Skip to main content

Abstract

One of Carl J. Friedrich’s major contributions to the study of politics1 has been to systematize the concept of totalitarianism. His work in this field has been both pioneering and rigorous. It has helped to give the term “totalitarianism” a degree of precision previously lacking, thereby making it a meaningful category of political analysis and not merely a term of political opprobrium.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carl J. Friedrich, (ed.), Totalitarianism, Cambridge, Mass., 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Carl J. Friedrich and Zbigniew Brzezinski, Totalitarian Dictatorship and Autocracy, Cambridge, Mass., 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Robert Tucker, “Towards a Comparative Politics of Movement-Regimes,” American Political Science Review, Vol. LV, No. 2, June 1961; Alfred G. Meyer, The Soviet Political System, New York, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Benjamin R. Barber, “Conceptual Foundations of Totalitarianism,” in Carl J. Friedrich, Michael Curtis and Benjamin R. Barber, Totalitarianism in Perspective, New York, 1969, pp. 37–38.1 do not deal with the trivial objection that the concept of totalitarianism was a Cold War invention; if that is the case, then objection to the concept can be similarly represented as ideologically and politically motivated. Neither the former nor the latter has much to do with the analytical usefulness of the concept.

    Google Scholar 

  5. For a discussion of the difference between the instrumental and ideological (revolutionary) political systems, see Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel P. Huntington, Political Power: USA/USSR, New York, 1964. chapter 2.

    Google Scholar 

  6. This is the theme of a remarkable document submitted to the top Soviet leadership by three distinguished Soviet scientists. Academician A. D. Sakharov, Professor V. F. Turchin and Professor R. A. Medvedev, on March 19, 1970, and published in the New York Times, April 3, 1970, p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Note, for example, Brezhnev’s unpublished speech to the Party’s Central Committee on December 15, 1969 as well as a Pravda editorial published in January 1970 on economic shortcomings (“Responsibility and Discipline”, Pravda, January 10, 1970); see also an earlier Central Committee “Resolution to Spur Scientific Research and Development,” (Current Digest of the Soviet Press, Vol. XX, No. 43, November 13, 1968, pp. 3–6 ).

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. Rakowski, Nowe Drogi, No. 3, 1970, p. 22.

    Google Scholar 

  9. On the conservatism of the Soviet managerial elite, see Jeremy Azrael, Managerial Power and Soviet Politics, Cambridge, Mass., 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  10. In Quest of Justice, Problems of Communism, Part I, July-August 1968, Part II, September-October 1968, Vol. XVII, Nos. 4 and 5; also Abraham Brumberg, In Quest of Justice: Protest and Dissent in the Soviet Union Today, New York, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  11. As of this writing, at least twelve issues of Khronika Tekushchikh Sobytii (Chronicle of Current Affairs) have appeared, with each issue containing a great deal of information on political opposition, underground publications, and repressive actions by the government. In addition, some remarkable manuscripts have been prepared, outstanding among them Professor Zhores A. Medvedev’s The Rise and Fall of T. D. Lysenko, New York, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  12. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn put it: “Even in lawlessness, in crime, one must remember the line beyond which a man becomes a cannibal. It is short-sighted to think that you can live, constantly relying on force alone, constantly scorning the objections of conscience,” (as cited in The New York Times, June 17,1970).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Zbigniew Byrski, “The Communist ‘Middle Class’ in the USSR and Poland,” Survey, Autumn 1969, No. 3, pp. 80–92.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Yaroslav Bilinsky, “The Soviet Education Laws of 1958–59 and Soviet Nationality Policy,” Soviet Studies, Vol. XIV, October 1962, pp. 138–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. On the discussion of needed balance between the two, see Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, New Haven, Conn., 1968.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Klaus Von Beyme

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1971 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brzezinski, Z. (1971). Dysfunctional Totalitarianism. In: Von Beyme, K. (eds) Theory and Politics/Theorie und Politik. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2750-2_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2750-2_20

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-2752-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-2750-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics