Why Should An Authoritarian Regime Remain In Power?

Dictatorships are the most controversial form of government. They create a sense of comfort through the means of lies and a lack of knowledge. For the people living under a dictatorship, they have many options. They can stay and hide or rebel, or they can leave behind the only home that they have ever known. But if they leave, the oppression, or suppression might follow them. The main source of terror comes from within the mind of the oppressed. They are left with thoughts of the unknown. They are also left with thinking if they actually did well by leaving the country in which the oppression took place. Furthermore, the people are also left with constant thoughts. If the words are not spoken, they cannot be destroyed for words are ideas. People

Those who are in power are not accountable to constituencies and public policy does not derive from social consent. Within sociology and political science, particularly within comparative politics, authoritarianism has been understood as a modern type of political regime. Therefore, the concept focuses on the way of accessing, exercising, and organizing power, on the nature of the belief system, and the role of citizens in the political

According to the Declaration, under what circumstances are people justified in overthrowing their government? (The Thirteen Colonies Declare their Freedom, P. 168)

Singer’s premise that educated and ethical citizens are the solution to a repressive government is a strong, yet controversial claim. However, I believe that the reality of this statement relies on human nature, something that can be unpredictable. Many governments have covered up their actions in order to blind the public to the corruption and evil that has taken part in, as well as to retain their power over their people. Singer argues that a

Recently, everyone has begun to wonder the same thing: why are so many leaders so… corrupt? Why do they care only about a miniscule group of people, throwing aside morals altogether? The feeling of power creates a superiority complex, letting power go to a leader’s head and giving them the desire and means to execute terrible things. This is a problem because many people in our world acquire their power because others believe they can improve the world. Once power takes control, they become corrupt. It is essential for the public to understand this because otherwise, people in power will gain this complex.

As individuals gain power, their higher authority often strives for an easily controlled and often manipulated

Lord Acton once said, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Examples of power going corrupt can be found everywhere, from book to television shows to real life. In his article, “How Power Corrupts,” Ronald Riggo explains that there are two types of power, socialized and personalized. He further elaborates that a balance of both is healthy for a ruler to have, but it becomes a problem when personalized power overwhelms social power. Personalized power is defined as power that is used for one's personal gain.

Authoritarian rulers place themselves above the law without any reprimand. There is no respect for civil society and the population has limited political participation. These rulers often strive to financially benefit themselves rather than their state and any opposition is removed by threats of violence. This increases fear within the population and increases power of the ruler or rulers. All media platforms are censored and monitored and the ruler or party

Power and control are things most people crave and some are willing to go to desperate lengths to obtain and maintain it. Past monarchs and dictators alike have used fear, murder, and manipulation to ensure that their power was secure. Leaders such as Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and King Henry VIII all used intimidation and their influence to gain power which they used to benefit themselves and commit atrocities. They rose to power due to weak societal conditions and then left a dark mark on their countries after their corrupt reign ended. Their corruption was caused by unlimited access to power which made them thirst for more and more, proving that 'absolute power corrupts absolutely'.

‘We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.’ (Orwell 332)

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.

With Authoritarian rule, power is only enjoyed by a small group of leaders, not the people. The use of an Authoritarian government means there is a bigger chance that power can fall into the wrong hands. Also, the more power an authoritarian country has, the more probable that country will become corrupt. For example, take a look at Mexico before it was a democracy, when it was ruled by the PRI, the “perfect dictatorship”. In the years of PRI leadership, the government and president had extraordinary power that shook the institutional framework of the country and even the party itself. The PRI also caused the judicial system to suffer from weakness and lack of independence. After the defeat of the PRI in 2000 there has been greater competitiveness in the electoral system. Mexico’s transition from an authoritarian dictatorship to a democracy is a perfect example of the benefits that come with being a democracy. But what about the poverty and corruption that Mexico is still plagued with today? According to Comparative Politics, the poverty was, “transmitted through cultural traits like authoritarianism, a tendency toward interpersonal violence, misogyny, and poor education”. Also important to note, most of the traits that are associated with Mexico, especially the ones Comparative Politics speaks of, are not unique only to them. These traits are common among all forms of government, so the negative

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.

However, a regime is no longer democratic the moment it violates at least one of the norms that make elections democratic, hence the name electoral authoritarianism. Furthermore, there are intrinsic powers of representative institutions in driving the dynamic of stability and change in such regimes. Thus, there is motivation for rulers to manipulate them and gain electoral legitimacy without bearing the risks of democratic uncertainty. The manipulative tactics used by authoritarians to repress are assumed to render electoral authoritarian regimes more resilient. The article also assumes the manipulation of representative institutions to create imperfectly informed citizens are identified as more authoritarian than