Voting often refers to the collective action where the peoples’ preferences, ideologies and wills speak out for themselves. Even in non-democractic, authoritarian regimes, elections do exist and voter turnouts tend to incorporate a large percentage of the population. Even more commonly in authoritarian regimes, candidates are repeated for years and even for decades and the results are often predetermined. Elections in non-democractic regimes exist in different levels; however, they rarely offer opportunities for changing the existing regime. According to Lisa Blaydes, a professor in the Department of Political Science in the University of California, Los Angeles, elections in these non-democractic regimes are essential for several reasons. Egypt, for example, chooses to hold elections due to constant pressure from the United States and global institutions to be more democratic. Furthermore, elections are crucial for the survival of the regime on its own. Furthermore, elections also allow the regime to find out its’ supporters against its’ opponents (Magaloni, 2006.)
Political life in authoritarian regimes (notably Jordan and Egypt from the articles read) divides society into two: the wealthy minority who run as candidates and buy votes and the poor majority of citizens who sell themselves to the “highest bidder”. Often, results in authoritarian regimes are pre-determined and the candidates are repeated for years and several decades as well. Why then, do people in such regimes have the incentive to vote? Despite the fact that these votes rarely account for a change in the regime, the results are significant and imples the nature of the political sphere in authoritarian regimes.
Voting in authoritarian regimes could be ca...
... middle of paper ...
...hat they are doing over and over again. They first need to be properly educated in order to realise that. Voting for autocrats in authoritarian regimes because of survival can prevent them, since people want to survive. But if the same candidates are elected over and over again, and the same people are still not capable of surviving, except in times of election, people must understand and be able to see the pattern. Most importantly, I would also question and interrogate those in the upper classes of the society. For example, I would like at how they have managed to obtain a decent quality of life and whether or not it came from members of the regime that they had personal ties. It is interesting to see why they don’t vote and despite that, how they maintain their living. How come they don’t change what’s going on if it isn’t acceptable and why aren’t they bothered?
With the Internet and everything it brings (instantaneous communication and social media) now a part of everyday life across the globe, its hard to believe that people in middle eastern authoritarian states have no concept of the democratic process and the benefits it can bring to the populace.
The United States of America is often touted as the guiding beacon of democracy for the entirety of the modern world. In spite of this tremendous responsibility the political system of the United States retains some aspects which upon examination appear to be significantly undemocratic. Perhaps the most perplexing and oft misunderstood of these establishments is the process of electing the president and the institution known as the Electoral College. The puzzle of the Electoral College presents the American people with a unique conundrum as the mark of any true democracy is the citizens’ ability to elect their own ruling officials. Unfortunately, the Electoral College system dilutes this essential capacity by introducing an election by
Voting is at the center of every democratic system. In america, it is the system in which a president is elected into office, and people express their opinion. Many people walk into the voting booth with the thought that every vote counts, and that their vote might be the one that matters above all else. But in reality, America’s voting system is old and flawed in many ways. Electoral College is a commonly used term on the topic of elections but few people actually know how it works.
Regardless of the political environment, it is the responsibility of voters to take initiative in becoming politically involved. However, the current electoral system in the United States is not one that fosters voter participation, but instead often discourages voting altogether. This is evidenced through the lackluster voter turnout in the United States, which is amongst the lowest of any democratic nation. While it is convenient to blame this lack of democratic participation on a lazy and apathetic public, the root of the problem lies elsewhere. The current system of winner-take-all elections, strategic gerrymandering, incumbency advantage and governmental unresponsiveness to constituent desires is enough to deter even the most politically consci...
In many real and fictionalized totalitarian societies, children live apart from their families. I believe that dictatorial leaders enforced this living arrangement because they don’t want parents to influence their children, to make sure people are loyal to the society, and to maintain everyone equal. They do this so that they have total control over their society.
From its early period, the United States has obtained an indirect type of democracy, and has always had contentment that its citizens are allowed to vote for their representatives, especially the President. Nevertheless, the amount of citizens that actually vote in nationwide elections has decreased noticeably over the years. Voter participation and turnout has been declining in the United States throughout history. Voter turnout, the percentage of eligible individuals who actually vote (Ginsberg), to this day is lower than it was in the 1900’s. Since 1912, presidential elections have only had about 50 to 65 percent of Americans participate. This means that about half of United States citizens who are eligible and have the freedom to vote have failed to participate in presidential elections. At the end of the nineteenth century voter turnout started plummeting, reaching the 60 percent level by the election of 1912 (Teixeira, 1987). The declining rate of voter participation in the United States is due to voter registration and procedu...
In Eva Bellin’s “The Robustness of Authoritarianism in the Middle East: Exceptionalism in Comparative Perspective” she argues that the inability of the Middle Eastern countries to catch up on the wave of democratization may be associated to the robustness of the coercive apparatus in multiple states of the area and their will and capacity to crush any form of democratic initiative. She makes a valid point by first acknowledging the fact that even though the majority of these states have failed to meet the prerequisites for democracy there are multiple countries around the world that have been able to establish democratic regimes in the absence of many of these conditions. However, she also recognizes that the lack of them may have strengthen
When a dictator rises to power it is a big deal around the world and is the talk of many. These radical leaders have been in power since Julius Caesar and there are still some in power today. History shows us that dictators seem to come out of the shadows when the economy, military and government are unstable and seem to seize power during this period of unrest. And there is nothing stopping more dictators from rising now, well nothing except what you do to fight against them. Dictators will rise and fall, and will build themselves up despite people trying to tear them down, it's all a careful balancing act. The only way to prevent dictators is to do something about it; so stand up for yourself and fight for a better government, a prosperous economy and well trained military. Because “When dictatorship is a fact, revolution becomes a right” (Victor
of this power is voting. Voting is an opportunity for citizens to decide who leads their government. In contrast, some non- democratic countries give all governmental power to one sole leader who, in some cases, is not even elected. This corrupt way of governing can lead to a repression of one’s freedoms. Therefore, do not take your right to vote lightly. This is an chance for you and your fellow Americans to participate in your government. Furthermore, it is a unique opportunity to choose who you feel will best govern your country.
In comparing the average citizen in a democratic nation, say the United States, to that of a non-democratic nation, for instance Egypt, it will be found that the citizen in the democratic nation is generally better off – free of persecution, free from fear of the authorities, and free to express his opinions on governmental matters. And while national conflicts occur everywhere, incidents like violent revolts have shown to be more prevalent in nations where citizens are not allowed to choose who governs them. It is slightly paradoxical that democracy, so inherently flawed in theory, can lead to such successful outcomes in practice. The question, then, becomes: “If democracy has so many weaknesses, why does it work?”
Welzel, Christian, and Ronald Inglehart. 2008. The role of ordinary people in democratization. Journal of Democracy 19 (1): 126-40.
In the Quran it is said that: "Let there be no compulsion in religion."(2:256) If someone does not want to believe God and obey his rules, he cannot be forced to do. If even God's rules cannot be imposed by using force, a person can never have the right to impose his own rules by using power. Although all Muslim dictators claim that their state is the most Islamic one, this is evidence that dictatorships are un-Islamic. Dictators know that what they say is not true, but they also know that gaining and staying in power is much easier by hiding their aims under the cover of Islam. As Mir Zohair Husain, professor in University of South Alabama, says,
...ly repressed and discriminated in every sphere of social life. The people in autocracies generally cannot form interest groups and show persistence in their desire to improve their lives by competition, which further leads to the weakening of the state on the whole. In the end, the crucial question for autocracies remains whether they could stay for longer periods as they are essentially inherently unstable. The extreme case of what might happen next if the aforementioned issues are not sufficiently addressed might be observed via focusing on the recent Arab Spring events when the enduring autocratic regimes were overthrown and challenged across many states in Middle East. How they will further evolve as a governmental entity and whether they could resolve the issues without turning democratic should be the interesting case to research on in the foreseeable future.
... due to privilege. This might make people who are living under illegitimate and unauthentic power rise up and contest the ruling party. The people can have another nature too. If the people have illegitimate intentions, they will support illegitimate rule and vice versa.
French writer Milan Kundera mentioned in his work The Book of Laughter and Forgetting “Totalitarianism is not only hell, but all the dream of paradise-- the age-old dream of a world where everybody would live in harmony, united by a single common will and faith, without secrets from one another.” We have heard about totalitarian systems before, although it is often confused with fascism. Totalitarianisms is the ideology that everyone in an existing society will be the same and treated equally under law and govern of one single political party, creating a balanced perfect harmonious living.