Characteristics

Totalitarianism

Ultra-totalitarianism

Period

1930s – 1950s

21^st Century

Level of surveillance

High

Very High

Visibility of surveillance

Visible

Visible or invisible

Information technology

Low

High

Views of “dignity” by society

Was a society still valued “dignity”, albeit weakened compared with feudal society. For instance, comrades wear full suit and shouted “long live socialism” when executed by their comrades.

Greatly diminished. Dignity was seen as a joke by many - as unwise.

Means of technology

Newspapers, regional broadcasting machines - amplifiers

Internet, RFID, mind-reading machine, video-recorder, honesty-checking machines, GPS

“Matadata” used

Data collected by government, e.g. census, and data obliged to be given by residents, e.g. class background, mandatory political self-reflections

Varies, including data collected by government, firms, service sectors. e.g. Voluntary fill-in opinions, activities and reflections.

Freedom of movement

Restricted by paper “road documents” when moving from a place to another; residence movement was restricted; THOUGH faked documents is still possible

Monitoring by technology (Octopus card / Zhihubao / RFID) which faked documents becomes much more difficult e.g. Facebook AI recognition of faked face photos, restricted by occasional public traffic“incidents”

Ease of mind control

Rough, often straight-forward

Can be fine-tuned, e.g. personality rating system - one cannot buy food or travel tickets if lower than certain rating

Mind control

Government propaganda; government periphery organizations

Propaganda are clearly-cut: White and black, zero “reactionary comments”

White gloves which are officially non-government, but are financially related to the regime / party-state. They can even be NGO occasionally allowing 20% - 30% mild criticism, and even 5% violent “reactionary comments” which may trigger party-state’s other actions. Content farms can be used.

Manipulated search engine results.

Mobilization

Compulsory rallies, demonstrations, self-reflections and review

Basic compulsory activities (e.g. education); half-compulsory activities related by case-by-case personal activities (e.g. signing of agreements supporting the regime when enjoying some services); voluntary activities that invisibly supporting the authority

Threat

Public criticism, “class struggle” sessions, arrests, brutal tortures, executions

Use properties, money, jobs and personal habits (dignity) as blackmailing tools, so that residents know that loyalty to the regime is a much better choice to secure their local properties, families etc.

Unexplained disappearance of posts, complaints by mobs.

Non-legal measures enacted by authorities

Usually, even the laws can be changed arbitrarily

Occasionally, as legal and executive measures themselves already empower the regime to act on it’s purposes (by law)

The attitude of personal expressions

Discouraged (traditionally), with extremely short periods of encouraging usually as a stage of purging

Often encouraged (so as to feed the metadata)

The ease of persons to retain their personality from external views

Difficult but still possible, since their mind can be hidden from the regime if properly managed

Nearly impossible, since the regime often pretend to act moderately, while personal emotions and feelings can be easily recording by the regime. (For instance, in China, some factories force workers to stop their work for hours if the detector revealed that workers’ emotion and thinking were undesirable at the time)

“Political victims” or “Dissents”

More clearly-cut, victims can more easily testify they are indeed oppressed.

More ambiguous, because more chances for “white gloves” and spin doctors to pretend as “Dissents” and was only mildly “oppressed”

The role of religious bodies (e.g. churches)

Sometimes succumbed to the regime by force, often oppressed and become supporters of dissent. The societies were still religious to accept religion as a lowest bound of morality

Not closely related to interest hierarchy within regime

Old churches had permanent properties, being historical heritage, not easily destroyed by regulations

Marginalized, even become white gloves of the regime (often through a process of funding and infiltration). Often, societies are too un-religious to accept any lowest bound of morality. (Niangxin)

Closely related to interest hierarchy with regime (e.g. funding and student enrollment)

New churches have rented / less stable properties, easily intervened by regulations. They are also less experience to cope with political issues.

The oppressors

NKVD, Gestapo, Cong-An, People’s army, street committee

Ordinary police, superiors of firms / organizations, forum administrators, social network managers, hackers

The last resort

Often, home might be last resort. The Reich and East Germany accepted it and people left their feelings to home. Oppressors could sometimes storm home, and churches are often as last resorts that even regimes recognized.

Nil, since information technology revealed the personal positions and , i.e. reveal real-time personal thoughts and actions. Even overseas, if not properly recognized, can occasionally be threatened.

The worldview of the residents

Distorted by propaganda, but can be easily questioned (secretly) since the manipulation was too evident and one-sided. For example, the news of Armstrong was slightly reported in Moscow, but was totally not heard in Peiping, Hanoi and Pyongyang.

Distorted, but pretended to be normal as the manipulation is not very evident, and multi-view sources are still heard by the populace. The populace easily subjected to an illusion that the worldview is impartial, foreign information is still assessable.

The possible responsibilities of consequence

The regime bears nearly full responsibility. Leader may be arrested for trial after regimes fall.

As the evil of the regime is outsourced. The responsibilities of consequence in the future will be rather blurred. More minor invisible evil committed by ordinary people which are less likely to be prosecuted

International bodies unable to intervene

League of Nations, Interpol etc.

United Nations

International bodies trying to intervene

United Nations, Human rights commission