Authoritarian Rule

REGIMES OF GOVERNANCE

Authoritarianism vs. DemocracyA BRIEF COMPARISON

Authoritarianism vs. DemocracyA BRIEF COMPARISON

Democracy Government is limited by

constitution. Power is exercised by

elected officials who are chosen by ballot.

Authoritarianism Government seeks a total

concentration of political power.

Power is held by an individual or small group (junta or group of generals).

Power of Government

Democracy Liberties and rights are

guaranteed by a constitution. Individualism and social

contract theory for ensuring individual rights.

Authoritarianism Rights are not guaranteed

in practice. Collective interests take

precedence over individual rights.

Civil Liberties & Rights

Democracy Elections offer a choice of

candidates with differing ideas, usually in a two- or multi- party system.

Calls for free elections at regular intervals.

Authoritarianism Elections do not offer a choice. Single party system is in

effect. Elections are usually symbolic

for the ruling class to show the solidarity of the regimes.

Elections

Democracy Government and people are under

the rule of law. Based on formal constitutions that

protect citizens’ rights. Law is promulgated by a limited,

neutral government whose legitimacy derived from a social contract.

Authoritarianism Government relies on ideology,

religion, or personal charisma as a source of moral authority.

The ruling parties are the final political, legal, & moral authority.

Rule of Law

Democracy Orderly demonstrations

are legal and protests are guaranteed by law.

Force is used only to restrain the disorderly.

Authoritarianism Force or threat of force are

used frequently to keep peace.

Social stability is viewed as the central element for the legitimacy of government.

Maintaining Order

Forms of Authoritarian Rule Traditional authoritarian rule

• Royal family (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia)• Personal despot (Haiti)• Ruling president (Uzbekistan)• Military government (Burma)• Theocracy (Iran)

Communist state Fascist state

Totalitarianism

An extreme version of authoritarianism Limited sphere for private life A guiding ideology Lack of tolerance to pluralism in social

organizations Strong state power in mobilizing the

whole population in pursuit of national goals

Totalitarianism & AuthoritarianismTotalitarianism Authoritarianism

Charisma High Low

Role of leader Leader as function Leader as individual

Ends of power Public Private

Corruption Low High

Official ideology Yes No

Limited pluralism No Yes

Legitimacy Yes No

Traditional Authoritarian Regime

Rule by persons rather than by law Politics comes before policy The penetration of the state remains limited The rulers are concerned with protecting

their positions than developing their states Developments (as education, TV, Internet)

are perceived as a threat by the rulers who are concerned to maintain the populations’ dependence on their patronage.

Authoritarianism, Totalitarianism, and Autocracy Both authoritarian and totalitarian rules have

been excised in autocratic government

Autocratic forms of government• Theocracy (Rule by religion, leader is the main

religious figures)

• Monarchy (Rule by a single leader, typically claims Divine Right)

• Tyranny (Rule by an absolute dictator who is not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition)

• Oligarchy (Rule by a few individuals)

• Aristocracy (Rule by the wealthy)

Communist State Monopoly of ruling parties (no opposition,

state-managing elections, acting above the law, controlling the media and spying on their population).

Equality of welfare to the mass of the population

Equal and classless society Centralized planning economy All ownership was transferred to the state,

which was operated by the vanguard of the proletariat

Fascist State An autocratic ruler and a single party personify

the state; state and nation were to become one. Strong ideological impulse; depend on

movement rather than a method of governing An extreme nationalism; extreme glorification of

the nation, often defined by racial terms National socialism (extensive governmental

control of the economy while retaining private production and enterprise

Comparing historical trajectories to make causal inferences about macro-level structures and processes to test historical generalizations.

Also called as the Historical-Comparative Tradition, an approach that explores specific processes that explain a sequence of contingent events that occurred across time.

Barrington Moore, Jr., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, identifies three alternative routs to modernity: (1) “bourgeois revolution” to liberal democracy; (2) “revolution from above” to fascism; (3) “peasant revolution” to communism. Compares sets of countries that follow similar routes and contrasts these with sets that follow different paths.

Theda Skocpol, in States and Social Revolutions, theorizes that three countries (Bourbon France, Imperial China, and Tsarist Russia) experience revolutionary crises for similar

analytic reasons. She compares these instances to countries that did not experience revolutionary crises.

These non-revolutionary instances act as controls.

Macro-Causal Analysis

The Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy

Analyses the rise of fascism in Germany, Italy, and Japan. Fascism was a reaction to capitalistic modernization which

was shaking the old political order by bring new groups into the political nexus and adversely affecting old groups.

Analyses the specific factors that led to the rise of fascism Describes the fascist system of governance, ideology, and the

role of the state. Evaluates the major strengths and weaknesses of fascism.

Moore, 1966, Chapter 8