Out of Pod Experience

Totalitarianism isnt a from of government, it's an administrative process of a government. to be specific to this discussion, Totalitarianism wouldn't and doesn't "overthrow" Democracy, it is the end result of it. Democracy in it's true form is government by majority rule. When the majority rule, their is a natural consolidation and centralization of power. as power accumulates, the need for standardization of everything to manage to majority and to rule and control the minority requires a collective thought of the majority so that they will not splinter and lose majority power. this means all individuality must be uprooted, smeared and destroyed. This in turn, the process to uproot individuality and and re-enforce the collective is what Totalitarianism is. It's a the fungus that grows on Democracy once the majority have centralized power.

This is what ultimatly what 1984 was about. Social Democracy at the end of the road, written by a socialist who saw the end results in growth of fascism and communism (both are forms of socialism). Orwell was warning they were walking a fine line.
Orwell was forewarning of the pitfalls of socialist ideals if lead by less then scrupulous rulers and and a blindly devoted public.

Democracy is over-rated when the masses are asses - Reuben Johnson.

It can be hard to parcel out exactly where a writer gets inspiration from. From what ve read about Orwell, the book wasn't wholly written by his experience in the Spanish Civil War. It certainly had an effect on him as the "dream" of the war, and the end result started to to have him re-think his ideals on socialism. And that re-think is what inspired the book. Of course, as the war being pivitol in life for this massive contemplation, many "scenes" in his book would be drawn up from events he experienced, but do not necessarily comprise the bases whole book itself.

that being said, that's just an opinion. one cannot parcel out every thought and inspiration of the writer sitting next to you, much less one who one has never met, and died long before one was born.

Edit: again, mind running. As I remember, the break up into three distinct "nations" (I quote nations, as it was metaphorical for three ideologies) was because of violent warfare, but it wasnt a direct result, it was a slow creep after the war. He was establishing the conflict between three particular and opposing views of Socialism that was popular throught out the 1930's and 1940. Fascism, Communism, and Progressivism. Orwell experienced these conflicts of ideology first hand during the Spanish Civil War, but it became most apparent in WWII as the world became engulfed in the pulling of these three political/social/economical ideals.

So as the three nations split up in the book, they didnt become "instant Totalitarians". They bacem Fascist, Communists, and Progressives. The book starts years later as Totalitarianism creeped in to these respective ideologies as they consolidated power. So, to me it seems, 1984 was more about Orwells view on the political conflict as he saw it of WWII and his fear of where it might lead to, drawing on his disenfranchisement from his experience from the Spanish Civil War.