Ruling Parties And Ruling Presidents Research Paper

In authoritarian leadership, the leaders make the decisions without the involvement or input of the group members. Making

Authoritarianism is a regime type and, furthermore, a political vision that seeks to create compliance in authority and establish order and peace by striving for absolute legitimacy. In an authoritarian regime, power relations are vertically-organized, where there is little to no accountability for those in power and where civil and political rights of citizens, if established, are restrictive and violated. Two common misconceptions of authoritarianism are that they are durable and they have always have a paternal figure as leader. To the first point: though an authoritarian regime would be relatively simple to establish, the difficult task of legitimizing and consolidating absolute authority makes authoritarian rule an incredibly arduous endeavour. Authoritarian regimes can easily be snubbed out as quickly as they began to burn, pointing to how the legitimacy of authority is by far the most essential tool to the authoritarian. But who is the authoritarian? Many see authoritarian regimes as patrimonial, meaning that though there still might be complex institutions of bureaucracy, security, and even political parties, all authority comes from the top and the top alone. However, there can also be authoritarian regimes run by an institution, whether through a military junta or hegemonic political party. Authoritarianism can easily derive from civil society instead of through the military, yet the coercive powers of military are essential for consolidating power.

Why must you hold certain views to be considered a democrat, republican, or even independent? This is extremely strange to me. I cannot figure out what is wrong with holding your own views.

Americans will argue that the United States is undeniably the greatest country in the world. This strong sense of nationalism is based off the rights Americans are guaranteed, such as freedom and due process. Numerous countries that reside under authoritarian and totalitarian rule do not receive these basic rights that some citizens of the United States take for granted. An authoritarian state can be simply defined as “a political system where legitimate authority rests with a single person or with a small group, or in other words, an oligarchy.” Although authoritarian states have been the most frequent type of government over time and are the main alternative to democracies as a form of government, authoritarianism receives much criticism

Essentials of Comparative Politics defines an authoritarian regime as “a political system in which a small group of individuals exercises power over the state without being constitutionally responsible to the public.” It is important to keep in mind that such a regime can be made up of numerous individuals, and not just one person as it is commonly thought of. A regime run by only one person would be known as an autocracy, whereas a group rule would be known as an oligarchy. There are also many different kinds of rulers that an autocrat could be. One example would be a dictator, where the ruler is only interested in accomplishing his goals and shows no care for the interests of the state. Another example would be the

One ruler or a small group of leaders have the real power in authoritarian political systems. Authoritarian governments may hold elections and they may have contact with their citizens, but citizens do not have any voice in how they are ruled.

The political regime is a broader term that encompasses not only the mechanisms of government and the institutions of the state, but also the structures and processes through which these interact with the larger society (Heywood, Ch.2, p. 26). According to the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, governments could be categorized on the basis of two questions: the first – who rules?; the second – who benefits?. There are many kinds of political regimes, however, political studies highlights three most common regimes: totalitarianism, authoritarianism, and democracy. The purpose of this research paper is to define the totalitarian regime and its functions, and also to illustrate political systems in Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia.

In this writing prompt we were asked to compare the Authoritarian government to our own Democracy. First things first an Authoritarian is One individual having all the power. A Democracy is a group of people who represent the country. Now, let's get into the differences.

Throughout his presidency, George Washington warned about how the formation of political parties would be detrimental to the prosperity of the nation. Washington viewed political parties as being destructive due to the temptation of manifesting power and seeking revenge on political opponents. He truly believed that parties would divide the American people and have a negative influence on government. However, his warning was overlooked and following his second term, the divisions became clear and a two-party system was established. While some believe it is still possible to govern without parties, they do not realize what it is they help accomplish. Political parties in a democracy help inform the public, organize the government, and assist in reaching compromise.

The authoritarian government is very different from the democracy government in many ways. There are ways like how they come into power and how they run their country and things like that. The authoritarian government doesn’t have the freedom like we have a democracy government.

state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life. If one accepts this construct,

Some of these characters where very obvious and easier to notice, such as aggression toward other people who are different and seam weaker in a way or another ,also a rigid thinking, a stiff obedience to authority and rules, loyalty to traditions and rejecting any change and new ideas, . In addition, the research identified other characteristic that are subtle and more difficult to spot, such as superstitious way of thinking and concerns regarding sexual behaviour, furthermore, the study claimed that authoritarian people think the world is a source of fear and threat to them (McAvoy, 2014, Pp 32- 33). On the other hand, Altemeyer definition of authoritarianism was much simpler and has three characters only, submission to authority, aggression toward people who are different and finally conventionalism, which is resisting any new ideas and adhering to the old establishment, (McAvoy, 2014, P 49). Yet, both of them believed that people with authoritarian characteristics would not commit such violent acts toward others unless the whole political and social atmosphere is accepting and tolerant toward such behaviour (McAvoy, 2014, P 33), and (McAvoy, 2014, P

In these systems, the regimes possess some of these characteristics but have found ways to manipulate the system to consolidate their power. “Rather than openly violating democratic rules (for example, by banning or repressing the opposition and the media), incumbents are more likely to use bribery, co-optation, and more subtle forms of persecution, such as the use of tax authorities, compliant judiciaries, and other state agencies to ‘legally’ harass, persecute, or extort cooperative behavior from critics” . While it is apparent that these regimes are not fully democratic, it would be unfair to label them as fully authoritarian either. Unlike traditional totalitarian governments, the persistence of true democratic institutions in competitive authoritarian regimes allows the opposition to contest, weaken and occasionally even defeat autocratic incumbents. While these situations are generally uncommon, these situations are possible in competitive authoritarianism due to four independent means, the electoral arena, the legislature, the judiciary and the media. These four branches are virtually independent of the executive control however, unlike in democracies, the competitive authoritarian regimes use its power to undermine their independence. “In regards to the electoral arena, large-scale abuses of state power, biased media coverage, harassment of opposition candidates and activists are widespread, legislatures tend to be relatively weak, the

In recent times, no one can take total power by force alone; you must offer something favorable to the people in order to obtain support. Unfortunately, there are some countries that follow a dictatorship system, which is a form of government that includes social and political power to ensure that the individual’s capability remains strong. Vladimir Putin is a contemporary dictator of Russia. His rebelliousness as a child has led him to his leadership. His cold-heartedness to his rivals and invasion towards countries has led to an opposition towards him. Vladimir Putin’s experience as a street thug led him to his leadership, which easily rose him to power: Not only has he committed crimes against humanity, but he has made groups of people and countries oppose him.

In the following paragraphs, survival of authoritarian regime will be the focus. Philippine and Malaysia will be used as case study to explain the rationale. History of Singapore, Burma, Thailand, South Vietnam and Indonesia will also be covered.