Before our very eyes, neo-totalitarianism of the 21st century is acquiring final features. Neo-totalitarian regimes and ideologies are quite different from their totalitarian predecessors.
All the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, and primarily the Stalinist USSR, proceeded from the idea of their absolute superiority over the West and were determined to conquer it.
The neototalitarian regimes of the beginning of the 21st century exist on the fact that they export raw materials to the West and import everything else. Accordingly, they are not going to conquer the West. Otherwise, they will have nowhere to buy iPhones and no one will finish their toilet bowls with gold. Their warlike rhetoric is not a preparation for war, but simply a way to plunge their people into an abyss of paranoia.
Accordingly, all these states, para-states and ideologies, whether it be Venezuela, Iran, the "Congress of Islamic Courts", Salafists or "Nashists", do not proclaim technological superiority over the West. They proclaim their moral superiority over him. They don't say, "Our science and economics are better." They say: "They are richer, but we are more spiritual."
This is a psychologically more stable position. When a person living in Khrushchev is shown an American house and told: “Our system is more progressive,” he experiences cognitive dissonance. When an alcoholic who beats his wife and regularly rapes his stepdaughter is told: “But you are more spiritual,” he does not experience any cognitive dissonance. There is nothing an alcoholic, loser, or sociopath wants more than to feel "highly spiritual and misunderstood."
If the totalitarian ideology was the ideology of the winners, then the neototalitarian ideology is the ideology of the losers. "These infidels blow themselves up to compromise our peaceful Islam." "All the troubles of our Zimbabwe come from the fact that the colonialists again dream of bringing her to her knees." “Russia is surrounded by fascists, and self-defense forces are operating in Crimea,” is the psychology of losers and sociopaths. Any sociopaths consider themselves skilled manipulators and those who are not amenable to manipulation are considered as enemies.
The old totalitarian regimes forbade emigration. They needed brains inside the country to create new technologies. Neo-totalitarian regimes encourage emigration. To everyone who is afraid that the Kremlin will close the borders now, don't be afraid, they won't. The more thinking people leave Russia, the better for the Kremlin. The neo-totalitarian regime works like a giant rectification column - the light, intellectual fractions of the population fly away abroad, viscous black fuel oil collects below: lumpen, officials and security forces, the support of the regime - those who firmly believe that there are enemies all around.
Classical totalitarian regimes relied on the most powerful repressive apparatus. Neo-totalitarian regimes rely on democratic majorities.
This is a fundamental difference. In Soviet times, dissidents (and the KGB) believed that it was enough to convey the truth to the majority and the regime would collapse. If everyone reads The Gulag Archipelago, then everyone will.
The neo-totalitarian authorities understood a simple truth. In today's society, just like a thousand years ago, only a minority is free, alas.
If you tell the majority on TV that the sun revolves around the Earth, then the majority will believe it. Moreover, even without any TV, 36% of Russians think so. If the majority is told on TV that genes are found only in genetically modified products, and there are no genes in ordinary products, then the majority will also believe this, especially since the same 36% of the population think so even without TV. If we hire the Goreslavskys and Dmitry Kiselevs to say that Putin personally stopped the sun, and, accordingly, those who say that this is impossible and that the Earth revolves around the sun are agents of the damned West, then the majority of the population without any coercion and violence believe in it.
Do you want democracy? Did you want universal suffrage? Do you want to hear the voice of the people? Please sign for receipt. So what if the Gulag Archipelago is in the public domain if the majority never reads it?
We cannot yet predict the degree of stability of neo-totalitarian regimes. The old totalitarian regimes ended up being unsustainable because they needed a highly educated elite to function, who saw that ideology was at odds with reality. I draw your attention to the fact that it was the elite who saw it. A worker at a worsted factory in Ivanovo knew from TV that blacks were being lynched in the United States, and she did not experience any cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance arose among the elite.
Neototalitarian regimes are characterized primarily by the fact that they do not have an elite. They have a top. They have friends of the leader. These are people of an extremely low intellectual level who, through chance acquaintances or negative selection, have gained access to the administrative resource and the golden loaf, and who profess the same values that they teach to the lumpen. They don't have cognitive dissonance.
As a consequence, neo-totalitarian regimes can be extremely resilient. For example, Robert Mugabe has ruled Zimbabwe for 23 years. During this time, the country's GDP fell three and a half times (and this despite the fact that the population grew from 7 million to 12), but nothing threatens Mugabe's power: in 2013, he really won the next election. The elite has left, and those who remain are well aware that all their troubles stem from the intrigues of the accursed West, from the enslavement of which only the leader and teacher Mugabe saves the country.
Neototalitarian ideology is aimed primarily at washing out the elite from society. Anyone - scientific, entrepreneurial, intellectual, managerial, because the elite are those who need to think.