An ongoing debate but, in my opinion no.
Robespierre was never sole ruler. Throughout the period the Jacobins were in power, he relied heavily on the group around him that formed the Committee of Public safety. Of course you could liken this to the inner circle of Stalin/Hitler, but I think that's a bit too much. Men like Sant-Just, Carnot, and Billaud-Varenne were key figures who had considerable power.
The Levee en Masse did create large armies, but many of its provisions were impossible for an 18th century state to put into practice in reality. All horses to be owned by the army? All firearms to be handed over? The Republic never achieved that to any great extent. Yes, the populace was militarized, but at the height of Robespierre's rule sections of the country were in open revolt (esp in the Vendee).
Its a bit of a misconception that the Jacobins are a one party state and have total control. There is a huge body of representatives, known as "the marsh", who were the moderate faction in the wider government. Sometimes they supported Robespierre and sometimes they didn't. Yes, he sometimes cowed them into fear, but the Marsh also generated the opposition that eventually toppled him.
You are right on propaganda. But the Jacobins didn't create all of this - the co-opted most of it from the earlier revolutionary period and some of what they themselves created (Supreme Being for instance) didn't grab the populace in the same way and died with them.
Add to this the nature of Paris itself - the Jacobins rely on the Parisian sections, particularly the sans-culottes, but are also beholden to them. Its hard to think of a modern totalitarian regime that was so much at the mercy of the crowds of the capital. Remember at various points the crowds invade the chamber and demand things off the Deputies. At one point they even cut off the head of a Deputy on the floor of the Assembly and wave it around on a pike. Part of the reason Robespierre falls during Thermidor is that he can't get the sections to turn out to support him anymore.
Ultimately I think that, whilst the Jacobins would have liked total control, they were never able to achieve it to any meaningful degree.