Re: CHAT: totalitarianism [was Re: Sexual terminology]

Thomas R. Wier wrote:


> Note that you have only proven that states can become less
> compelling, not that there is a fundamental distinction between
> one type of government or another.  Surely you would not claim
> that when the United States *did* enforce this requirement
> that the United States was not at the same time some kind of
> liberal democracy, would you?

No, I had no such thought in mind.  I do continue to believe,
however, that there is a fundamental distinction between rule
by an individual or a clique on the one hand, and rule by
a movement on the other.  Nazism was dangerous not because it
was the rule of Adolf Hitler, but because it was the rule
of Nobody, and when Nobody is responsible, then things like
the bureaucracy of murder become not only possible, but
seemingly inevitable.

--
Not to perambulate             || John Cowan <jcowan@...>
    the corridors               || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose     || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    in the boots of ascension.  \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel

Reply