The Constitution, which was the legal basis for the establishment of this new society - was in fact in perfect harmony with the party's ideology and practical implementation of the program, based on the same goals and methods - thus representing a complete political and legal whole of this totalitarian system.
Â
The analysis of the mentioned constitutions of totalitarian regimes indicates that such collectivist regimes are in their essence opposed to the idea of the individual and individualism. Such regimes do not affirm the individual outside the general context of the community. A citizen of such a state can enjoy only those rights and freedoms that are within the general goals of the collective
Â
Whether it is Stalin's constitution that seeks to maintain the illusion of democratic ideals and principles (with the help of the usual liberal formulations and established guarantees of personal and civic values) while ignoring the totalitarian aspect of rule, or the 1933 Third Reich Act interpretation of 48 of the Weimar Constitution) which created a new system whose ideological values are based on fundamentally different bases, in relation to the democratic values that precede them and which do not seek to hide their repressive policies and tools of its implementation or finally the Constitution of Democratic Kampuchea current moral values but adopts totalitarian methods of practical implementation, which are in conflict with these current moral values) is clearly visible theoretical justification and practical expediency of regulating rights and freedoms in totalitarian regimes.
