Why are some autocratic regimes more durable than others?
There are many factors which can affect the durability of autocratic regimes. Firstly, durability is hugely affected by the type of autocratic regime a state is. This is because of the variation in the relative proportion of the selectorate who are in the winning coalition between the types. It is also down to institutional differences and checks and balances on the regime.
An autocratic regime can be defined as those where power is vested in a person, or a body of people, by an undemocratic process. In other words, leaders are not competitively selected by the whole population. There are often negative connotations of autocratic regimes; however this has not always been the case. Rousseau,
…show more content…
This can be subdivided into two further types; those which are politically closed and those which rely upon electoral authoritarianism. Politically closed regimes are those which do not legally allow any sort of political competition on a national level. These can be personalistic, where a leader leads on the basis of their personality, such as North Korea. They can also be systems such as that in China which only allows one party to exist. These are dominant party regimes. Electoral authoritarism means that there is some political competition and elections are held, however the results are manipulated in such a way that there is only one realistic outcome. These can be hegemonic, whereby the dominant party win large majorities, such as in Singapore; or they can be more competitive, whereby the opposition wins substantial minorities such as in …show more content…
It could be argued that the only real autocracies in the world are those which are completely isolated from international interference, such as Myanmar, North Korea and Belarus. States like North Korea and Belarus are protectorates of China and Russia respectively, states that the USA would not want to go to war with. There is therefore little incentive for military interference to instate a democratic regime. Fewer countries trade with these countries too; therefore they never see an alternative sort of lifestyle. This process of globalisation can, according to Richard Inglehart, lead to “conditions conducive to democracy can and do emerge -- and the process of "modernization," according to abundant empirical evidence, advances them.” There is therefore little incentive to democratise from within the state either. Regimes that are more open to international trade and intervention are therefore less likely to be durable than these closed regimes. However, states such as the UAE and Qatar with an abundance of natural oil resources could arguably be an exception to this. Democratised nations are reliant upon trade with them for oil supplies, and are therefore far less likely to intervene. They are also economically modernised, with a large GDP per capita. Therefore, it could be argued that they are unlikely to democratise
They tend to make alliances with other democracies like themselves but those states are too weak. However, when they choose to work with those whose opinions who differ from their own meaning oligarchies, then they most often turn on them as did
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract and Discourses. trans. by G.D.H. Cole. New York: Dutton, 1950.
In history, governments have endeavored to rule their subjects. Major forms of authority consist primarily of monarchy, absolute monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, tyranny, theocracy, and republic. By examining the main faults of each government, the republic is clearly the superior form.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a philosopher that helped develop concepts such as general will, and improved on the early norms on child-raising. Born in Geneva, he was a “citizen” of the city. “Citizens” were the two hundred members of the Grand Council of Geneva, which made most of the political decisions in state. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an important part of the Enlightenment. He led an interesting life, as told by his three memoirs, had a solid philosophy, did not believe in reason, and left a lasting legacy that still affects us today.
Many countries have decided against having a totalitarian government system, but there still are countries that continue with running their country with authoritarianism. The Middle East persists on having an authoritarianism style government over having a democracy. Theories that prove to be true to Middle Eastern people of how a totalitarian government is better relate to economics, religion, and international involvement. People living in the Middle East want to avoid having political liberation because that can lead to a consistent and stable democratic government. Another reason keeping them from changing is that since their countries aren’t struggling economically, the citizens don’t see it necessary to elect new leaders. The countries in the Middle East region decide to continue with authoritarianism because the fear and pain is greater than the feeling of freedom.
There are common patterns and traits that can be seen in dictators and their steps to dictatorship. Becoming a dictator isn’t just a simple task, and it requires different techniques and methods that have been changed and altered throughout the years, some of which can be seen today in the world. Why do people become dictators? There are more
Democracy is “...the word that resonates in people’s minds and springs from their lips as they struggle for freedom and a better way of life...” (Schmitter and Karl, 1991:75). However, the word democracy has many different means depending on the country and context it is used in. “Every country has is own culture and comes by its political system through its own history” (Greenberg, 2007:101, cited in Li, 2008:4). Li, (2008) states that because of China’s political structure the usual road to democracy may be difficult for it to achieve. The western idea ...
Rousseau's society has a very controlling government with a lot of power that could be damaging if given to the wrong p...
In a dominant- party system, a single party wins approximately 60 percent or more of the seats in legislature and two or more other parties usually win less than 40 percent of the seat. Opposition parties in dominant-party system are free to contest elections. The dominant parties have to compete for votes to maintain its power or to gain power. This democratic competition imposes a check and balance on the government of the day, promotes transparency and accountability and ensures that service delivery to the people are prioritized or it will be given the boot.
Shklar, J. (1969). Men and Citizens: A study of Rousseau's social theory. Cambridge: Cambridge UNiversity Press.
...a voice and a choice. They have the feeling of being secure and free something which is only achieved through national security. Democracies also share similar beliefs and political ideologies which prevent them from engaging in warfare in the event of an arising conflict. The democratic peace theory states that democratic countries do not engage in interstate wars against each other. This theory has been proven true from time and time again in history. There has never been a case of an independent democratic country raging war on another democratic regime. So definitely when it comes to solving conflict through war regime type does matter since democratic states are 99 percent less likely to engage in a fight with autocracies and 100 prevent less likely to declare war on fellow democracy. Democracy is a preventer of conflict on all levels of human interactions.
the participation by as many citizens as possible, they also use the measurement of vote, lottery
Blais, Andre. "Electoral Insight." CCL Web: Criteria for Assessing Electoral Systems (1999): 1-6. Web. 26 Aug. 2010.
As Helmut Steinberger said: “. with their reputation, possibilities, and competence they in themselves have a limiting effect on any attempts to act in a manner contrary to the constitution and to restrict rights and freedoms.” Actually, democracy is deemed to be a difficult form of government regardless if it is favourable circumstances or not. It seems to be all the more difficult when society’s economic environment is weak, civil society is still developing, and finally there are people, circles and other actors who find themselves threatened from all the sides by the new and strive to back it up.... ... middle of paper ... ...
This is because democratic governance is expected be based on consensus and respect for the wishes and aspirations of the people. A political system where the government depends on repression as a way of increasing regime strength cannot be described as democratic.