perpetrators and compensated their victims. Historical theories of property rights became radical, and consequentialist theories, conservative. Totalitarianism in Europe disintegrated but did not end. The legacies of totalitarianism in higher education met New Public Management, totalitarian central planning under a new label. Totalitarianism divorced language from reality through the use of dialectics that identified opposites and the use of logical fallacies to argue for ideological conclusions. This book illustrates these legacies in the writings of Habermas, Derrida, and Žižek about democracy, personal responsibility, dissidence, and totalitarianism.

Seminar paper from the year 2003 in the subject Sociology - Politics, Majorities, Minorities, grade: A- (82), University of British Columbia (Dept. of Sociology), course: Seminar 'Political Sociology', language: English, abstract: Since its coinage in the 1920’s the term ‘totalitarianism’ has adopted various connotations and has lead to highly controversial discussions in a multitude of scientific texts. Created by the opposition of Italian fascism, it is soon taken up by Mussolini himself. After the end of the Second World War, Hannah Arendt and Carl J. Friedrich write two standard works, that classify both Nazism and Stalinism as totalitarian regimes. In the following cold war period the term develops into an ideological catchword of the Right, which culminates in the equation of the crimes of Communism with the Holocaust in the ‘Historikerstreit’ in 1986. Recently, after the collapse of soviet Communism, the term is rediscovered as a useful tool to classify and compare political systems. In the following pages, I will therefore discuss the general concept of totalitarianism and the socio-historic causes for the rise of totalitarian regimes in the 20th century with the help of the classic theories of Hannah Arendt, Carl J. Friedrich and Karl D. Bracher. Further on I will deal with some of the criticism that the theory of totalitarianism was confronted with and show the benefit of the concept for scientific discourse. In view of the flood of theories and criticism, it is not possible for me, to comment on the debate on totalitarianism as a whole. Instead I will concentrate on some of the crucial arguments of the debate, being aware that certain aspects will be left out in my discussion.

Publisher description: Providing a fascinating account of totalitarianism, historian Abott Gleason offers a penetrating chronicle of the central concept of our era--an era shaped first by our conflict with fascism and then by our conflict with communism. Interweaving the story of intellectual debates with the international history of the twentieth century, Gleason traces the birth of the term to Italy in the first years of Mussolini's rule. He follows the growth and expansion of the concept as it was picked up in the West and applied to Hitler's Germany and the Soviet Union. Gleason's account takes us through the debates of the early postwar years, as academics adopted the term, notably Hannah Arendt. The concept fully entered the public consciousness with the opening of the Cold War, as Truman used the rhetoric of totalitarianism to sell the Truman Doctrine to Congress. As he takes his account through to the 1990s, Gleason offers an inner history of the Cold War, revealing the political charge the term carried for writers on both the left and the right. He also explores the intellectual struggles that swirled around the idea in France, Germany, Italy, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. When the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, Gleason writes, the concept lost much of its importance in the West even as it flourished in Russia, where writers began to describe their own collapsing state as totalitarian.