While some might argue that dictators rely on repression to help them stay in power, does it actually increase the chances the survival of a dictatorship and does repression actually work? In this journal article, the author conducts an experiment to see if there’s a relationship between survival and repression. The writer also explores what type of repression is more effective, non-violent or violent repression. The writer states that while the use of repression can sometimes backfire and lead to the demise of the leader however from his research he also finds that the use of repression is actually beneficial for the leader because it decreases the likelihood of coups and any challengers that can harm the regime. So using repression is actually
Did you know that most dictators come to power by force? They eliminate their opponent and then they are sworn in as the dictator. The people of that country do not have many rights. The dictator is allowed to do anything he/she wants. Dictatorship is a form of government where one person is in full control and the people of that country must do what the dictator says.
Life to a dictator is dispensable. Dictators such as Adolf Hitler believed that “terrorism is an effective political tool”. People could be executed or tortured just for having a different opinion from their dictators, or for being of a different race [doc 5]. Hitler also said “already the boy in school must learn to be silent, not only when he is blamed justly but he has also to learn, if necessary, to bear injustice in silence,”… [Doc 8] This basically means that even if someone is wrongly accused of doing something they should just take the punishment and be executed or tortured rather than fight the police. Society was supposed to be submissive no matter what the circumstances were or be
A dictatorship is most common in alienated countries. Dictatorships impose certain ways of thinking unto their general population, censoring the media and possibly other forms of communications. Citizens are usually kept under close observation and certain
Which is why dictators usually reserve the right of overriding their parliaments, government and courts even though they designate power for most situations. It's also why dictatorships are far more efficient in crisis situations i.e. war, then democracies. (Separation of Powers)
Despite the primitive backwardness of this collectivist society, the power of its suppressive methods must be recognized. The dictators have succeeded in subjugating the populace in ways that go beyond the stifling policies of such murderous tyrants as Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot. These real-life collectivist rulers forced millions of human beings to surrender their individuality in practice. The dictatorial regimes of Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Communist China, and Communist Cambodia forced their citizens, in action, to serve the state. Individuals had no right to their own lives, and their actions were brutally controlled; they were slaves of Nazism or Communism.
First, dictatorships can arise from popular fear when one person tries to promise the people what they think they need and another tries to give them what they want. This is shown through Hitler’s rise to power (“Causes of World War II: Hitler’s Actions”). Hitler became powerful because he promised the German public something that the Weimar Republic and its leaders couldn’t: a chance to become powerful
In conclusion, Dictators are not born evil, they just develop severe mental illnesses. I am not saying they have an excuse for being evil, they just need to be tamed. In this way, it is pretty obvious that diving into the mind of a dictator can be very confusing. Dictators have way more much power then a normal brain can hold and because of that they become paranoid. They are very dangerous and psychopathic and must be treated as such to prevent major destruction. Dictatorship quite possibly the worst form of government that country can have.
In this journal article, the authors explain how repression is used to control the masses. There’s two type of repression violent or non-violent. Violent repression would be torture and killings while non-violent would be political imprisonment and harassment. The article argues that by using repression on its elites can cause the elites to become dissatisfied with the leadership, which will weaken the hold the leader has on its people because dissatisfaction within the inner clique can lead to mobilization and in result the leader can be overthrown. However, the use of violent repression, such as purges is also beneficial to the leader because he is able to use it to get rid of his competitions. But the leaders always have to draw a clear
On balance, is information a factor that undermines autocratic rule and helps anti-regime activists, or is it one that contributes to authoritarian longevity? Explain your reasoning and the evidence for your answer.
Dictators are selfish and care more about themselves than for their people. They do not seek help and believe that nothing is wrong with them. They believe they are entitled to unlimited praise and deference (Tassew). Dictators have an inability to identify with the feelings, needs, and viewpoints of others. Despite the fact that bullies rule over weak people and dictators rule a whole country, they both have similar
The readings examined this week focus on the relationship between democracy and repression. More specifically, Christian Davenport adequately demonstrates the how repression and democracy influence on another and how sometimes they can work together interchangeably (Goodhart, 2016: 237). Davenport discusses the concepts of democracy and repression and how they work simultaneously with one another. He advances that “democracy is more likely to place greater constraints on its political leaders so that they will be less able to do what they wish and will constantly feel a greater degree of oversight/constraints” (237). Repression, on the other hand, involves the state infringing the rights of its citizens through coercion and suppression (237).
They were now faced with the threat of leftist resurgence, and responded fiercely through violent repression of those who opposed them (Pion-Berlin, 2011). However, levels of state repression varied widely between regimes. According to Table 1 in the Appendix, which measures lethal violence by state forces and other indices of repression in Southern Cone states, Argentina has the highest number of state-perpetrated deaths and disappearances (20,000-30,000) recorded during its BA regime (1976-1983). Chile has the second highest figure (3,000-5,000), and Brazil has the lowest (284-364).
When looking at the literature of the effects of repression on ethnic minorities, it seems, as of my own research of the existing literature, that in looking at the origins of State repression and ethnic conflict, the effects of repression on the ethnic minorities that end up being the targets of the repression are also detailed in the articles as well. Take the White article for example. In discussing the reasons for State repression of ethnic, and in their case religious, minorities, violence becomes the answer it that given case. And as such, violence leads to violence and death being the effect of the repressions on the repressed. For most studies, it may be difficult to attempt to answer the question of how repression will impact the
Flashbacks: when memories of past traumas feel as if they are taking place in the current moment. These memories can take many forms: dreams, sounds, smells, images, body sensations, or overwhelming emotions. This re-experience of the trauma often seems to come from nowhere, and therefore blurs the lines between past and present, leaving the individual feeling anxious, scared, and/or powerless. It can also trigger any other emotions that were felt at the time of the trauma.
Under an authoritarian regime, specifically a dictatorship, the ruler has the political and executive power to persecute an individual or group for political reasons, which demonstrates a form of political oppression.