Sure, but for a society to be "totalitarian" is an asymptotic climb, not a defined goal. An independent Russian businessman might find himself approached by the local mob (under the aegis of an oligarch, who is under the aegis of the Russian state) to acquire a share of his business. He can't turn to any authority for help, and if he refuses his business (or he) will be crippled. That's not total control.
Political opponents are murdered by assassins, and domestic coverage of the murder makes no bones about what happened, nor is the even truthier international coverage suppressed at all. Public execution by implication. I'm certain Putin has the functional ability to quietly kill someone; he was in the KGB. Most of the big assassinations read more like expansive threats: "look what I can get away with, and the West just wags a stern finger at me; you are not safe, enemy of mine, even in the UK".
I appreciate that words usually have fairly fixed definitions (but sometimes not so literally, aha). That said, while Putin's Russia may not be totalitarian to the standards of, say, Maoist China, I think it's pretty damn difficult, and moreso than in most other countries, to do anything that the ruling class doesn't want done. That approaches total control.
Russian businessmen being approached by the local mob was more common back in 90s (that much I know from experience, because my parents ran a small business back then, and had to deal with all that). But the country as a whole was less authoritarian than it is today.
As far as doing something that the ruling class doesn't want done - if you mean politically, there are plenty of comparable countries, such as Singapore, that are similarly considered authoritarian but not totalitarian. Totalitarianism normally means total control (or at least the possibility of it) - not just of political participation, but of all spheres of life. Russia may turn totalitarian yet - there are certainly plenty of ideologues advocating it - but it hasn't crossed that line so far.
And yes, of course it's all a spectrum. Totalitarianism itself is a small subset of the much wider authoritarian spectrum.
Political opponents are murdered by assassins, and domestic coverage of the murder makes no bones about what happened, nor is the even truthier international coverage suppressed at all. Public execution by implication. I'm certain Putin has the functional ability to quietly kill someone; he was in the KGB. Most of the big assassinations read more like expansive threats: "look what I can get away with, and the West just wags a stern finger at me; you are not safe, enemy of mine, even in the UK".
I appreciate that words usually have fairly fixed definitions (but sometimes not so literally, aha). That said, while Putin's Russia may not be totalitarian to the standards of, say, Maoist China, I think it's pretty damn difficult, and moreso than in most other countries, to do anything that the ruling class doesn't want done. That approaches total control.