{"quotes":[{"text":"The 20th Century proved that there is nothing more dangerous to the health of ethnic minority communities than big government.","author":"A.E. Samaan","tags":["big-government","bill-of-rights","central-planning","civil-rights","democide","diversity","ethnic-minorities","eugenics","genocide","individual-liberty","individualism","individuality","libertarian","libertarianism","planned-societies","totalitarianism"],"id":4395,"author_id":"A.E.+Samaan"},{"text":"The believer claims to know, not just that God exists, but that his most detailed wishes are not merely knowable but actually known. Since religion drew its first breath when the species lived in utter ignorance and considerable fear, I hope I may be forgiven for declining to believe that another human being can tell me what to do, in the most intimate details of my life and mind, and to further dictate these terms as if acting as proxy for a supernatural entity.","author":"Christopher Hitchens","tags":["anti-theism","atheism","christianity","faith","religion","totalitarianism"],"id":5153,"author_id":"Christopher+Hitchens"},{"text":"The right of dissent, or, if you prefer, the right to be wrong, is surely fundamental to the existence of a democratic society. That’s the right that went first in every nation that stumbled down the trail toward totalitarianism.","author":"Edward R. Murrow","tags":["democracy","dissent","totalitarianism"],"id":12743,"author_id":"Edward+R.+Murrow"},{"text":"I dispute the right of conservatives to be automatically complacent on these points. My own Marxist group took a consistently anti-Moscow line throughout the 'Cold War,' and was firm in its belief that that Soviet Union and its European empire could not last. Very few people believed that this was the case: The best known anti-Communist to advance the proposition was the great Robert Conquest, but he himself insists that part of the credit for such prescience goes to Orwell. More recently, a very exact prefiguration of the collapse of the USSR was offered by two German Marxists, one of them from the West (Hans Magnus Enzensberger) and one from the East (Rudolf Bahro, the accuracy of whose prediction was almost uncanny). I have never met an American conservative who has even heard of, let alone read, either of these authors.","author":"Christopher Hitchens","tags":["cold-war","communism","dissent","left-wing-politics","soviet-union","totalitarianism"],"id":15434,"author_id":"Christopher+Hitchens"},{"text":"Politicians in our times feed their clichés to television, where even those who wish to disagree repeat them. Television purports to challenge political language by conveying images, but the succession from one frame to another can hinder a sense of resolution. Everything happens fast, but nothing actually happens. Each story on televised news is ”breaking” until it is displaced by the next one. So we are hit by wave upon wave but never see the ocean.The effort to define the shape and significance of events requires words and concepts that elude us when we are entranced by visual stimuli. Watching televised news is sometimes little more than looking at someone who is also looking at a picture. We take this collective trance to be normal. We have slowly fallen into it.More than half a century ago, the classic novels of totalitarianism warned of the domination of screens, the suppression of books, the narrowing of vocabularies, and the associated difficulties of thought. In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, published in 1953, firemen find and burn books while most citizens watch interactive television. In George Orwell’s 1984, published in 1949, books are banned and television is two-way, allowing the government to observe citizens at all times. In 1984, the language of visual media is highly constrained, to starve the public of the concepts needed to think about the present, remember the past, and consider the future. One of the regime’s projects is to limit the language further by eliminating ever more words with each edition of the official dictionary.Staring at screens is perhaps unavoidable, but the two-dimensional world makes little sense unless we can draw upon a mental armory that we have developed somewhere else. When we repeat the same words and phrases that appear in the daily media, we accept the absence of a larger framework. To have such a framework requires more concepts, and having more concepts requires reading. So get the screens out of your room and surround yourself with books. The characters in Orwell’s and Bradbury’s books could not do this—but we still can.","author":"Timothy Snyder","tags":["books","reading","totalitarianism","tyranny"],"id":15856,"author_id":"Timothy+Snyder"},{"text":"The prose is deeply inspired by the tension between post- totalitarianism and consumer democracy. I am constantly probing the soft fleshy parts of the American dream.","author":"Alina Stefanescu","tags":["consumerism","totalitarianism","writing-life"],"id":21186,"author_id":"Alina+Stefanescu"},{"text":"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it. It seems to me nonsense, in a period like our own, to think that one can avoid writing of such subjects. Everyone writes of them in one guise or another. It is simply a question of which side one takes and what approach one follows. And the more one is conscious of one's political bias, the more chance one has of acting politically without sacrificing one's aesthetic and intellectual integrity.","author":"George Orwell","tags":["biases","democracy","essayist","on-writing","political","politics","purpose","totalitarianism","world-war-ii"],"id":22173,"author_id":"George+Orwell"},{"text":"Totalitarianism in power invariably replaces all first-rate talents, regardless of their sympathies, with those crackpots and fools whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty.","author":"Hanna Arendt","tags":["loyalty","totalitarianism"],"id":25157,"author_id":"Hanna+Arendt"},{"text":"The most striking difference between the ancient and modern sophists is that the ancients were satisfied with a passing victory of the argument at the expense of truth, whereas the moderns want a more lasting victory at the expense of reality. In other words, one destroyed the dignity of human thought whereas the others destroy the dignity of human action. The old manipulators of logic were the concern of the philosopher, whereas the modern manipulators of facts stand in the way of the historian. For history itself is destroyed, and its comprehensibility—based upon the fact that it is enacted by men and therefore can be understood by men—is in danger, whenever facts are no longer held to be part and parcel of the past and present world, and are misused to prove this or that opinion.","author":"Hannah Arendt","tags":["1968","antisemitism","communism","historians","history","ideology","marxism","post-factual","post-truth","race-theory","reality-control","sophism","totalitarianism"],"id":30590,"author_id":"Hannah+Arendt"},{"text":"Every thought that deviates from the officially prescribed and permanently changing line is already suspect, no matter in which field of human activity it occurs. Simply because of their capacity to think, human beings are suspects by definition, and this suspicion cannot be diverted by exemplary behavior, for the human capacity to think is also a capacity to change one's mind.","author":"Hannah Arendt","tags":["thinking","totalitarianism"],"id":35765,"author_id":"Hannah+Arendt"}],"pagination":{"page":1,"page_size":10,"total":117,"pages":12,"next":"?page=2\u0026page_size=10"}}