The left rationalizes that a totalitarian rule is necessary to achieve the utopian world they envision. A totalitarian regime ruled by “decent” people, for the “good” of the whole, is the only way to survive. What folly – the creation of a totalitarian regime would demand the suppression of freedom in order to exist.
It is human nature for people to be drawn to a party or a cause or a politician that “seems” to possess strength to “get things done,” who exercises the greatest appeal to those with an axe to grind or those unwilling to become productive members of society. Yet, under a totalitarian rule, this political party, person or cause becomes not our savior, it becomes our greatest enemy.
There is no doubt that a totalitarian Fascist system in America would differ greatly from say Hitler or Stalin’s regimes but judged on the world’s historical past, an American Fascist rule would, in the end, prove no different or less intolerable than its prototypes.
That such a system could be put into practice without the destruction of our current Constitutional government is a lie. There is no such entity as a fascist Republic, no elected representatives, no Congress or Judicial system to speak of. For a fascist system to exist, a potential dictator must weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters, the docile and gullible of society who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to blindly follow.
It is easier for people to agree on the negative, on the hatred of an enemy, or on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the “we” and the “they,” the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidify a group for common action. From the left’s point of view, this “creed” gives them the greater advantage.
When a government is placed above the individual, only those individuals who work for the same ends can be regarded as members of the community. Anyone who disagrees or has individual ideas becomes an enemy of the state. There can be no place for them in a collectivist system of thought.
The moral basis of collectivism has long been debated but, what should concern all Americans is not its moral basis but its moral results. Collectivism on a world scale seems unthinkable except in the service of the ruling elite. What true socialist would contemplate the equal division of existing capital resources among the peasants when they regard capital resources as not belonging to humanity but to the ruling elite?
The fascist principle that the “end” justifies the “means” becomes the supreme rule. There is literally nothing followers must not be prepared to do if it serves “the good of the whole,” because the “good of the whole” is the only criterion that must matter.
Since it is the supreme ruler who alone determines the “end” the peasants must have no moral convictions of their own; no ideals of their own which they want to realize; no ideas about right or wrong which might interfere with the intentions of the leader.
Change starts with self-sufficiency and solid principles. It begins with unwavering pride in the value of sovereignty and liberty. It begins with a relentless pursuit of balance and truth.
Source: The Road to Serfdom by F.A. Hayek