Totalitarianism as a Social issue in America Today

The most fundamental feature of totalitarianism in America today is the attempt to substitute non-economic satisfactions of rewards as the basis for the rank, function, and position of the individual in industrial society as economic policies. These satisfactions have in themselves no economic value at all, but they are powerful symbols of social position.

The non-economic financial society constitutes a social miracle, which makes possible and sensible for the maintenance of the economic system, and therefore an economically unequal capitalist system of industrial production is being replaced.

Has it become impossible to continue the capitalist system of production as an economic society?

If it was equally impossible to replace it by something else?

Is the answer a capitalist recovery or socialist revolution?

IS TOTALITARIAISM AS A NON-ECONOMIC SOCIETY THE ANSWER?

As history has told us, Mussolini did not find himself confronted with this problem until 1934, although there had been a "totalitarian" faction in his party ever since 1925.

However in 1934, Italy, like Germany, had to find a social formula which maintains the forms and production methods of industrial society while eliminating the economic basis.

It becomes clear, in the first place, to ask the question; which social class put fascism into power in Italy and Germany?

No single class can have put fascism into power. But a few ruthless industrialists backed Hitler and Mussolini is as near to the truth as that the masses backed them.

Both were necessarily supported by a minority of all classes.

Mussolini had more capitalist support than Hitler; yet for many years he had to fight the most powerful combination of Italian capitalists, headed by Toeplitz of the dominant Banca Commerciale and comprising the large industrial corporations affiliated with that bank.

Hitler did have the great majority of industrialists and bankers against him until late in 1932, when his success as Chancellor seemed practically assured then onward it became a matter of prudence to contribute to his funds by individually powerful industrialists like Thyssen or Kirdorf, in the same way in which industry had contributed to Socialist funds in the early twenties without ever supporting the Socialists.

The majority of industrialists opposed Nazism, but the really decisive backing came from sections of the lower middle classes, the farmers, and the working class, who were hardest hit by the demonic economic nature of business and by the irrationality of society.

Secondly, is the question whether totalitarianism is a capitalist or socialist society.

It is, of course, neither.

Totalitarianism seeks a society beyond socialism and capitalism that is not based upon economic considerations.

Its only economic interest is to keep the machinery of industrial production in good working order. At whose expense and benefit comes from subsidies, new investments, and depreciation.

Totalitarianism may be beneficial even if the economic losses arising from the higher costs and the inferior quality of industrial products outweighs the savings in imports in terms of money.

But it might also be permanent, in which case the import problem becomes economically insoluble. Even if the failure of substitute industries to become economically beneficial is only temporary, the disturbance created thereby is a very serious matter.

This holds true of any managed consumption economy in a country that does not start practically self-sufficient, as Russia did.

It applies doubly to America that concentrates on armaments as capital goods investments. Armaments since World War II has always been a subsidiary question; for economic consequences are entirely incidental to the main social task.

Totalitarianism is a social revolution but not socialist; it maintains the industrial system but it not as capitalist.

Capitalism as an American society ended in the 1900’s, this was followed by the production society, followed by the management society and now America is in the knowledge society.

The comparison of the body politic to a human body always served to stress the equal economic function and equal economic importance of the various classes in order to justify an existing noneconomic social inequality.

The question is which one will survive in America?

Mr. Martin Chekel, a noted international businessman and author of the thought provoking “Managing America” six book series and the retrospective eight book series “The Diary of American Foreign Policy 1938 – 1945” that laid the foundation for US foreign policy the past seventy-four years.