American Totalitarianism

Photo of Hannah Arendt in 1975

Hannah Arendt

(This article was originally published on my blog on December 29, 2016. It was also reprinted in the magazine of the Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies, in syndax vuzz, and Church and State. I thought it was a good time to reprint it here.)

In an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and that nothing was true. … Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie … The totalitarian … leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that … one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism. Instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness.”
~ Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism

For weeks now, I have been reading and blogging about dozens of articles from respected intellectuals from both the right and left who worry about the increasingly authoritarian, totalitarian, and fascist trends in America. Interestingly, when I tried to escape my scholarly bubble by looking for voices arguing that we are NOT heading in this direction, I came up empty. I found partisans or apparatchiks who maintain that all is good, but I couldn’t find hardly any well-informed persons arguing that we have nothing to worry about. I know there must be such people, but if there are they must be a tiny minority.

Now I did find informed voices saying that, in the long run, things will be fine. That the arc of justice moves slowly forward, that we take 1 step back but then take 2 steps forward. Such thinking about things from a larger perspective resonates with me. I write about big history and believe there may be directionality to cosmic evolution. I’ve argued that the universe is becoming self-conscious through the emergence of conscious beings, and I’ve even hypothesized that humans may become post-humans by utilizing future technologies. So I can’t be accused of ignoring the big picture.

However, at the moment, such concerns feel obtuse. Yes, it may be true that life is getting better in many ways, as Steven Pinker recently noted. But such thoughts provide little consolation for the millions who suffer in the interim. When people lack health care and educational opportunities; when they are deported, tortured, falsely imprisoned, or killed in wars; when they live in abject poverty surrounded by gun violence and suffer in a myriad of other ways, none of this is ameliorated by appeals to a far away future. Even if the world is better in a thousand years, that provides small consolation now.

What is almost self-evident is that America is now becoming more corrupt, and at a dangerously accelerating rate. In response, we must resist becoming like those of whom Yeats said: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.” So I state unequivocally that I agree with the vast majority of scholars and thinkers—recent trends reveal that the USA is becoming more authoritarian, totalitarian, and fascist. The very survival of the republic is now in doubt.

Of course, I could be mistaken, as it’s hard to predict the future. Moreover, I am not a scholar of Italian history, totalitarianism, or the mob psychology that enables fascist movements. But I do know that all of us share a human genome; we are more alike than different. Humans are capable of racism, sexism, xenophobia, cruelty, violence, religious fanaticism, and more. We are modified monkey—in many ways we are a nasty species. As Mark Twain said: “Such is the human race … Often it does seem such a pity that Noah and his party did not miss the boat.”

Thus I resist the idea that fascism can happen in Germany, Italy or Russia, but not in America. It can happen here, and the signs point in an ominous direction. Furthermore, the United States was never a model of liberty or justice. The country was (in large part) built on slave labor as well as genocide at home and violent imperialism abroad. It is a first world outlier in terms of incarceration rates and gun violence; it is the only developed country in the world without national health and child care; it has outrageous levels of income inequality and little opportunity for social mobility; it ranks near the bottom of lists of social justice; it is one of the few countries in the world to condemn Article 25 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and it is consistently ranked as the greatest threat to world peace and the world’s most hated country.

Furthermore, signs of its dysfunction continue to grow. If authoritarian political forces don’t get their way, they shut down the government, threaten to default on the nation’s debt, fail to fill judicial vacancies, deny people health-care and family planning options, conduct congressional show trials, suppress voting, gerrymander congressional districts, support racism, xenophobia and sexism, and spread lies and propaganda. These aren’t signs of a stable society. As the late Princeton political theorist Sheldon Wolin put it:

The elements are in place [for a quasi-fascist takeover]: a weak legislative body, a legal system that is both compliant and repressive, a party system in which one party, whether in opposition or in the majority, is bent upon reconstituting the existing system so as to permanently favor a ruling class of the wealthy, the well-connected and the corporate, while leaving the poorer citizens with a sense of helplessness and political despair, and, at the same time, keeping the middle classes dangling between fear of unemployment and expectations of fantastic rewards once the new economy recovers. That scheme is abetted by a sycophantic and increasingly concentrated media; by the integration of universities with their corporate benefactors; by a propaganda machine institutionalized in well-funded think tanks and conservative foundations; by the increasingly closer cooperation between local police and national law enforcement agencies aimed at identifying terrorists, suspicious aliens and domestic dissidents.

Now with power in the hands of an odd mix of plutocrats, corporatists, theocrats, racists, sexists, egoists, psychopaths, sycophants, anti-modernists, and the scientifically illiterate, there is no reason to think that they will surrender their power without a fight. You might think that if income inequality grows, individual liberties are further constricted, or millions of people are killed at home or abroad, that people will reject those in power. But this assumes we live in a democracy. And a compliant and misinformed public can’t think, act or vote intelligently. If you control your citizens with sophisticated propaganda, mindless entertainment, and a shallow consumer culture, you can persuade them to support anything. With better methods of controlling and distorting information will come more control over the population. And, as long the powerful believe they benefit from an increasingly totalitarian state, they will try to maintain it. Most people like to control others; they like to win.

An outline of how we might quickly descend into madness was highlighted by David Frum, the conservative and former speechwriter for President George W. Bush. Frum envisions the following scenario which is, I believe, as prescient as it is chilling:

1) …  I don’t imagine that Donald Trump will immediately set out to build an authoritarian state; 2) … his first priority will be to use the presidency to massively enrich himself; 3) That program of massive self-enrichment … will trigger media investigations and criticism by congressional Democrats; 4) ….Trump cannot tolerate criticism … always retaliating against perceived enemies, by means fair or foul; 5) … Trump’s advisers and aides share this belief [they] … live by gangster morality; 6) So the abuses will start as payback. With a compliant GOP majority in Congress, Trump admin can rewrite laws to enable payback; 7) The courts may be an obstacle. But w/ a compliant Senate, a president can change the courts … 8) … few [IRS] commissioners serve the full 5 years; 9) The FBI seems … pre-politicized in Trump’s favor … 10) Construction of the apparatus of revenge and repression will begin opportunistically & haphazardly. It will accelerate methodically …

Let me tell a personal story to help explain the cutthroat, no holds bar political world that is rapidly evolving in America today. Years ago I played high-stakes poker. It started out innocently, a few friends having a good time playing for pocket change. Slowly the stakes grew, forcing me to study poker if I didn’t want to lose money. My studies paid off, and I began to win consistently. Great.

Then I start playing with strangers, assuming my superior poker skills would prevail. But soon I started losing; finding out later that I was cheated. (I was being cold decked.) It turned out that my opponents played by a different rule—their rule was that I wasn’t leaving the game with any money. Then I discovered that some people will go further, robbing you at gunpoint of the money you had won. (This actually happened to me.) Once the gentleman’s rules of poker no longer applied, nothing was off-limits. Similarly, once the agreement to play by democratic rules is violated, all bets are off. For example, you begin to ignore the other parties Supreme Court nominees or threaten to default on the nation’s debts or ignore obstruction of justice in order to get your way. This is a sign that we have entered the world of mobsters and rogue nations, an immoral world. The logical end of this state of affairs is violence.

This describes the current political situation. The US Congress was once characterized by comity but is so no longer. From the period after World War II to about 1980, the political parties in the USA generally compromised for the good of the nation. The radicalization of the Republican party began in the 1980s and by the mid-1990s, with Republican control of the House of Representatives, the situation dramatically deteriorated. (Newt Gingrich is more responsible for this than anyone; he is possibly the worst American to live in this century.) One side was determined to get their way and wouldn’t compromise. It was now no holds barred.

In other words, American politics has entered a situation that game-theorists call the prisoner’s dilemma. A prisoner’s dilemma is an interactive situation in which it is better for all to cooperate rather than for no one to do so, yet it is best for each not to cooperate, regardless of what the others do. For example, we would have a better country if everyone paid their share of taxes, but it is best for any individual, say Donald Trump, not to pay taxes if he can get away with it. Put differently, you do best when you cheat at poker and don’t get caught, or control the situation if you do get caught. In politics this means you try to hide your crimes, but vilify the press or whistleblowers if you are exposed.

If successful in usurping power, you win in what the philosopher Thomas Hobbes called the state of nature. Hobbes said that in such a state the only values are force and fraud— you win if you dominate, enslave, incarcerate, or eviscerate your opponents. But the problem with this straightforward egoism, Hobbes thought, was that people were “relative power equals.” That is, people can form alliances to fight their oppressors. So while what Hobbes’ called the right of nature tells you to use whatever means possible to achieve power over others, the law of nature paradoxically reveals that this will lead to continual warfare—to a state of nature. The realization of this paradox should lead people to give up their quest for total domination and cooperate. They do so by signing a social contract in which they agree to and abide by, social and political rules.

But if we live in a country where people are radically unequal in their power—Democrats vs. Republicans; unions vs. corporations; secularists vs theocrats; African-Americans vs. white nationalists—then those in power won’t compromise with the less powerful. When the powerful few are imbued with the idea that they are better people with better ideas, and when they are drunk with their power, you can bet that the rest of us will suffer.

In short, it is a centuries old story. People want power. They will do almost anything to attain it. When they have it they will try to keep it, and they will try to divide those who should join together to fight them, hence they promote racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, etc. In the end, a few seek wealth and power for themselves, others want a decent life for everyone. Right now the few are winning.

7 thoughts on “American Totalitarianism

  1. The central motivation for democracy is the realization that a failure to fairly address the concerns of the minority ultimately leads to civil war. The Republicans are now operating on the theory that getting 50% +1 of the votes justifies them cramming 100% of their goals down the throats of the 50% -1 of the population. It’s legal, but it’s not wise.

    I hope that the Democrats will carry out proper investigations of Mr. Trump and Mr. Kavanaugh using their new subpoena power in the House. Sadly, this will take a few more years, and the Democrats will fail in any attempt to impeach either one. Mr. Trump will surely be crushed in 2020, but in the meantime he and the Republican Senate will stuff the Federal bench with cretinous judges. I estimate the probability of survival of the American Republic over the next two decades at 50-50.

  2. If as this article stated,

    “Furthermore, the United States was never a model of liberty or justice. The country was (in large part) built on slave labor as well as genocide at home and violent imperialism abroad. It is a first world outlier in terms of incarceration rates and gun violence; it is the only developed country in the world without national health and child care; it has outrageous levels of income inequality and little opportunity for social mobility; it ranks near the bottom of lists of social justice; it is one of the few countries in the world to condemn Article 25 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and it is consistently ranked as the greatest threat to world peace and the world’s most hated country.”

    why would anything happening now be a surprise or why would anyone of logical and compassionate mindset think that trying to preserve such a system be worthwhile? This has always baffled me. I would have to guess it’s because the person writing is invested in their life within such a system and wants to keep doing what they are doing for as long as possible. They just don’t want it to get worse and they’ve learned to mostly ignore the foundation/culture their life is built on. IMO that’s not a great way to think and I don’t see the value in complaining when things get more difficult. It just seems a little like whining to me. Or am I missing something here?

  3. Another of my lengthy diatribes.
    Good news is the election yesterday will put a brake on totalism/extreme authoritarianism. Yet it is undeniably true that:

    “When people lack health care and educational opportunities; when they are deported, tortured, falsely imprisoned, or killed in wars; when they live in abject poverty surrounded by gun violence and suffer in a myriad of other ways, none of this is ameliorated by appeals to a far away future.”

    Also quite true:

    “Recent trends reveal that the USA is becoming more authoritarian, totalitarian, and fascist. The very survival of the republic is now in doubt.”

    Naturally, as is the case with Russia and China, America is a superpower that cannot be virtuous or just. Americans can’t be truly Good people, because America’s size and diversity alone precludes such. The US is not a melting pot or salad bowl– it is cauldron!
    The mistakes made in the past century since the Tet Offensive (proximate starting-date) exacerbated our Romanesque characteristics. Putting to one side justice, the last time America was virtuous was during the early ’60s. After 1965 came various social catastrophes. Only a full-length article [or book] could catalog post-Vietnam War catastrophes.
    ———————————–
    Today ideologues/religionists harbor exaggerated, to say the least, expectations. Religionists hanker after a Heaven that no evidence exists for.
    Libertarians follow a mirage of limited government.
    Progressives want a progressivism existing, in small measure, only in tiny democratic socialist societies.
    ———————————-
    But again, the election is strong evidence of a counter-trend to totalism/fascism/extreme authoritarianism.
    Will write on a factor, IMO a crucial one (this is a comment, not an article.. for brevity’s sake am keeping it simple): the negative unity the post 9-11 decade offered. Plus the Obama years of renewal after the Great Recession.
    We got lucky. We survived the 9-11 decade and were fortunate to have the Obama administration to smooth the aftermath. The aftermath being the eventual outcome of the dislocation of the post- 9/11 decade.
    This is all to write on how the contrast between the fifteen years of negative unity from 2001 to 2016, and the events of the past two years, is what is most striking. As during the ’90s, people became excessively confident from 2001 to 2016, thus a great letdown burgeoned all throughout 2016. Obviously, the Grand Dragon in the Oval Office was a violent reaction to the Obama administration– and a dragon is a temporary creature. However too true and very sad that:

    “Even if the world is better in a thousand years, that provides small consolation now.”

    Provides no consolation at all. Escapism is the word that always comes to mind. Escaping through religion/spirituality, drugs, alcohol, the Arts, etc. Observers too often without fully understanding put down the
    Pretentiousness of religion;
    Dissipation of drugs, alcohol.
    Conceit of artists who think their art is profound.

    It all comes under the heading of escapism. The consolation this article names. Compensation is another word. Not an ‘opium of the masses’ but, rather, a necessary escapism/consolation/compensation.

  4. I agree with your probabilities. But the problem is we have a rule of the minority given how Democrats get more total votes for President and Congress (12 million more for the Senate yesterday but lost.)

  5. response to Chris Crawford

    “I hope that the Democrats will carry out proper investigations of Mr. Trump and Mr. Kavanaugh using their new subpoena power in the House.”

    Guaranteed they will.
    Democrats have no respect for Trump. People hate him, as he goads them into hating him– he goes by the truism ‘you are known by your enemies’. I don’t hate Trump because I grew up in the NY metro area– and got used to people like him. Met them every day. No exaggeration.

    “Lemme handle this, I’m friends wida guys uptown. Yaknow: da Big Boys.”

    Guys like Putin, ferinstince. Ya get my drift?

    “Sadly, this will take a few more years, and the Democrats will fail in any attempt to impeach either one.”

    Agreed.

    “I estimate the probability of survival of the American Republic over the next two decades at 50-50.”

    51 percent probability for the survival of the US Republic.
    ——————————————–
    “why would anything happening now be a surprise or why would anyone of logical and compassionate mindset think that trying to preserve such a system be worthwhile?[…] I would have to guess it’s because the person writing is invested in their life within such a system and wants to keep doing what they are doing for as long as possible. They just don’t want it to get worse and they’ve learned to mostly ignore the foundation/culture their life is built on.”

    Naturally! Isn’t that Prisoners Dilemma?

    “IMO that’s not a great way to think and I don’t see the value in complaining when things get more difficult. It just seems a little like whining to me.”

    Our comments are whiny as well…

    “Or am I missing something here?”

    Only what everyone is missing: solutions.

  6. @J. Miller. One more post, promise.
    Not that you are mistaken. The ‘system’ could be changed. First, large nations would have to be downsized, making them less predatory. Afterwards, Constitutions would be changed, making them also less predatory. Then massive public education is started to…
    you get the picture– so much has to change, presuming the majority of people deep down want comprehensive change. It’s not that people of logical and compassionate mindset think preserving the system is worthwhile– it is the staggeringly daunting task of even beginning to change the system. Understanding evolution, you can see the timeframe involved.

  7. I agree with Alan on this. “It’s not that people of logical and compassionate mindset think preserving the system is worthwhile – it is the staggeringly daunting task of even beginning to change the system.” JGM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.