Authoritarianism

We know that democracies are common among the economically urbanized countries and rare between the very deprived ones. The reason we scrutinize this pattern is not that democracies are more probable to emerge, as a result, of economic development but that they are to a large extent more possible to survive if they occur to emerge in most urbanized countries. The paths to democracy are diverse. Indeed, they appear to follow no unsurprising pattern. But once democracy is conventional, for whatever reasons, its endurance depends on a few, easily particular, factors.

Democracy and the challenges it is facing has been the main topic in the field of international politics since some Authoritarian regimes have raised again as a great power after a long time of absence. In this essay, we will look at some of the challenges facing the international democracy based on the work of Azar Gat “ The Return Of Authoritarian Great Powers”. The article is presenting the author view on the rise of authoritarian regimes as the main challenge of liberal democracy. The main part of my essay will be an illustration and reflection on a number of arguments that have been brought by the author. Additionally and before concluding my piece I will establish my own argument as a critical response to the article or more specifically to the Economic efficiency argument brought by Azar Gat.

In the midst of the prevalence of democratic transitions, a number of developing countries are seeking to achieve the successful consolidation of civil order in modern days. Among those participants, Mexico and Nigeria has been spotlighted for the completely contrastive endings at the end of their long-adventures towards democratization since their independence; Mexico, from its independence, has maintained the political stability despite the authoritarian single-party regime and even accomplished the solid democratization at the time of the 2000 election whereas Nigerian regime has been deteriorated by a series of military cues d’états and

Many European nations suffered a prolonged period of instability and financial instability. This instability caused citizens of some countries to be willing to give up their democratic government for a strong, authoritarian

With the human civilization is progressing, there are several kinds of political system appeared in the world. It seems that an important reason that results in some countries are democratic or some countries not. Therefore, this essay will discuss 2 countries America and Cuba, which are liberal democracy country and non-democracy (authoritarian regime) country respectively. What are liberal democracies and authoritarian regime? What class of politics system runs in those two countries? How does politics system runs in those two countries and changes them. Following will help to further show what above is. This essay will also compare the some aspects of them, which are economics, party of country, human right.

The purpose of this essay is to outline the similarities and differences between Adorno et al.s (1950) and Altemeyers (1981) approach to authoritarianism. In 1981 Bob Altemeyer revamped Adornos study on authoritarianism, focusing on who the followers are, how they got that way, how they think and why they are so submissive and aggressive.

Latin America is a continent that is constantly struggling between governmental abuse and oppression of its citizens. In Latin America, it is very common for non –democratic systems to be enforced. During recent years, the continent has experienced a governmental shift from an absolute to a more democratic system. This era is called the democratic third wave, which brought about democratic like tendencies to Latin America. Many factors such as corruption, poverty, and inequality pushed the people to favor this new democratic system. The abuse of power is also very common, and the citizen’s unrest is highly noted. Most citizens are in favor of doing away with the old system of government, and establishing a new efficient political system.

Whenever people think of communism, Russian SFSR (Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic) and China, as two biggest communist polity, always come to people’s mind first. Likewise, at any time people mention authoritarianism, they will never miss the two biggest authoritarian regimes: Russia (Russian Federation) and China. The former, with the collapse of Soviet Union in 1991, the world’s first and largest communist polity and the prime facilitator of communist political system came to an end, which creates the modern Russia Federation, a country that still persists in authoritarianism but applies democratic political system and constitution. The latter, after experience multiple destructive invasions and humiliating

India and China are two republics that have experienced very opposing political regimes throughout history. China has been fundamentally stable country with a lack of a distinct authority figure (Desai, 2003). Being a single party state China has been controlled by the Chinese Communist Party since the 5th National Congress held in 1927 (Wang, 2013). Correspondingly India, have always been a federal parliamentary democratic republic where the President of India elected is head of state and the Prime Minister elected is the head of government (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, 2013). This

Democracy has become the most widespread political form of government during the past decade, after the fall of all its alternatives. During the second part of the 20th century, the 3 main enemies of democracy, namely communism, fascism and Nazism, lost most of their power and influence. However, democracy is still only to be found in less than half of this world's countries. China with a fifth of the total population "had never experienced a democratic government" and Russia still doesn't have a well established democracy. By adopting a democratic perspective, 3 types of governments emerge, non-democratic, new democracies, and old democracies, and all have a different challenge to overcome: either to become democratic, to "consolidate"

150). Democracy is supposed to be about equal opportunity but when bribery is brought into the balance it disrupts the scale to tip the scales into the favor of the politicians which goes against the principle of democracy (“Rise of Democracy”, para. 1). In the majority of Latin American countries there is a system called “compulsory voting” which makes it illegal not to vote. Although it is illegal not to vote, in Brazil’s case, only 78.90% of eligible voters voted for the presidential campaign in 2014 (“Voter Turnout”, para. 3). While there is a huge amount of corruption in Latin America, it can be overcome. In September of 2015, a crowd of Guatemalans chanted at President Otto Perez Molina, “Resign, now.” Their voice was heard as the ex-Guatemalan president stood down from office and is now in prison awaiting trial over an alleged corruption scandal (Watson, p.1, para. 1-3). This is just a glimpse of the power the people can hold. If the voters can get a current president out of office than imagine what can happen if everyone were to vote for who they truly believe is worthy of representing and governing the country.

In recognition of the indicators of democratic consolidation in various countries, it is significant to understand the features that characterize the presence of successful consolidation within a country’s government. Features such as the holding of free repeated elections, peaceful transfers of power through elections, survival of tribulations, adherence to a rule of law, lengthy survival, and legitimacy recognized by the populace are all characteristics of a successful consolidation of democracy. In terms of which indicators would convincingly indicate truly successful consolidation of democracy, it is evident that legitimacy, survival of tests and tribulations, the presence of free consistent elections, and an adherence to a rule of law by the public are the most appropriate characteristics that would indicate or refute veritable consolidation. Each of these democratic

Schedler argues that authoritarian regimes – particularly since the end of the Cold War era have been replaced by electoral authoritarian regimes that combine the façade of electoral democracy with systemic abuse of democratic procedures. They have reproduced institutional arrangements present in the democratic system, such as elections, the legislative and judicial powers, and independent local governments. However, these institution creations are never meant to become autonomous, rather manipulative in order to be instruments of pretentious delegation of power from the executive.

Since the initiation of the Third Wave of Democracy, several countries have attempted to form a democratic system of governs. We take note that not all have succeeded. At the dawn of this era, democracy was being applied to countries with no prior history of a governing body that was place by the people for the people hence success of such a system could not be guaranteed because of the innumerous variables that existed in each country. People being the highlighted factor of variance, it may become easier to understand how countries such as Pakistan and Nigeria, both countries prior to the Wave had no local governing machinery. Pakistan further endured a partition from India which resulted in not only an instant religious and

According to Andrew Janos, “the price of economic progress has been political turmoil”. (Janos, pg. 21) If the Modernization Theory holds that countries tend to become more democratic the more they modernize, then political turmoil is to be expected in democracies. Certainly this can occur in both parliamentary and presidential systems: as Linz argues, the presidential system concentrates too much power on the president, resulting in “winner-take-all” politics (Linz, pg. 56) and the polarization of political parties. This is evident in the United States, where the president is elected separately and Congress is divided between the opposing Democrats and Republicans. Conversely, the parliamentary system in Britain, as well as that adapted by the former British colonies of Sri Lanka and Nigeria, has had its fair share of single-party hegemony and political abuse. (Horowitz, pg. 78) Democracy is therefore not a perfect form of government when put in practice, and much of its