The Totalitarian Legacy of the Post-Soviet Countries: Theoretical Reflection of the Problems of Totalitarism

Main Article Content

Abstract

The theoretical reflection of the totalitarian phenomenon was studied. It was established that there is no single generally accepted scientific theory of totalitarianism in modern political science, moreover, despite the long-term development of this problem, researchers did not even manage to clearly define the subject of the discussion, so diametrically opposed answers to fundamental questions regarding form-forming and essential features led to antagonistic differences in views on this complex phenomenon in the social and political life of society – from the complete denial of the very fact of its existence to the granting of an omnipresent, universal, timeless character.


It was determined that in the process of development of the theory of totalitarianism in the West, several complementary and sometimes mutually exclusive concepts were formed, within which this phenomenon was interpreted as a “closed society” and a particularly cruel lawless autocratic dictatorship, based on modern technology and mass legitimation, was identified with socialism , one-party system, terror and authoritarianism, was interpreted as a product of the irrational psychological and characteristic structure of the consciousness of an ordinary individual and “unproductive human orientations” in the conditions of the birth of a mass society. It has been proven that the loss of clarity of evaluation criteria and the transformation of the term itself into a commonly used emotionally colored negative epithet called into question the scientific value of the very concept of totalitarianism, which had already undergone significant ideological compromise, too often serving as a quasi-theoretical legitimation of the policy of forceful confrontation between two hostile blocs. The urgent need to combat Soviet communist expansion had an extremely negative impact on the scientific value and quality of a large part of the research, turning it into a stereotypical collection of myths and propagandist clichés, monotonous accusations and boring curses, which led to a permanent crisis of the concept of totalitarianism and its characterization “rather as metaphors than of a clear scientific theory” and “appendix to the Cold War”.


It is concluded that despite the permanent crisis of the theory of totalitarianism, the revival of authoritarian dictatorships in the first quarter of the XXIst century caused a new wave of popularity of already forgotten scientific concepts. Their heuristic potential is still far from being exhausted, therefore, despite the gradual distancing from the political catastrophes of the XXth century, interest in totalitarianism in society not only does not fall, but also constantly grows, scientific discussions not only do not subside, but also intensify and deepen, receiving from each succeeding generation has a new meaning and various nuances, which are especially relevant when summing up the past, solving the problems of the present, and outlining the prospects for the future.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Rozumyuk, V. (2023) “The Totalitarian Legacy of the Post-Soviet Countries: Theoretical Reflection of the Problems of Totalitarism”, Problems of World History, (20), pp. 7–26. doi: 10.46869/2707-6776-2022-20-1.
Section
Articles
Author Biography

V. Rozumyuk

Rozumyk Volodymyr – Ph.D. in Political Sciences, Senior Research Fellow, Leading Research Fellow of the State Institution “Institute of World History of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine”.

References

Kun, T. (1975). Struktura nauchnykh revolyutsiy [The structure of scientific revolutions]. Moskva: Progress. [In Russian].

Piter, L. Dzh. (1997). Zakon Merfi [Murphy’s Law]. Minsk: Popurri. [In Russian].

(1993). Totalitarizm: Chto eto takoye ? Issledovaniye zarubezhnykh politologov [Totalitarianism: What is it? Study of foreign political scientists.]. V 2-kh chastyakh. Moskva: RAN. [In Russian].

Sills, D.L. (eds), (1982). International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. London: Collier-MacMillan, Vol. 16. [In English].

(1970). The Encyclopedia Americana. International Edition. Americana corporation. Vol. 26. [In English].

Borkenau, F. (1939). The Totalitarian Enemy. London: Faber and Faber. [In English].

Khayyek, F. (1992). Doroga k rabstvu [Road to slavery]. Moskva: Ekonomika. [In Russian].

Popper, K. (1994). Vidkryte suspil’stvo ta yoho vorohy [The open society and its enemies]. V 2 tomakh. Kyiv: Osnovy. [In Ukrainian].

Arendt, H. (1966). The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt, Brace. [In English].

Friedrich, C.J. & Brzezinski, Zb. (1965). Totalitarian dictatorship and autocracy. Cambridge (Mass): Harvard University Press. [In English].

Friedrich, C.J. (1964). The Unique Character of Totalitarian Society. Totalitarism. Proceedings of a Conference Held at the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. March 1953. Cambridge (MA), pp. 94-123. [In English].

Shpeyer, A. (1997). Vospominaniya [Memories]. Smolensk: Rusich. [In Russian].

Friedrich, C.J. (1956). Totalitarianism. Cambridge (Mass). [In English].

Voslenskiy, M.S. (1991). Nomenklatura. Gospodstvuyushchiy klass Sovetskogo Soyuza [Nomenclature. The ruling class of the Soviet Union]. Moskva: Sovetskaya Rossiya, MP Oktyabr’. [In Russian].

Berdyayev, N. (1990). Istoki i smysl russkogo kommunizma [Origins and meaning of Russian communism]. Moskva: Nauka. [In Russian].

Moore, B. (1958). Political Power and Social Theory: Six Studies. Cambridge (Mass): Harvard university press. [In English].

Wittfogel, K. (1957). Oriental Despotism (a comparative study of total power). New Haven: Yale University Press. [In English].

Nol’te, E. (2001). Fashizm v yego epokhe [Fascism in his era]. Novosibirsk: Sibirskiy khronograf. [In Russian].

Fromm, E. (1990). Begstvo ot svobody [Escape from freedom]. Moskva: Progress. [In Russian].

Spiro, H.J. (1968). Totalitarianism. International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences. New York, Vol. 16, pp. 106-117. [In English].

Kara-Murza, A. (eds), (1989). Totalitarizm kak istoriko-kul’turnyy fenomen. Sbornik nauch. Rabot [Totalitarianism as a historical and cultural phenomenon.]. Moskva: AN SSSR. [In Russian].

(1978). Istoriya fashizma v Zapadnoy Yevrope [History of fascism in Western Europe]. Moskva: Nauka. [In Russian].

Markuze, G. (1994). Odnomernyy chelovek. Issledovaniye ideologii Razvitogo Industrial’nogo Obshchestva [One-dimensional man. Study of the ideology of the Advanced Industrial Society]. Moskva: REFL-book. [In Russian].

Aron, R. (1993). Demokratiya i totalitarizm [Democracy and totalitarianism]. Moskva: Tekst. [In Russian].

Sartori, G. (1976). Parties and party system. A framework for analysis. London: Cambridge University Press, Vol. 1. [In English].

Almond, G. & Powell, B. (1966). Comparative Politics: Developmental Approach. Boston: Little and Brown company. [In English].

Curtis, M. (1980). Totalitarism. London: New Brunswick. [In English].

Sartori, G. (1993). Totalitarianism, Model Mania and Learning from Error. Journal of Theoretical Politics, (5), 1, pp. 5-22. [In English].

Tormey, S. (1992). Making Sense of Tyranny: Interpretations of Totalitarianism. Manchester University Press. [In English].

Zhelev, Zh. (1991). Fashizm [Fascism]. Moskva: Novosti. [In Russian].

(1977). Bol’shaya Sovetskaya Entsiklopediya [Great Soviet Encyclopedia]. Moskva: Sovetskaya Entsiklopediya. [In Russian].

Tol’yatti, P.(1974). Lektsii o fashizme [Lectures on fascism]. Moskva: Politizdat. [In Russian].

(1986). Materialy ХХVІІ zʺyizdu Komunistychnoyi partiyi Radyans’koho Soyuzu. Kyiv: Vydavnytstvo politychnoyi literatury Ukrayiny. [In Ukrainian].