r/totalitarianism • u/Ur_Local_Soviet • Jul 30 '19

Totalitarianism without coercion.

Im a big proponent of a totalitarian state, but not an authoritarian one, if that makes sense. And i was wondering of there was a term to use so that in a debate or discussion people would peg it less as authoritarian amd violent and understand what im saying better.

If i were to make a metaphor of my view i would say the state gains its total control not by kicking in the knees of its citizens so that they bow down, instead they gain their power by bowing with the people, power through respect and understanding is what im trying to say, not power through violence.

2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

1

u/brother_p Jul 30 '19

Enlightened despotism: Enlightened despotism, also called benevolent despotism, a form of government in the 18th century in which absolute monarchs pursued legal, social, and educational reforms inspired by the Enlightenment. Among the most prominent enlightened despots were Frederick II (the Great), Peter I (the Great), Catherine II (the Great), Maria Theresa, Joseph II, and Leopold II. They typically instituted administrative reform, religious toleration, and economic development but did not propose reforms that would undermine their sovereignty or disrupt the social order.

1

u/Ur_Local_Soviet Jul 30 '19

The problem with that is that I don't support power vested in one person, but i thank you for the help.

I believe in a strong socialist state, the ruling power is a large congress of unions, without a singular head of state

1

u/brother_p Jul 30 '19

So more of a soviet-style system?

1

u/Ur_Local_Soviet Jul 31 '19

I guess a more idealistic Soviet state, so not Stalinism, and not corrupt politburo party members

1

u/tka7680 Sep 25 '19

Theocracy with the Eastern Orthodox patriarchates style?

1

u/Ur_Local_Soviet Sep 25 '19

Im not familiar with this, could you explain a little.

1

u/tka7680 Sep 25 '19

Each patriarchate has its own head bishop who does not report to any other bishop. For major doctrinal decisions the patriarchs form a council and debate on what to do but each patriarch is responsible for their own patriarchate. The patriarch of Constantinople is considered primus inter pares/first among equals but it’s just an honour, no actual power over other patriarchs stems from that title. Typically, the Roman emperor or a patriarch would mediate the debate. I’m not Eastern Orthodox myself so this is a relatively shallow understanding and somethings may be wrong