Skip Navigation
21 comments
  • The people in charge want to have complete control over everything, for their own benefit. They don't want to have to see anything they don't like. They don't want to have to interact with people they don't like. They want all of their citizens to have to do their bidding, either directly or indirectly, in order to survive. They don't want any outside "interference" or inside opposition. They want to wield this power for their entire lives, and handpick the person who replaces them at their death. Basically, look at North Korea.

    The actual endgame of a totalitarian country is inevitably collapse, though; every totalitarian regime has either fallen or is in the process of falling. Corruption and massive wealth inequalities always result in revolution. Repressive legal codes always produce martyrs to rally behind. Social oppression and persecution often end up with outside countries invading to depose the fascists; and if they don't, the purity tests get more and more specific until everyone is "out," leading to large enough blocs to challenge the leadership. The only way that any totalitarian leadership has ever avoided the deadly consequences of their fascism is by voluntarily (or, uh..."voluntarily") giving up some power in exchange for their lives.

    Historically, the only truly stable countries are ones that allow their people a significant amount of financial, social, and legal freedom and security.

  • Power for the people in charge, and a combination of enforced stratification of society (with those who support the regime on top of course) and reduced status for, the removal of, or outright sanctioned violence against the people upon whom all of society's ills are blamed.

  • I think it starts as a means for making money and getting power and continues because those involved know that if they give up power they're in deep trouble.

  • north korea: empower a few, enslave the rest, never be challenged for generations

21 comments