Totalitarianism: What, Exactly, Does It Mean? 

“The essential characteristic of totalitarian governments is that 100% of the population lies 100% of the time.”

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson 

That’s what Dr. Jordan B. Peterson said in this interview. (Or something like that.)

He was speaking about the culture war that has been raging in the past six years, spearheaded by the Black Lives Matter and MeToo movements. And how, since then, the battle has shifted from arguments about competing ideas that are indisputably true (i.e., Black Lives Matter and All Lives Matter) to ideas that are indisputably false (i.e., Slavery Is the Invention of White Men and Men Can Have Babies). And he was saying that this drift towards “telling and believing lies” was and is a symptom of a culture that is drifting towards totalitarianism.

When his interlocutor challenged him on this assertion, he doubled down on it, saying that in a totalitarian state, 100% of the people lie 100% of the time.

100% of the population 100% of the time?

That sounded to me like intentional hyperbole. But Peterson isn’t the sort of person that typically exaggerates his claims. He has achieved prominence as a public intellectual by knowing the facts and making thoughtful and measured statements. On top of that, he has spent years studying political and social ideologies.

Totalitarian and totalitarianism are words one hears all the time today. What’s interesting about them is that they are used by people on both sides of the aisle to negate and, if possible, cancel their opponents. (This is also true for the word fascism, which perhaps we’ll investigate in a future blog post.)

And since there is a good chance these words will keep popping up in future conversations, I thought I should spend some time trying to understand what they really mean.

First, a bit of word history…

The word “totalitarianism” dates to the fascist era of the 1920s and 1930s. The lexicographers say it was first used by Italian political theorists, including Giovanni Gentile in Italy and Carl Schmitt in Germany, to refer to Mussolini’s rule. And the little history I’ve read on the subject says that Mussolini’s ideas were based on right-wing utopian ideas of how countries should be run. So, put one check in the right-wing box as a descriptor of totalitarianism.

But the word was next picked up to describe the rule of communism in Russia, especially under Joseph Stalin. The intellectual validation for totalitarianism came from Lenin through Marx and then Stalin, where it came to mean (and to justify) a fully developed communist ideology, using Marx’s phrase, “the dictatorship of the proletariat” to mean the dictatorship of the Soviet Communist Party.

It was also used to describe the governments of Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler (1933–45) and China under Mao Zedong (1949–76). Not to mention these.

Currently, the Kim dynasty in North Korea and the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (from 2021) can reasonably be described as “totalitarian.”

A definition… 

What this boils down to, for me, is that the word can be fairly used to describe governments from either side of the left-right political divide. The key phoneme here is total. You can find dozens of definitions of the word online, but Wikipedia’s is as good as the rest:

“Totalitarianism is a form of government and a political system that prohibits all opposition parties, outlaws individual and group opposition to the state and its claims, and exercises an extremely high if not complete degree of control… over public and private life.”

That definition is unlikely to be debated. The only debatable issue is how much control a government must exert to earn the descriptor “totalitarian.”

Based on my research, here are nine characteristics to be considered when determining whether any government is totalitarian:

Characteristics of totalitarianism… 

1. total single-party rule
2. state-controlled communication
3. widespread oppression
4. police-directed terror
5. utopian vision
6. enforcement of state-dictated ideologies
7. mobilization against enemies
8. self-aggrandizing leadership
9. a controlled economy

You might wonder about #5. How can governments that tortured and killed millions be said to have been based on a utopian vision?

As an ideology, totalitarianism can be linked to a variety of perennial values and intellectual commitments. The best-known example is Plato’s Republic, which promoted a caste-based society in which both social and moral order are to be maintained and fostered through strict political control and eugenics.

For much more about the history and philosophy of totalitarianism, click here.

The COVID Response: What We Got Wrong

Moderna and Its Investors Made Billions Selling a Fake Vaccine 

I’ve been critical of our government’s handling of the COVID epidemic since the beginning. And I think every criticism I had in year one was validated when the facts came in.

I was reluctant to criticize the vaccines, but I was reading a lot of smart people (and talking to some, too) that were very critical of them from the start. And as it turned out, they did not do what Fauci and the government health establishment said they would do. They did not give us immunity from catching COVID. Nor did they keep us from spreading it.

As for the claim that they lessened the symptoms, I am doubtful. There is no scientifically valid way of determining whether or not it was true. And we know that even before the vaccines, the symptoms ranged from mild to terrible.

In looking at the research and the arguments that drew from them, I often encountered accusations from critics that the entire overreaction to COVID by the government and the media was purposeful and planned by the drug companies that made the vaccines and supported by their advertising. (Which paid for lots of commercials and research subsidies.)

So, now I’m starting to think that, yes, this huge overreaction could have been the work of Big Pharma – which, by the way, made billions from it.

Here’s one little piece on this.

The COVID Response: What We Got Wrong

Have Your Ears Been Ringing?

For as long as the COVID vaccines have been available, the CDC has received some complaints about ear-related problems. In a recent study, researchers reviewed 500 cases of screened patients and found that 61 of them (14.5 %) had reported one or more ear or hearing-related symptoms within four weeks of vaccination. That included 21 (5.0 %) with hearing loss, 26 (6.2 %) with tinnitus, 33 (7.9 %) with dizziness, and 19 (4.5 %) with vertigo.

“Self-defense is not just a set of techniques; it’s a state of mind, and it begins with the belief that you are worth defending.” – Rorion Gracie

The COVID Response: What We Got Wrong.

The Impact of Vaccines on Mortality 

A large meta study of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reported by vaccine manufacturers found that the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines did not impact overall mortality.

As reported in the latest issue of the journal iScience, the two vaccines, both based on messenger RNA (mRNA) technology, protected against deaths from COVID-19. But that effect was offset by vaccinated trial participants being more likely to die from cardiovascular problems.

“In the RCTs with the longest possible blinded follow-up, mRNA vaccines had no effect on overall mortality despite protecting against some COVID-19 deaths. On the other hand, the adenovirus-vector vaccines were associated with lower overall mortality,” the researchers said.

The researchers compared the overall deaths in the vaccinated groups with the placebo groups. They also broke deaths down into different categories: those attributed to COVID-19, to cardiovascular problems, to other non-COVID-19 causes, to accidents, and to non-accident, non-COVID-19 causes.

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, they found, were associated with lower COVID-19 mortality but higher cardiovascular and non-accident, non-COVID-19 mortality. There was no difference in overall mortality between the vaccinated and the placebo groups.

The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was associated with lower overall mortality and with lower non-COVID-19 mortality, with no effect on COVID-19 mortality. AstraZeneca’s shot, never authorized in the US but cleared in some other countries, performed well against overall mortality and other categories across several trials, except for one trial where slightly more vaccinated people died from non-COVID causes or non-accident, non-COVID-19 causes.

Interesting: The study was published ahead of peer review in 2022, but the authors struggled to find a journal that would accept the paper. Several rejected it without explaining why, causing a delay in publication.

Read more here.

The COVID Response: What We Got Wrong.

Another Validated Side Effect of the Vaccines 

JM, one of my trainers and physical therapists, sent me the link below on a study about the relationship between COVID vaccines and the incidence of retinal vascular occlusion (RVO).

RVO is basically what I had prior to my stroke. It is a malfunction of the retina due to a reduction in blood flow from a vein or artery that connects the heart to the eyes. Though it can be caused by many factors, health officials noted a significant rise in cases since the vaccine mandate for COVID.

Initially, the US government and the manufacturers of the vaccines denied the possibility of a connection. To determine the truth, NPJ Vaccines, a research and publishing group that studies vaccines, did an extensive review of all the available data. After looking at the results of several large studies and adjusting for variables, they calculated that vaccinated individuals have a “significantly” higher risk of experiencing RVO than unvaccinated people.”

Check out the full report here.

The COVID Response: What We Got Wrong.

The Craziest Part of the Propaganda 

As I hope you know by now, virtually every important statement that Fauci and crew told the press in 2020, 2021, and 2022 about COVID, including its origins, its infectiousness, and its deadliness, was false.

What irks me is that anyone with a touch of curiosity and modicum of common sense should have realized from the very beginning that the “facts” being reported could not possibly have been correct.

I explained all that way back at the beginning of the COVID scare. Even with the smattering of information we were given, it was easy to understand that the logic they were using was false and the arithmetic was impossibly wrong.

Looking back at those falsehoods now, it is clear that the greatest and most obviously intentional was the decision to exaggerate the mortality rate (by a factor of seven to nine times!) by instructing hospitals and doctors on how to report the deaths.

I must have mentioned this a dozen times in my blog. And every time I did, I expected to hear back from someone explaining why what I was saying was wrong. But that never happened. I was never challenged because, incredibly, it was true!

What am I talking about? The CDC mandate to classify anyone that died with COVID as having died from COVID.

Here’s a doctor explaining how he felt when he first got the directive.

The COVID Response: Are Vaccines Bad for the Brain? Or Is This Another Conspiracy Theory? 

One of the claims made against COVID vaccination is that it can cause a variety of mild to deadly brain problems.

I’ve already suffered three of the possible side effects. I had an ischemic stroke, an optic nerve problem, and hand tremors. (Which can be manifestations of MS.) And while I want to believe that they were caused by other things (smoking, inflammation, etc.), I have to recognize that they all manifested themselves after I got my mRNA vaccinations.

I’m not scared. And I’m not trying to scare you. But if you’ve had your shots and are experiencing any of the above – or other – symptoms (I know three people that recently came down with tinnitus), you may want to educate yourself on the arguments. Pro and con.

I’ve been reading bits and pieces on this subject since I first heard about it. Recently, I found this rather in-depth (for a layman) essay written by Colleen Huber. I know nothing about her. I’m recommending her essay because she doesn’t sound like a nut. She sounds like she understands what she’s saying. And because, although the content is somewhat technical, I was able to understand it pretty easily.

Click here.

Good Cop, Bad Cop

Do We Need Stop-and-ID Laws?

Stop-and-frisk was a policy that was ruled legal in 1968. In Terry vs. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled to allow police officers the flexibility to temporarily detain and search anyone they suspected of doing something illegal. However, in 2015, the Court put additional limits to the policy, saying that the police are not allowed to investigate civilians for any crime other than the one the citizen was detained for. If you’re stopped for a traffic violation, for example, cops can’t have a police dog check you or your car for evidence of drugs. Nor can they detain you longer than it takes to write you a ticket.

Because of the abuse of the “Terry” law, stop-and-frisk policies went largely out of practice. But some legal experts began saying that not only do cops not have the right to frisk you without a reasonable suspicion you’ve committed a crime, they can’t even demand to see your ID.

I mentioned police bullying tactics in my April 7 blog. Since then, I’ve been watching more of these stops on YouTube, and I see now that it’s a complicated situation.

Click here for an example of a “bad cop” approach.

Click here for an example of a “good cop” approach.

In the “bad cop” example, the cop begins politely. But the moment the “suspect” refuses to give his ID, the cop gets angry and loses control. He is so far gone that he either doesn’t hear or doesn’t listen to the suspect’s excuse for being there, and proceeds to assault the man in order to cuff him. What he did resulted in a $5 million lawsuit. And because it was taped by the officer’s camera, it is admissible as evidence. Which means that his response to this situation will cost his department money and may cost him his job.

In the “good cop” example, the officer understands the legal limits of what he can do. (It’s not illegal to look suspicious.) So, while we can applaud him for acting both politely and legally, we can also empathize with how frustrated he must feel in that he can’t do what he was called on to do – which is to find out if this guy is up to no good.

On the one hand, I think Fourth Amendment protection is essential and must be respected. On the other hand, I can see how, if refusing to provide IDs becomes the norm, the course of police work will be difficult. Eventually, if refusing to produce IDs in such situations becomes commonplace, cops will stop responding to calls about suspicious people. 911 operators will inform callers that police can be dispatched only if an actual crime is witnessed.

The COVID Response: What We got Wrong.

Have You Heard of Project Next Gen? 

Project Next Gen is a $5 billion government program advertised as “accelerating the development of new coronavirus vaccines and treatments, seeking to better protect against a still-mutating virus, as well as other coronaviruses that might threaten us in the future.”

The idea, they say, was inspired by Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed” that rushed vaccines to the market in 2020. In this case, the Biden administration is “partnering” with private-sector pharmacological companies to “keep ahead of” coming mutations.

“It’s been very clear to us that the market on this is moving very slowly,” Ashish Jha, the White House coronavirus coordinator, said. “There’s a lot that government can do, the administration can do, to speed up those tools… for the American people.”

(Translation: “We sold hundreds of millions of shots when they were mandatory. Now that they are not, all these damn skeptics are crashing sales. This project should allow us to make gobs of money the next time the mandates roll around.”)