The concept of a totalitarian state was an invention of the twentieth century. The notion of a state or nation whose government could control virtually all aspects of its citizens lives was not conceivable in prior times. It is certainly true that in monarchies throughout history the average subject had little capability to individually alter his finances geographical mobility or political status. But the monarchs reach into the personal life of his subjects was largely restricted to the upper aristocratic coterie that surrounded him. Tradition religion ethnic constraints and geographical proximity were far more influential in determining the beliefs and behavior of the average subject than were the machinations of the king.
However in a modern totalitarian state technology advanced communications and sophisticated surveillance techniques endow a relatively small ruling class with much more extensive powers. In the totalitarian state the government completely controls the political economic social and cultural life of almost all its citizens. Such a level of control has actually only been achieved in two twentieth century nations: Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Although strongly authoritarian heavily centralized and equally war-like Imperial Japan wasnt really a totalitarian state in the same sense as the other two. The lives of its citizens were determined more by rigid cultural and religious rules than by the exhortations of the Emperor and his court. There were also a few mini totalitarian states in the last century for example: Albania perhaps Burma and a few wannabees (Nicaragua Belarus). But Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia are really the only examples of major nations that qualify as totalitarian states.
As is well-known the rulers of such nations have an appetite for control that cannot be sated only by its own citizens. The urge to conquer other nations is overwhelming. And alas the history of the two twentieth century totalitarian regimes is replete with invasion mass murder concentration camps gulags occupations and unimaginable barbarism. It is to the eternal credit of the United States that it refused to be cowed by these murderous regimes led international coalitions to combat them and in the words of Ronald Reagan dispatched them to the ash heap of history.
But to the sorrow of the civilized world the twenty first century seems to have coughed up a third major totalitarian system Islamism or radical Islam. There is absolutely no question that the sponsors of this ideology have in mind a totalitarian system for all regions in which that ideology will rule. It may be that the prime motivating factor in this third case is religion unlike Nazism in which it was race or
volk; or Communism in which it was economic or class. Nevertheless according to the self-professed intentions of the Jihadists who espouse Islamism the goal is to create a society ruled absolutely by Sharia Law. Based on prior experience in Afghanistan and those few despoiled spots in the Middle East (Iraq Syria) and Africa (Sudan parts of Mali) where rule by Sharia Law has been implemented one must conclude that it is a political system which seeks to control all aspects of the lives of those under its domain. Ergo a totalitarian system.
However there is a major difference between radical Islam as it is developing and Nazism and Communism as they existed. While in all three cases the goal was/is worldwide domination; in the twentieth century variety the focal point for the system and the font from which all the branches were directed was a single nation state. That is far from the case with radical Islam. For the latter we are witnessing far-flung eruptions like pimples on an ugly face all over Africa and Asia (with tentacles all over the world). Although they are only loosely aligned with each other each is guided by the same ideology and employs the same tactics. All seek to create a worldwide totalitarian system based on radical Islam that would totally dominate the lives of all who live under it.
Here is a
partial list of the blemishes: Al Qaeda (AQ) AQ in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) AQ in the Maghreb (AQIM) Islamic State Hamas Hezbollah Islamic Jihad Boko Haram Abbu Sayyaf Al Shabaab Jabhat al Nusra Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Taliban. Breathtaking! The cancer is metastasizing all over the world and new mutations spring up regularly. Incidentally some would add the state of Iran to the list.
The West in general and the Unites States in particular are now confronted by a lethal threat from this metastasizing totalitarian system. The systems adherents in every case have declared that the West and the US are indeed the mortal enemies of Islam and that the peoples of those entities must be converted or killed. That is not a negotiating positon on their part. It is their hardcore belief one on which they have acted and on which they promise to continue acting. We in the US (and in the West) do not have the luxury of dismissing their intentions as ludicrous and not worthy of our attention. They have declared war on us and even if we pretend it is not so it does not change the fact that we are in their crosshairs.
Part of the reason that we have not taken the threat with the seriousness that it warrants is indeed the diffuse nature of the enemy. There is no single nation state that is its chief sponsor and upon which we might concentrate any ire that we could work up. (Again some consider Iran to be a candidate although we are extremely reluctant to confront them as such.) Another reason is the fatigue we feel first from our two heroic struggles to overcome the twentieth century totalitarian systems; and second from our halting and unsuccessful efforts to engage the Jihadists in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last decade. But I think the main reason is that since the threat emerged (roughly 20 years ago) all of our leaders (Clinton Bush Obama) have been loath to identify it for what it is. They tell us that Islam is a religion of peace and that the practitioners of Jihad are a small minority that has hijacked the religion. In fact there is no objective evidence for that claim and much to support its refutation. Moreover I doubt that our leaders believe their own words. Instead the emergence of the third totalitarian threat does not conform to their vision of the twenty first century as the West foresaw it developing following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Another totalitarian monster? No way! Been there done that. Its so twentieth century. The eruption of radical Islam just doesnt square with the end of history theme to which they subscribe and so Islamism must be a passing or insignificant trend that does not command the attention resources and drive required of us that were needed to combat the evils of the twentieth century. The West just doesnt want to go down that road again.
And so we call Jihad in Fort Hood workplace violence; we refer to terrorist actions against us in the homeland as man-caused disasters; and we label the limited sorties against the Jihadists that we have permitted ourselves overseas contingency operations. We strive mightily to fool ourselves so as not to recognize that for a third time a brutal and murderous totalitarian system has emerged to threaten the civilized world and that if we dont confront and destroy it the fate of mankind is bleak indeed.
But we are not fooling anyone. Islamism is indeed a totalitarian system. The way it has emerged and the nature of its existence differs from those of Nazism or Communism. That should not prevent us from a clear evaluation of its nature and the threat that it poses. We defeated Nazism by building and deploying a mighty military force that bludgeoned the Nazis into submission. We defeated Communism by building a mighty economy and social engine that exposed the hollow and false nature of Communist ideology so that the Soviet Union collapsed on its own. We clearly have not settled on a strategy for confronting and defeating Islamism. It might be that we havent even begun looking for one. But we better get busy. The Islamists are coming for us. For them its a fight to the death. The sooner we recognize that the sooner we can get to work arranging for their death.
Ron Lipsman Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at the University of Maryland writes about politics culture education science and sports at http://ronlipsman.com.
Follow him on Twitter @rlipsman
This essay also appeared in
Canada Free Press
