Paragraph 2
The totalitarianism of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were attempts to hold off and reject the beliefs and values of liberalism, a turning away from the worth of the individual and the principle of a collective, all-powerful state where individuals served the interests of the state. Totalitarian rule seeks the total, unconditional, control of a disenfranchised population and the society is ruled by force, not by consent. It eradicates political freedoms, democratic process and legality as such, by setting up the daily pronouncements of the ruler and the party as an omnipotent force with unchecked powers to exercise control over the institutions of the state. Totalitarian regimes began in Europe and were characterized by leaders …show more content…
When the Bolsheviks announced the formation of a government of Soviet workers and soldier deputies, they believed they were inaugurating the beginning of the transition from capitalism, a system they believed was based on exploitation, inequality and war, to communism. The divergence of statement and fact is one of the basic features of the communist movement. It is the institution of complete control of communication and expression in order to sustain the irrelevent theoretical picture. The communist mentality can be described in essence as a compulsive self-justifying opportunism, where leaders assume full freedoms of action but insist on squaring every step with the varieties of Marxism-Leninism. This viewpoint is a direct opposition to liberalism values, as liberalism stresses the importance of human rationality. Vladimir Lenin, founder of the Russian Communist Party, and the Bolsheviks believed that violent revolution was the only way to overturn the government and avoid further development of liberalism in Russia. The authoritarian bent in Lenin’s thinking only got stronger and the Soviet Union became a dictatorship with a ruling central government. In the years following the death of Vladimir Lenin in 1924, Stalin rose to become the leader of …show more content…
Our own beliefs may lead us to question and to possibly push to change what we see around us rather than passively accept it. In a true democracy, citizens have a responsibility to exercise their rights and challenges as long as their actions are not illegal and do not infringe on the rights of others. Challenges to liberalism can also occur by people who are not living in a liberal democracy, but who believe that the imposition of, or belief in, some liberal values is somehow destructive or incompatible with what is “right.” Environmental ways of thinking can challenge or align with a society’s liberal values, depending on the society’s interpretation of environmental issues that affect the common good. Part of the problem lies in whether governments should limit an individual's freedom to consume and to freely pursue his or her own self-interest. Environmental thought in general and environmental politicians thought in particular often demanded radical and even utopian changes in society and in individual lives and attitudes. An example of of liberalism being challenged by alternative thought is the Greenpeace organization. Greenpeace is an international campaigning organization with an uncompromising voice for the environment. It is a catalyst for ethical, political, commercial, and technical change in society. Greenpeace campaigns puts the spotlight on the causes of environmental degradation
The totalitarianism of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were attempts to hold off and reject the beliefs and values of liberalism, a turning away from the worth of the individual and the principle of a collective, all-powerful state where individuals served the interests of the state. Totalitarian rule seeks the total, unconditional, control of a disenfranchised population and the society is ruled by force, not by consent. It eradicates political freedoms, democratic process and legality as such, by setting up the daily pronouncements of the ruler and the party as an omnipotent force with unchecked powers to exercise control over the institutions of the state. Totalitarian regimes began in Europe and were characterized by leaders …show more content…
When the Bolsheviks announced the formation of a government of Soviet workers and soldier deputies, they believed they were inaugurating the beginning of the transition from capitalism, a system they believed was based on exploitation, inequality and war, to communism. The divergence of statement and fact is one of the basic features of the communist movement. It is the institution of complete control of communication and expression in order to sustain the irrelevent theoretical picture. The communist mentality can be described in essence as a compulsive self-justifying opportunism, where leaders assume full freedoms of action but insist on squaring every step with the varieties of Marxism-Leninism. This viewpoint is a direct opposition to liberalism values, as liberalism stresses the importance of human rationality. Vladimir Lenin, founder of the Russian Communist Party, and the Bolsheviks believed that violent revolution was the only way to overturn the government and avoid further development of liberalism in Russia. The authoritarian bent in Lenin’s thinking only got stronger and the Soviet Union became a dictatorship with a ruling central government. In the years following the death of Vladimir Lenin in 1924, Stalin rose to become the leader of …show more content…
Our own beliefs may lead us to question and to possibly push to change what we see around us rather than passively accept it. In a true democracy, citizens have a responsibility to exercise their rights and challenges as long as their actions are not illegal and do not infringe on the rights of others. Challenges to liberalism can also occur by people who are not living in a liberal democracy, but who believe that the imposition of, or belief in, some liberal values is somehow destructive or incompatible with what is “right.” Environmental ways of thinking can challenge or align with a society’s liberal values, depending on the society’s interpretation of environmental issues that affect the common good. Part of the problem lies in whether governments should limit an individual's freedom to consume and to freely pursue his or her own self-interest. Environmental thought in general and environmental politicians thought in particular often demanded radical and even utopian changes in society and in individual lives and attitudes. An example of of liberalism being challenged by alternative thought is the Greenpeace organization. Greenpeace is an international campaigning organization with an uncompromising voice for the environment. It is a catalyst for ethical, political, commercial, and technical change in society. Greenpeace campaigns puts the spotlight on the causes of environmental degradation