Totalitarian movements, unlike Fascism, must never achieve definite goals

Evidence

As regards the Fascists, their movement had come to an end with the seizure of power, at least with respect to domestic policies; the movement could now maintain its motion only in matters of foreign policy, in the sense of imperialist expansion and typically imperialist adventures. Even before the seizure of power, the Nazis clearly kept aloof from this Fascist form of dictatorship, in which the “movement” merely serves to bring the party to power, and consciously used the party “to drive on the movement,” which, contrary to the party, must not have any “definite, closely determined goals.” — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 649

Categorization

• DEFINE: Key definitional distinction: Fascism ends its movement at power seizure; totalitarianism keeps the movement open-ended and goal-less — a core mechanism for the scaffold.
• XREF: Directly connects to later critical-theory readings on how totalitarianism’s open-endedness resists closure — usable as the framework’s definition of movement-vs-party.