Totalitarianism is a political ideology that has been totalized or made to make everything within its power without any exceptions,  it suggests a single-minded and total transformation of society. The totalitarian political regime is a regime where the operating political ideology provides rationalization and determines every public and all private interaction. This ideology that reaches the state is exclusive to the point that it eradicates any private sphere. Totalitarianism is kind of similar to a tyranny which is a very long-established form of a political regime that is discussed in Plato's Republic, totalitarianism is normally compared to authoritarianism, fascism and even communism for the reason that all of these regimes are practised by a leader or ruling elite that allows no opposition. Totalitarianism is identified with some failed states in the 20th century although it could be a mistake to think that the lure of totalitarian control of the making of society is something from the past never to return. In the United States, the framers of the constitution and so many political thinkers of the modern age focused their attention on tyranny and they understood that it was something to avoid, because it opposed to liberalism bases and their inherent of equality of all men, the figure of a tyrant obviously opposed the democratic aims of the founding generations. tyranny,  such as the ruling of a prince or a king also opposed the republican thought of the rule of law, Law that is already written and is not man-made. the American constitution framers for example did understand the private property is a bulwark against tyranny and against any overreaching of the authority of the state in their scheme of a limited government. While the avoidance of tyrannical government was the main factor in the design of the American constitutional regime with its separation of powers by making branches of government, the framers couldn't have imagined the extremes of power presented by modern totalitarianism. in a study of totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt it suggests that totalitarianism is different from tyranny because this form of ruling tends to control every aspect of political and social lives, destroying civil rights and societies leaving only a little or no private life for people to escape to.

also, while tyranny is mainly characterized by the implementing of the personal wills of the tyrant, in a totalitarian regime, all people are rendered superfluous to that even to the extent that though the political ruler would possibly exude a powerful temperament, he too should adapt to the prevailing ideology, if not emblematize it. Hannah's was particularly involved regarding totalitarianism’s logical inclination and capability to end the pluralism that democratic societies want because totalitarian regimes in practice had already acted in this manner and decreased the space where freedom can appear through people acting alone and declining to conform. This way of totalitarian regimes demanded a response from all the free world, either to defeat their ideologies or contain them. Unlike fascism, where individuals are forcefully organized under the state and forced through submission to the state and to the ruling of a dictator, totalitarianism requires the control of a population necessary to subdue it into doing the state’s ideology and believing in its own hopelessness to do anything but accept it. nevertheless, when Benito Mussolini spoke about the Italian fascist state as "lo Stato totalitario", he introduced the term into popular expressions. Both fascist and totalitarian states are in the criteria of the brutality of their enforcement and policing ways in forcing their people into obedience. In both Mussolini’s Italy state or Hitler’s nazi Germany, a lot of people already were inclined to conform to political messages that appealed to their sense of nationalism, nostalgia or missing the great ways of their ancestors or the common ideas of racial majority and purity

Totalitarianism is considered a 20th- century phenomenon, for the reason of it being reliable on thorough ideological metaphors to create enthusiasm for the good of the regime, and surveillance technologies with major propaganda techs, These technologies include communications methods, with the utilization of media, widespread effective, proper use of terror to intimidate, and, scare any opposition, to live under in a totalitarian society is highly regimented, and for the normal person was filled with fear and non-comfort of everyone else, except for the very few close friends and family members which whom a person could dare to share his ost honest thoughts, rather than the patriotic talks that are expected of everyone else all the time. The totalitarian regime can also establish a cult of personality or another form of leader worship, such as characterizing the rule of Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union, though this was a lot less religiously mentioned than was the typical cult of the Roman emperor. Indeed, the 20thcentury’s totalitarian regimes were secular regimes that evaded religion.

There has been some estimation that present times globalization and the spread of human rights with democratic ideals are rising the significance of the nation-state and, therefore, reducing the threat that totalitarian political regimes reappear or merge again. There are also observers who believe that maybe ideology is no longer a very much important consideration in the time being, or that the historical development of great rivalling societies is ended, in the same sense, with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, and so humankind has moved over brutality, old visions such as were seen in totalitarianism. While the increased knowledge and spread of a great variety of cultural, economic, and political practices presently available is getting the picture of the world’s peoples to all corners of the globe, totalitarianism has become unliked, but not unthinkable. Wherever the huge social impacts of globalizing are seen to be unwelcome, such as in based theocratic regimes, and people look to the state as having the capacity to resist multiplicity in the name of nationality or race, ethnic, or religious purity, then the potential is available for political leaders and those who aid them who are attracted by the thought of total control and transforming of society to lead the state by the light of some locally crafted, logical, and compelling ideologies.