Authoritarianism is a form of social organization Social organization or social institution, refers to a group of social positions, connected by social relations, performing a social role. It can also be defined in a narrower sense as any institution in a society that works to socialize the groups or people in it. Common examples include education, governments, families, economic systems, characterized by submission to authority Authority, from the Latin word auctoritas, means invention, advice, opinion, influence, or command. Essentially authority is imposed by superiors upon inferiors either by force of arms or by force of argument (sapiential authority). Usually authority has components of both compulsion and persuasion. For this reason, as used in Roman law, authority. It is opposed to individualism Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that stresses "the moral worth of the individual". Individualists promote the exercise of one's goals and desires and so independence and self-reliance while opposing most external interference upon one's own interests, whether by society, or any other and democracy Democracy is a political form of government where governing power is derived from the people, either by direct referendum or by means of elected representatives of the people (representative democracy). The term comes from the Greek: δημοκρατία - (dēmokratía) "rule of the people", which was coined from δῆμος (dêmos) &. In politics Politics , is a process by which groups of people make collective decisions. The term is generally applied to behavior within civil governments, but politics has been observed in other group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. It consists of "social relations involving authority or power" and refers, an authoritarian government is one in which political power is concentrated in a leader or leaders Leadership is stated as the "process of social influence in which one person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task." Definitions more inclusive of followers have also emerged. Alan Keith stated that, "Leadership is ultimately about creating a way for people to contribute to making something, typically unelected, who possess exclusive, unaccountable, and arbitrary power.^[1][2]

Characteristics

Theodore M. Vestal of Oklahoma State University–Stillwater has written that authoritarianism is characterized by:

• "Highly concentrated and centralized A centralized or centralised (UK) government is one in which power or legal authority is exerted or coordinated by a de facto political executive to which federal states, local authorities and smaller units are considered subject. In a national context, centralization occurs in the transfer of power to a typically sovereign nation state power structures" in which political power Political power is a type of power held by a group in a society which allows administration of some or all of public resources, including labour, and wealth. There are many ways to obtain possession of such power. At the nation-state level political legitimacy for political power is held by the representatives of national sovereignty. Political is generated and maintained by a "repressive Political repression is the persecution of an individual or group for political reasons, particularly for the purpose of restricting or preventing their ability to take part in the political life of society system that excludes potential challengers" and uses political parties A political party is a political organization that typically seeks to attain and maintain political power within government, usually by participating in electoral campaigns, educational outreach or protest actions. Parties often espouse an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming a coalition among and mass organizations to "mobilize people around the goals of the government";^[3]
• The following principles The scientific process generally consists of establishing a cause by analyzing its effect upon objects. In this way, a description can be established to explain what principle brought about the change-effect. For this reason the principle of cause is considered to be a determining factor in the production of facts^[3]:
  1. rule of men, not rule of law While the rule of law has been described as "an exceedingly elusive notion" giving rise to a "rampant divergence of understandings", a dichotomy can be identified between two principal conceptions of the rule of law: a formalist or "thin" and a substantive or "thick" definition of the rule of law. Formalist
  2. rigged elections Electoral fraud is illegal interference with the process of an election. Acts of fraud affect vote counts to bring about a election result, whether by increasing the vote share of the favored candidate, depressing the vote share of the rival candidates or both. Also called voter fraud, the mechanisms involved include illegal voter registration,
  3. all important political decisions made by unelected officials behind closed doors
  4. a bureaucracy Bureaucracy is the combined organizational structure, procedures, protocols, and set of regulations in place to manage activity, usually in large organizations. As opposed to adhocracy, it is often represented by standardized procedure that guides the execution of most or all processes within the body; formal division of powers; hierarchy; and operated quite independently of rules, the supervision of elected officials, or concerns of the constituencies they purportedly serve
  5. the informal and unregulated exercise of political power
• Leadership that is "self-appointed and even if elected cannot be displaced by citizens' free choice among competitors"^{[citation needed]}
• No guarantee of civil liberties Civil liberties are rights and freedoms that protect an individual from the state. Civil liberties set limits on the government so that its agents cannot abuse their power and interfere unduly with the lives of private citizens or tolerance for meaningful opposition In politics, the opposition comprises one or more political parties or other organized groups that are opposed to the government, party or group in political control of an area, county, or state;^[3]
• Weakening of civil society Civil society is composed of the totality of voluntary civic and social organizations and institutions that form the basis of a functioning society as opposed to the force-backed structures of a state and commercial institutions of the market: "No freedom The opposite of a free society is a totalitarian state, which highly restricts political freedom in order to regulate almost every aspect of behavior. In this sense ‘freedom’ refers solely to the relation of humans to other humans, and the only infringement on it is coercion by humans to create a broad range of groups, organizations, and political parties to compete for power or question the decisions of rulers", with instead an "attempt to impose controls Social control refers generally to societal and political mechanisms or processes that regulate individual and group behavior, leading to conformity and compliance to the rules of a given society, state, or social group. Many mechanisms of social control are cross-cultural, if only in the control mechanisms used to prevent the establishment of on virtually all elements of society";^[3]
• Political stability maintained by "control over and support of the military A military is an organization authorized to use force, usually including use of weapons, in defending its country by combating actual or perceived threats. As an adjective the term "military" is also used to refer to any property or aspect of a military. Militaries often function as societies within societies, by having their own to provide security to the system and control of society; 2) a pervasive bureaucracy staffed by the regime; 3) control of internal opposition and dissent Dissent is a sentiment or philosophy of non-agreement or opposition to a prevailing idea or an entity (e.g. an individual or political party which supports such policies). The term's antonyms include agreement, consensus (when all or nearly all parties agree on something) and consent (when one party agrees to a proposition made by another); 4) creation of allegiance An allegiance is a duty of fidelity said to be owed by a subject or a citizen to his/her state or sovereign through various means of socialization Socialization is a term used by sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists, politicians and educationalists to refer to the process of inheriting norms, customs and ideologies. It may provide the individual with the skills and habits necessary for participating within their own society; a society itself is formed through a plurality of."

Authoritarian political systems may be weakened through "inadequate performance to demands of the people."^[3] Vestal writes that the tendency to respond to challenges to authoritarianism through tighter control instead of adaptation Adaptation is the evolutionary process whereby a population becomes better suited to its habitat. This process takes place over many generations, and is one of the basic phenomena of biology is a significant weakness, and that this overly rigid approach fails to "adapt to changes or to accommodate growing demands on the part of the populace or even groups within the system."^[3] Because the legitimacy The word legitimacy is often interpreted in a normative or a positive way. In a normative sense, legitimacy gets greater attention as a part of moral philosophy. It is a status conferred by the people on the government's officials, acts, and institution through their belief that the government's actions are an appropriate use of power by a legally of the state is dependent on performance, authoritarian states that fail to adapt may collapse.^[3]

Authoritarianism is marked by "indefinite political tenure" of the ruler or ruling party The ruling party or governing party in a parliamentary system is the political party or coalition of the majority in parliament. Within a parliamentary system, the majority in the legislature also controls the executive branch of government, thus leaving no possibility of dueling parties concurrently occupying the executive and legislative (often in a single-party state A single-party state, one-party system or single-party system is a type of party system government in which a single political party forms the government and no other parties are permitted to run candidates for election. Sometimes the term de facto single-party state is used to describe a dominant-party system where laws or practices prevent the) or other authority.^[3] The transition from an authoritarian system to a democratic Democracy is a political form of government where governing power is derived from the people, either by direct referendum or by means of elected representatives of the people (representative democracy). The term comes from the Greek: δημοκρατία - (dēmokratía) "rule of the people", which was coined from δῆμος (dêmos) & one is referred to as democratization Democratization is the transition to a more democratic political regime. It may be the transition from an authoritarian regime to a full democracy, a transition from an authoritarian political system to a semi-democracy or transition from a semi-authoritarian political system to a democratic political system. The outcome may be consolidated (as it.^[3]

John Duckitt of the University of the Witwatersrand The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg is a leading South African university situated in the northern areas of central Johannesburg. It is more commonly known as Wits University. The university has its roots in the mining industry, as does Johannesburg and the Witwatersrand in general suggests a link between authoritarianism and collectivism Collectivism is a term used to describe any moral, political, or social outlook, that emphasizes the interdependence of every human in some collective group and the priority of group goals over individual goals. Collectivists focus on community and society, and seek to give priority to group rights over individual rights, asserting that both stand in opposition to individualism Individualism is the moral stance, political philosophy, ideology, or social outlook that stresses "the moral worth of the individual". Individualists promote the exercise of one's goals and desires and so independence and self-reliance while opposing most external interference upon one's own interests, whether by society, or any other.^[4] Duckitt writes that both authoritarianism and collectivism submerge individual rights Group rights are rights held by a group rather than by its members separately, or rights held only by individuals within the specified group; in contrast, individual rights are rights held by individual people regardless of their group membership or lack thereof. Group rights have historically been used both to infringe upon and to facilitate and goals to group goals, expectations and conformities Conformity is the process by which an individual's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors are conditioned by what is conceived to be what other people might perceive. This influence occurs in both small groups and society as a whole, and it may be the result of subtle unconscious influences, or direct and overt social pressure. Conformity also occurs.^[5] Others argue that collectivism, properly defined, has a basis of consensus decision-making Consensus decision-making is a group decision making process that not only seeks the agreement of most participants, but also the resolution or mitigation of minority objections. Consensus is usually defined as meaning both general agreement and the process of getting to such agreement. Consensus decision-making is thus concerned primarily with, the opposite of authoritarianism.

Authoritarianism and totalitarianism

Totalitarianism Totalitarianism is a political system where the state, usually under the control of a single political person, faction, or class, recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible. Totalitarianism is generally characterised by the coincidence of authoritarianism (where ordinary is generally considered^{[by whom?]} to be an extreme version of authoritarianism. Building on the work of Yale political scientist Juan Linz, Paul C. Sondrol of the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs has examined the characteristics of authoritarian and totalitarian dictators and organized them in a chart:^[6]

Sondrol argues that while both authoritarianism and totalitarianism are forms of autocracy An autocracy is a form of government in which one person possesses unlimited power. An autocrat is a person ruling with unlimited authority. The term autocrat is derived from the word autokratōr (αὐτοκράτωρ, lit. "self-ruler", or "one who rules by himself"). It is distinct from oligarchy ("rule by the few"), they differ in "key dichotomies A dichotomy is any splitting of a whole into exactly two non-overlapping parts, meaning it is a procedure in which a whole is divided into two parts, or in half. It is a partition of a whole into two parts (subsets) that are:":

(1) Unlike their bland and generally unpopular authoritarian brethren, totalitarian dictators develop a charismatic Charisma is a trait found in persons whose personalities are characterized by a personal charm and magnetism (attractiveness), along with innate and powerfully sophisticated abilities of interpersonal communication and persuasion. One who is charismatic is said to be capable of using their personal being, rather than just speech or logic alone, to 'mystique A cult of personality is similar to hero worship, except that it is propagated by mass media. However, the term may be applied by analogy to refer to adulation of religious or non-political leaders' and a mass-based, pseudo-democratic interdependence Interdependence is a dynamic of being mutually and physically responsible to, and sharing a common set of principles with others. This concept differs distinctly from "dependence" in that an interdependent relationship implies that all participants are emotionally, economically, ecologically and or morally "interdependent." with their followers via the conscious manipulation of a prophetic image.

(2) Concomitant role conceptions differentiate totalitarians from authoritarians. Authoritarians view themselves as individual beings, largely content to control; and maintain the status quo. Totalitarian self-conceptions are largely teleological. The tyrant In classical politics, a tyrant is one who has taken power by his or her own means as opposed to hereditary or constitutional power. This mode of rule is referred to as tyranny (τυραννίς turannis) is less a person A person is any individual human being. The term people is the plural of "person" (along with the slightly rarer word "persons"); however, "people" may also be used as a singular to refer to an entire nation or ethnic group than an indispensable 'function' to guide and reshape the universe. (3) Consequently, the utilisation of power for personal aggrandizement is more evident among authoritarians than totalitarians. Lacking the binding appeal of ideology An ideology is a set of ideas that discusses one's goals, expectations, and actions. An ideology can be thought of as a comprehensive vision, as a way of looking at things , as in common sense (see Ideology in everyday society below) and several philosophical tendencies (see Political ideologies), or a set of ideas proposed by the dominant class, authoritarians support their rule by a mixture of instilling fear and granting rewards to loyal collaborators, engendering a kleptocracy Kleptocracy, alternatively cleptocracy or kleptarchy, from Greek: κλέπτης and κράτος (rule), is a term applied to a government that takes advantage of governmental corruption to extend the personal wealth and political power of government officials and the ruling class (collectively, kleptocrats), via the embezzlement of state funds.^[6]

Thus, compared to totalitarian systems, authoritarian systems may also leave a larger sphere for private life The private sphere is the complement or opposite to the public sphere. The private sphere is a certain sector of societal life in which an individual enjoys a degree of authority, unhampered by interventions from governmental or other institutions. Examples of the private sphere are family and home. Martin Heidegger argues that it is only in the, lack a guiding ideology, tolerate some pluralism in social organization, lack the power to mobilize the whole population in pursuit of national goals, and exercise their power within relatively predictable limits.

Authoritarianism and democracy

While many people^[who?] regard authoritarianism and democracy as opposed to one another, it is possible for democracies to be authoritarian. An illiberal democracy (or procedural democracy) is distinguished from liberal democracy (or substantive democracy) in that illiberal democracies lack some democratic features, such as the rule of law, an independent judiciary, a further distinction was that liberal democracies rarely made war with one another. More recent research has extended the theory and finds that democracies have few Militarized Interstate Disputes causing less battle deaths with one another, and that democracies have few civil wars.^[7][8]

• Poor liberal democracies tend to have better education, longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality, access to drinking water, and better health care than poor dictatorships. This is not due to higher levels of foreign assistance or spending a larger percentage of GDP on health and education. Instead, the available resources are more likely to be managed better.^[9]

• Studies suggest that several health indicators (life expectancy and infant and maternal mortality) have a stronger and more significant association with liberal democracy than they have with GDP per capita, size of the public sector, or income inequality.^[10]

• In the post-Communist nations, after an initial decline, those most democratic have achieved the greatest gains in life expectancy. Although it must be noted that most were also the most developed states from the ex USSR before its end.^[11]

• A prominent economist, Amartya Sen, has theorized that no functioning democracy has ever suffered a large-scale famine.^[12] This includes democracies that have not been very prosperous historically, like India, which had its last great famine in 1943 and many other large-scale famines before that in the late nineteenth century, all under British rule. (However, some others ascribe the Bengal famine of 1943 to the effects of World War II^{[citation needed]}. The government of India had been becoming progressively more democratic for years. Provincial government had been entirely so since the Government of India Act of 1935.)

• Refugee crises almost always occur in non-democracies. Looking at the volume of refugee flows for the last twenty years, the first eighty-seven cases occurred in autocracies.^[9]

• Research shows that the liberal democratic nations have much less democide or murder by government. However it should be noted that those were also moderately developed nations before applying liberal policies.^[13] Similarly, they have less genocide and politicide.^[14]

• Liberal democracies are more often associated with a higher average self-reported happiness in a nation.^[15]

• Research by the World Bank suggests that political institutions are extremely important in determining the prevalence of corruption: democracy, parliamentary systems, political stability, and freedom of the press are all associated with lower corruption.^[16] Freedom of information legislation is important for accountability and transparency. The Indian Right to Information Act "has already engendered mass movements in the country that is bringing the lethargic, often corrupt bureaucracy to its knees and changing power equations completely."^[17]

• In the last forty-five years, the African countries poor democracies have grown their economies more rapidly than non-democracies of the same continent.^{[citation needed]}

• Of the eighty worst financial catastrophes during the last four decades, only five were in democracies. Similarly, poor democracies are half as likely as non-democracies to experience a 10 percent decline in GDP per capita over the course of a single year.^[9]

• One study has concluded that terrorism is most common in nations with intermediate political freedom. The nations with the least terrorism are the most and least democratic nations.^[18]

List of authoritarian states

Though any list of such states is bound to be controversial, certain indices have striven to ascertain the openness or democratic quality of countries based on a somewhat simplistic tick-box method, the notion of index itself being economically oriented. Within the present world system, unsurprisingly the "soft power" countries of major western power centers often come out at the top of such lists, countries such as Sweden, Norway, etc.. on the other hand, places like North Korea, Chad and Turkmenistan appear as strongly authoritarian. For a list see, for example, The Economist magazine's democracy index, though this is a economic-liberal magazine - but indexes compiled from other points of view such as Amnesty International or Freedom House are available from time to time: The Economist's list of authoritarian States and of states that are a hybrid of democratic and authoritarian. It is often the more wealthy countries that come out at the top of such lists and the poorer ones that fall toward the end; whether this is a cause or result of their political systems is open to debate.

Another way of looking at the problem of trying to make a list of authoritarian regimes is not to compare the apparent forms of government (for example, whether direct election as in the Swiss Cantons or by collegiate representation etc.) but, in making such a list, to compare the content of such governance. Such an index asks questions as to whether or not a given government tortures its own citizens, imprisons them in Gulags or other such prison systems or behaves in a belligerent manner toward democratic nations or allows poor work conditions to flourish or even allows forms of slavery, see for example Uses of torture in recent times.

Authoritarianism in history

Forms of authoritarianism have served as the norm in many polities and in most periods from the dawn of recorded history. Tribal chiefs and god-kings often gave way to despots and emperors, then to enlightened monarchs and juntas. Even superficially democratic constitutions can allow the "concentration of power" or domination by strong-men or by small elites - note the history of the icelandic Althing.

In contrast to the varying manifestations of authoritarianism, democracy as a standard mode of political organization became widespread only after the Industrial Revolution had established modernity. Tyrants and oligarchs bracketed the flourishing of democracy in ancient Athens; and kings and emperors preceded and followed experimentation with democratic forms in the Roman Republic.

See also

References

1. ^ http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/44640/authoritarianism
2. ^ Shepard, Jon; Robert W. Greene (2003). Sociology and You. Ohio: Yin Chi Lo-Hill. pp. A–22. ISBN 0078285763. http://www.glencoe.com/catalog/index.php/program?c=1675&s=21309&p=4213&parent=4526.
3. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i} "Vestal, Theodore M. Ethiopia: A Post-Cold War African State. Greenwood, 1999, p. 17.
4. ^ John Duckitt (1989). "Authoritarianism and group identification: A new view of an old construct". Political Psychology 10 (9): 63–84. doi:10.2307/3791588. http://jstor.org/stable/3791588.
5. ^ Markus Kemmelmeier et al. (2003). "Individualism, Collectivism, and Authoritarianism in Seven Societies". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 34 (3): 304–322. doi:10.1177/0022022103034003005.
6. ^ ^{a b} "Sondrol, Paul C. "Totalitarian and Authoritarian Dictators: A Comparison of Fidel Castro and Alfredo Stroessner." Journal of Latin American Studies 23(3): October 1991, pp. 449-620.
7. ^ Hegre, Håvard, Tanja Ellington, Scott Gates, and Nils Petter Gleditsch (2001). "Towards A Democratic Civil Peace? Opportunity, Grievance, and Civil War 1816-1992" (). American Political Science Review 95: 33–48. http://www.worldbank.org/research/conflict/papers/peace.htm.
8. ^ Ray, James Lee (200l3). A Lakatosian View of the Democratic Peace Research Program From Progress in International Relations Theory, edited by Colin and Miriam Fendius Elman. MIT Press.
9. ^ ^{a b c} . Carnegie Council. .
10. ^ Franco, Álvaro, Carlos Álvarez-Dardet and Maria Teresa Ruiz (2004). "Effect of democracy on health: ecological study (required)". BMJ (British Medical Journal) 329 (7480): 1421–3. doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7480.1421. PMID 15604165.
11. ^ McKee, Marin and Ellen Nolte (2004). "Lessons from health during the transition from communism". BMJ (British Medical Journal) 329 (7480): 1428–9. doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7480.1428. PMID 15604170.
12. ^ Sen AK (July 1999). "Democracy as a Universal Value". Journal of Democracy 10 (3): 3–17. doi:10.1353/jod.1999.0055. http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/jod/v010/10.3sen.html.
13. ^ Rummel RJ (1997). Power kills: democracy as a method of nonviolence. New Brunswick, N.J., U.S.A: Transaction Publishers. ISBN 1-56000-297-2.
14. ^ No Lessons Learned from the Holocaust?, Barbara Harff, 2003, [1].
15. ^ R Inglehart, HD Klingemann (1999). Genes, Culture, Democracy, and Happiness. World Values Survey. R.J. Rummel, (2006). Happiness – This Utilitarian Argument For Freedom Is True. Accessed February 22, 2006.
16. ^ Daniel Lederman, Normal Loaza, Rodrigo Res Soares, (November 2001). "Accountability and Corruption: Political Institutions Matter". World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2708. SSRN 632777. Accessed February 19, 2006.
17. ^ AsiaMedia :: Right to Information Act India's magic wand against corruption
18. ^ Harvard Gazette: Freedom squelches terrorist violence

External links

• Not The End Of History? Democracy vs Authoritarianism Debated
• Authoritarianism 2.0
• Autocracy on the march guardian.co.uk., February 12, 2008
• The new age of authoritarianism Chrystia Freeland, Financial Times, August 12, 2008
• Are we entering the age of the autocrat? Francis Fukuyama, Washington Post, August 24, 2008
• UN University Annual "State of the Future" Report: including discussion on how genuine democracy can emerge from former states of authoritarian regimes
• Useful dos and don’ts for fast economic growth

Categories: Political theories | Social philosophy | Sociology | Sociological terms | Socioeconomics | Social psychology | Science fiction themes

See Also:

What Links Here:

Recently Viewed Pages:

• Home
• Society: Crime: Prisons: Directory
• False Imprisonment
• Society: People: Pen Pals: Prisoners and Inmates: Directory
• Prison Uniform: Images
• Criminal Justice
• ADX Florence
• Prison: Encyclopedia
• Prison: News
• Prison: Answers

Most Popular Pages:

• Prison Uniform: Images
• US
• Prison Farm
• Prison Uniform
• ADX Florence
• Penology
• John Anglin: Encyclopedia
• Gaol: Dictionary
• Fremantle Prison: Encyclopedia
• Imprisonment: Dictionary

Related 'Authoritarianism' Searches: