Totalitarianism and the open society

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

1

1

Vladimir State University named after Alexander Grigorievich and Nokolai Grigorievich Stoletovs

TOTALITARIANISM AND THE OPEN SOCIETY

Glukhareva A.A. - student,

T.I. Matayr - scientific supervisor

Abstract

The article considers the open society and the closed ratio. The data analysis is made on the basis of the work by Karl R. Popper “The Open Society and Its Enemies”. Totalitarianism is chosen as an example of the closed society personification.

Key words: Totalitarianism, the open society, Popper, dictator.

Аннотация

ТОТАЛИТАРИЗМ И ОТКРЫТОЕ ОБЩЕСТВО

Глухарева А.А. - студентка, Т.И. Матяр - научный руководитель, доцент

В данной статье автор рассматривает соотношение открытого и закрытого общества. Анализ данных феноменов проведен на основе работы К. Поппера «Открытое общество и его враги». В качестве примера олицетворения закрытого общества, выбран тоталитаризм.

Ключевые слова: тоталитаризм, открытое общество, Поппер, диктатор.

The main text

Henri-Louis Bergson was the first to divide societies into open and closed ones; we can find these ideas in his work "The Two Sources of Morality and Religion" written in 1932. Bergson understands the open society as the state tuned to development, whose dynamics is based on activities of the moral heroes and religion representatives. A closed society he identifies with the primitive one, pointing out to its excessive taboos. Thirteen years later, Karl Popper took on the development of the open society theory. The ideas of these philosophers generally agreed, however, on the issue Popper avoids religion and considers the secular society. In the first volume of his book "The Open Society and its Enemies", he denounces Plato's views; no coincidence the book was published under the poetic name "The Spell of Plato". In this work, Popper says that there are two types of society, the open society, whose defender he is, and the closed one, the supporters of which he denounces. According to the philosopher, the open society, values freedom and peace, it has been formed in the course of a society's long-term development and improvement, as a result of "deep and radical revolutions", such society's foundation are the laws, whose guarantor is its authorities. The closed society according to Popper is a throwback preserved from the tribalism times, its existence speaks of the state degradation, because when compared to the open society it is unsustainable, based on fear and irrational system of taboos. However, countries subjected to totalitarian influence, of course, are if not a certain rigor followers, then tend to maintain a "firm hand" policy. One can say that some countries are at bay, because at a certain stage of their development, under favorable social conditions, they will be forced to move to the closed type of society. In his judgment Popper starts out from his own worldview attitudes. He believes that history can not be predicted and that is why he so actively criticizes historicism, and totalitarian society, because they are inherently missionary. At the heart of totalitarianism there is some author's idea of a perfect state, be it a pure race domination world or a classless society, free from social inequality. The authors of these ideas are not just talking about the possibility of their implementation, but they give a society a choice - to cleanse the world of inferior races or perish / rise up to fight the rich, or die of hunger. They imagine that they are messiahs whose aim is to save the world, which is possible only through the implementation of their "scripts". This attitude seems irrational to Popper, he understands that inside this at first sight wonderful "fantasy" there is the destruction and annihilation of the old society, violence, total control killing individuality, as a humanist and philosopher Karl Popper could not accept all this. That's why in opposition to such closed society, he creates the open society theory, whose center is a person aware of his own responsibility for his every action.

Popper believes that the countries of the closed type will not be able to develop at the same level with open society countries; they are based on the utopia making them vulnerable to unpredictable time. Indeed the open society is a more flexible, which allows it to change the political course avoiding massive bloodsheds, whereas the government overthrow in the closed system requires the use of brute force. However, a deeper historical analysis shows us that the open, at that moment, Europe, in the face of Germany and Italy, has voluntarily chosen the path of totalitarianism, the fascists and the Nazis came to power by legal means, having the majority of votes. The closed society Russian Empire resisted the new totalitarian regime arrival and, in case it had won, the Soviet Union possibly would never have existed. An open society can be flexible, it is its strength and weakness at the same time, the same thing applies to closed societies, they are able to resist the regime change and thus save the country, but at the time of the necessary changes required for the society development, it can suppress them.

In the chapter "Aestheticism, utopianism, and the idea of perfection," the philosopher distinguishes two approaches to the state constructing - utopian and gradual (step-by-step) engineering. Their main differences are in the of problems solving methods, and even their regard - when the utopian engineering creates an ideal future state model, on the path to which it is ready to sacrifice everything and everyone, the step-by-step engineering, sees its task in the major challenges addressing, it aims at the citizens' lives facilitating and this attitude is able to really improve the situation here and now and not in the "near" future. Consequently, the state gradually eliminating its shortcomings, open, capable of perceiving a foreign culture and experience, built on humanistic laws, is in a much better position than the closed state permanently sacrificing something, moved by idйe fixe, with the monopolized power and the law enforcement lack. As a social engineering supporter Popper adheres to democratic views, believing that the history course depends on the person, but its change by means of radical methods is fraught with social disasters.

The social engineering is aimed at the search for better social problems solutions, it suggests the diversity of approaches and methods, while the utopian engineering operates only within its own attitudes, which excludes the possibility of change, because they are the only true path, and the history has already been predetermined. Popper rightly observes that an open democratic society based on laws, is a higher development stage, because people need to "grow" up to the responsibility. Government and society relations must change at the everyday level and not only at the legislative one. Today, even in democracies, some people retained an opinion that the authority representatives are masters, while today we must treat them as the people' servants. The totalitarian attitudes seem to be firmly entrenched in people's minds. However, in my opinion a closed type, in some cases, is the best option of the state preservation.

A totalitarian state is the most striking example of a closed society, the triumph of totalitarianism fell on the 20^th century, it can rightly be called the century of totalitarianism, the world turned upside down. The term "totalitarianism" comes from the late Latin words "totalitas", meaning completeness, integrity; and "totalis" signifying total, full, whole. The term was first introduced into the political vocabulary in 1926 by Giovanni Amendola for Benito Mussolini fascist regime criticism as striving to establish an absolute power over all society life aspects. This concept originally had a negative connotation, so no wonder that soon they began to use it in relation to the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. Researchers have always found some similarity between these three political regimes, but only united by the definition of totalitarianism they have turned into some uniform disaster. Mussolini tried to improve the situation and bring some positive features to totalitarianism, showing it as a way of achieving the national idea by means of merging the state, party and personality. For twenty-six years totalitarianism had a free interpretation there was not any strictly established terminology, everyone could understand this definition as he liked. Only in 1952, totalitarianism got its exact wording and now it has been fixed as a term. At a political symposium in the United States totalitarianism has been defined as "closed and fixed social, cultural and political structure in which every action from children upbringing to production and distribution of goods is directed and controlled from a single center." Totalitarianism inevitably leads to full authority control of the citizens, the state interferes with private affairs of all the people even those, having little to do with politics or not associated with it at all. The society is fully controlled by the government and the political system is almost impossible to change because government stifles opposition still at an early stage. The alternative impossibility makes the ruling party virtually invulnerable. Under such education system freethinking individuals upbringing is impossible, because from birth to death every individual is under the state supervision, he is shielded from everything that might "infect" him with an idea of rebellion.

Totalitarianism prerequisites emerge together with the state origin. Man is by his nature has always been striving for power; already in antiquity we encounter such phenomena as despotism and tyranny. Ancient Greece has contributed to the emergence of such tyrants as Pisistratus, Cypselus, Periander, etc; they made violence and lawlessness their power basis. In the ancient Rome dictatorship has been born. Originally, the word "dictator" did not have any negative connotations attributed to it today. In the ancient Rome, the word "dictator" meant a person selected by one of the consuls. His appointment was allowed only in case of emergency, for example, to eliminate the consequences of an unsuccessful war, or for solving neglected acute problems within the state. He had an absolute power, could veto the Senate's decision, his position united civil, military, legislative and judicial powers. The dictator rule term could not exceed six months; after this period expiration he was obliged to resign from the powers given to him, however even after his resignation he did not bear responsibility for the acts committed during the reign. According to historical records, the last republican dictatorship dates back to 220 BC. Rome gave such dictators as Sulla, Caesar, Octavian Augustus and Tiberius. Quite naturally the question arises, why in ancient times, when tyranny and dictatorship originated, no totalitarianism emerged; at least in a form we see it today? The answer is quite simple, at that time there were no possibilities for its development - the society was not enough technically developed. Totalitarianism, as it has been described above, assumes the total control of every citizen, and of course, it would have been impossible for the vast Roman Empire to control every single person. totalitarianism society popper open

Time for totalitarianism was ready in the 20^th century, when all the conditions for its emergence had been ripe. However, in my opinion, totalitarianism is a phenomenon hiding some permanent nature, which does not change under the epoch conditions. In totalitarianism as a political term, one must see its essence. The claim that totalitarian states appeared and disappeared in the fateful twentieth century, can be a fatal mistake for the humanity. The totalitarianism evil roots are in the denial of the identity and liberty; so philosophical analysis allows us to assume that totalitarianism has neither space nor time frames. It varies depending on the age, "keeps up with the times", changes its "face" beyond recognition; to forget about it and leave it in the last century, will be the first step come under its spell.

References

1. Бергсон А. Два источника морали и религии / пер.с фр. А.Б. Гофман - М.: «Канон», 1994. 384 С.

2. The Open Society and Its Enemies. Complete: Volumes I and II. Karl R. Popper. 1962. Fifth edition (revised). 1966. ISBN 0-691-01968-1, 0-691-01972-Xhttps://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jksadegh/.

3. Сухарев А. Большой юридический словарь. 2005 URL: http://determiner.ru/dictionary/201/word/diktator Справочно-информационный интернетпортал НЭС.

4. Totalitarianism and political religions: Concepts for the comparison of dictatorships / ed. By H. Mayer; tr. by J. Bruhn (germ.). N. Y.: Routledge, 2004, 439 p.

5. Totalitarianism. Proceedings of a Conference Held at the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. March 1953. Cambridge: Mass, 1954. Р. 38.

6. Шанин А.А. Новый тоталитаризм (обзор классических трактовок тоталитаризма с позиции современности) // Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 9: Исследования молодых ученых Выпуск № 6 / 2007 - 90-92 С. 90 с.

Размещено на Allbest.ru