> so why do you insist on the human factor, if the intentions don't matter Because, regardless of intention, results are a consequence of human action. > What

> so why do you insist on the human factor, if the intentions don't matter Because, regardless of intention, results are a consequence of human action. > What do you think of emergent properties of a system, for which nobody is to blame individually? Are you asking if emergent properties can be totalitarian? I think this question is not very useful. Do we have a real-world system in which nobody is to blame for its properties? > But I can see capitalism fitting into the second definition, or the first definition If you're talking about the capitalist societies we have today, yes, they can absolutely be totalitarian. But is that because of capitalism or in spite of it? The fear of totalitarianism is the reason capitalists defend freedom and the reduction of the state. > can racism be totalitarian? The idea of racism? The definition of the word? I don't think so. But a society where racists can exert power over people and reduce their freedom is totalitarian. But we're back to the human factor.