A Totalitarian United States The Eventuality Is Not Too Far Fetched

Recent Trends in Restrictions on Freedoms by a Totalitarian State
Two and a half centuries ago, the Founding Fathers of the United States forged what has become regarded as a “living document” with the U.S. Constitution that has managed to weather numerous conflicts, including a civil war, two world wars and dozens of regional clashes over the years. This foundation in liberty is being threatened by some politicians today to the point of making the United States a totalitarian state, including most especially the current occupant of the Oval Office. For example, in their article, “Three warning signs of ideological totalitarianism” (September 8, 2020), Sharansky and Troy make the point that more than 3 decades after the collapse of the former Soviet Union, “embers of the kind of totalitarian thinking that spawned the Communist Revolution are inflaming Western debate — and inciting Americans” (para. 2).
In truth, not all Americans are being thus incited, and the so-called “silent majority” continues to muddle along, hoping things will get better soon. There are a sufficient number of “incited” Americans that are advocating totalitarian rhetoric, however, to generate significant concern from domestic and international observers that the United States is headed down an irreversible path that leads to outright totalitarianism. In this regard, Sharansky and Troy (2020) emphasize that, “America remains light years away from a culture of secret police, informers, kangaroo courts and Gulags. But the stakes are too high not to react to the slightest drifts in that direction” (para. 3).
Indeed, the stakes are high but the republic has been down this road before where civil liberties have been limited and totalitarian methods used to maintain domestic control. Since the nation’s founding, the level of civil liberties afforded the American public has tended to ebb and flow as circumstances dictated, but the United States has always managed to return to normalcy once crises situations such as the Civil War or the two world wars were resolved. This time may be fundamentally different, however, because of the main actors that are involved. Certainly, President Trump has not been acting alone but has rather been supported at every turn by a cabal of Republican political and business leaders that appear intent on damaging and even destroying longstanding American institutions, perhaps irrevocably.
These disturbing trends are taking place under the very noses of the American public who are either unable or unwilling to acknowledge the erosion of these institutions and what the implications of this outcome will be for future generations. Indeed, this trend is one of the more challenging and troubling aspects of the ongoing push towards totalitarianism in the United States because the main perpetrators are being completely transparent about their methods, even if they are not being entirely honest about their ultimate motives. As Sharansky and Troy (2020) point out, “That is why it is so alarming to watch this new ideological totalitarianism curtailing America's collective conversation—even as its constitutionally protected freedoms remain legally secure” (para. 3).
It is important to note that lawmakers in the United States are not alone in making these types of decisions behind closed doors since negotiations and rationales are frequently sensitive or classified, but as pointed out in chapter 9, the American public is “never privy to what goes on that leads from situation to decision.” This cloak of secrecy not only facilitates policy making that is not in the country’s best interests but also provides “capitalist exploiters,” in the words of Sharansky and Troy (2020), with the opportunity to “relegate persons to the status of things” which makes demonizing them easier and far more effective.
Unfortunately, this is what is taking place in America today as lawful demonstrators are castigated, gassed, shot and attacked by the United States government and culpable state leaders that place their own interests above the country’s. More chilling still are the large numbers of Americans that are mindlessly chanting, “Lock her up!,” “Fake news!,” “Send her back!,” and “Fill that seat!” at Trump political rallies that resemble the “orchestrated outbursts of groupthink [that had] people shouting hysterically” when the Communists ran the Soviet Union with an iron fist. In many ways, the current executive administration appears to have read the Soviet totalitarian playbook because many of the same strategies are being used to quell dissent and diminish opposition.
Fortunately, though, it is not too late to save America’s soul from the tyranny of totalitarianism, but the outcome at present remains uncertain. Nevertheless, the American Experiment has endured as long as it has because of the firm resolve of a majority of the American people that the nation’s ideals and values are worth saving and even fighting and dying for if necessary, irrespective of what the commander-in-chief might think about such supreme sacrifices to the contrary. In fact, this is the essence of what spelled the end of the Soviet totalitarian regime. For example, according to Sharansky and Troy (2020), “No matter how loud they shouted, many Soviet citizens thought such exercises absurd. But they hid their real thoughts because speaking honestly was dangerous” (para. 6).
Today, the American electorate has the opportunity and profound responsibility to place the nation back on course by “speaking honestly” at the ballot box this November and providing the United States with another chance at redemption. The United States has achieved and contributed far too much to humankind to allow the nation to spiral down a Trumpian totalitarian toilet. Although it may take several generations to restore America’s credibility and leadership position on the world stage, it is never too soon to start and now is the time.
References
Sharansky, N. & Troy, G. (2020, September 8). Three warning signs of ideological totalitarianism. Newsweek. Retrieved from https://www.newsweek.com/three-warning-signs-ideological-totalitarianism-opinion-1529824.
Appendix A
Copy of Article
OPINION
Three Warning Signs of Ideological Totalitarianism | Opinion
NATAN SHARANSKY AND GIL TROY
ON 9/8/20 AT 7:30 AM EDT
01:47SHARE
OPINIONPOLITICSAMERICAN POLITICSGLOBAL POLITICSSOVIET UNION
Three decades after the Soviet Union fell, embers of the kind of totalitarian thinking that spawned the Communist Revolution are inflaming Western debate—and inciting Americans. Anyone born into Soviet oppression, and who resisted it, knows how important America's freewheeling culture of free speech and free thought was to citizens trapped in fear societies. Whatever its flaws, America remains the leader of the free world.
That is why it is so alarming to watch this new ideological totalitarianism curtailing America's collective conversation—even as its constitutionally protected freedoms remain legally secure.
Karl Marx saw history as one long class struggle. At every stage, those he deemed to be oppressors were evil, irredeemable.
Marxism pronounced the bourgeoisie inherently bad. Whole classes of people—the capitalist exploiters—were enemies. As oppressors, they all were to blame for belonging to the wrong group, no matter what they did or said. The Lenin-Trotsky-Stalin court of revolutionary justice never bothered seeking proof of specific crimes: every one of the proletariat's enemies was guilty of standing on the wrong side of progressive history. Meanwhile, the oppressed were always right. The resulting tyranny victimized tens of millions of people.
America remains light years away from a culture of secret police, informers, kangaroo courts and Gulags. But the stakes are too high not to react to the slightest drifts in that direction. Here are three recurring warning signs of ideological totalitarianism.
First, guilt by association. Organizing the world between "those who are with us" and "those who are against us," Soviet totalitarians categorized people crudely. As Martin Luther King Jr. warned, such lumping together "relegates persons to the status of things." So beware of judging people based on who they are, or to what group they belong—be it Mexicans, immigrants and Muslims or, whites, males and Zionists.
Second, truth is apparently by association now, too. When politics is zero-sum, facts don't matter—your ideological purity does. Rather than following a fact pattern or tolerating potential contradictions, you pattern the facts to confirm your preconceptions and brook no opposition. New York's legendary liberal senator, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, said: "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts." Dismissing details that might ruin your self-reinforcing narrative as "fake news," or shouting us down on campus by shrieking "We didn't come here to talk to you! We came here to demand 'Boycott Israel!," weaponizes ideology to trump reality.
This rejection of genuine dialogue evokes the condemnation campaigns that Communist Party officials used to run. These orchestrated outbursts of groupthink would have people shouting hysterically about the novelist Alexander Solzhenitsyn, the dissident scientist Andrei Sakharov or some other supposed enemy of the people: "There is nothing to discuss about that book! Of course I didn't read it! It's all lies! Shame on you, Solzhenitsyn. Shame on you, Sakharov. Shame on these renegades. We Soviet people condemn you!"
No matter how loud they shouted, many Soviet citizens thought such exercises absurd. But they hid their real thoughts because speaking honestly was dangerous. The Soviet dictatorship created a fear society that failed the "town square test"—can everyone express themselves freely, publicly, without fear of punishment?
That fear explains why a majority of people living under dictatorships are double-thinkers. And the fact that doublethink is now starting to spread in free America is the third and most alarming sign we see today. America still passes the town square test. But a recent Cato Institute survey found that a majority of both conservatives and liberals admit to thinking one thing while parroting a party line or simply staying quiet. They rarely fear government repression; they worry about their careers or their reputations.
Over the last two decades, we watched this self-censorship grow on campus, as more and more students started telling us they feel bullied, sculpting their expressions to avoid alienating professors or peers. That chilling atmosphere is now spreading, flattening conversation in corporations, government offices, newspapers and on social media. This is not just watching your tongue out of politeness; it's shutting your mouth out of fear.
Many of us easily recognize this ideological absolutism and bullying—in our political rivals. Democrats see it most clearly in the Republican Party's degeneration into President Donald Trump's amen chorus; Republicans see it most clearly in the cancel culture haunting many universities. And almost everyone sees it in their opponents' social media practices. But there won't be any real improvement until we stop, take a breath and start confronting such thinking among our own allies—and ultimately, within ourselves.
Natan Sharansky was a political prisoner in the Soviet Union and was a minister in four different Israeli governments. Professor Gil Troy is a distinguished scholar of North American history at McGill University and the author of nine books on the American presidency. Their book, Never Alone: Prison, Politics, and My People was just published by PublicAffairs of the Hachette Book Group.
The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.