Politics of Non Democratic Regimes
Politics of Non Democratic Regimes
PO- C12
What is the significant of non democratic regimes or why study non democratic regimes?
Well to study the non democratic regimes is not to justify them.
In 1986 Roy Macridis conducted a study of 122 nations. He found that out of 122 regimes, only 27 countries are democratic, and all others are non democratic regimes. Thus the numbers of non democratic regimes are much more than democratic regimes so they are important and must be studied.
Paul Brooker gives us different forms of non democratic regimes as-
1] Tribals- governed by elders. This is the most primitive form of non democratic regimes.
2] Monarchies e.g. Saudi Arabia there has been successful monarchies.
3] Aristocratic governments.
4] Empires
5] Military regimes
6] One party regimes.
During 1990s S.P. Huntington published his work. “The Third wave: democratization in the late 20th century “, (1991).
He says that from 1828 to 1926 democracy emerged in European world. What happened- there was setback to this democracy after world war I. after 1920s most European nations turned into fascist regimes.
Second wave of democracy began from 1943 till 1962. In late 40s, in the World War II fascist regimes were defeated. And in the mid 1950s, most of the Asian and African states become independent. Marshal plan implemented by the USA. It wanted to build a democratic Europe. Germany, Italy, France all become democracies. And in the east Japan’s military and fascist regimes was defeated. In fact, through Marshal Plan, America helped Japan too.
The third wave began in 1974 to 1989 i.e. collapse of east European communist. Even after Marshal Plan Spain and Portugal were authoritarian regimes. So this began in south Europe; Spain and Portugal, and then spread to Latin America and South America. This wave hit the Philippine (eastern world), and finally the wave reached to Eastern Europe.
Huntington said that democracy will be the globalize one.
Well Huntington published his other important work: “clash of civilization” in which it is about threat to secular democracy. Threats are coming from Muslim world, Buddhist world, and Hindu world. Most scholars believe that 21st century might belong to non democratic regimes.
The emergence of non democratic regimes was a reaction to the failure of democracy in different parts of the world. They had critical view of functioning of democracy and this so led them to expensive with non democracy e.g. Islamic revolution 1979 Iran.
In fact studying non democratic regimes we can compare the social, economic and political performance of non democratic regimes among themselves, as well as with democratic regimes. And in turn this will enrich our political thought and understanding.
One other point to be mentioned is that most of the Asian countries though have adopted western form of democracy failed to practice it like western democracies.
What is the regime specific approach?
First, we should know that what a regime is.
Well strictly speaking by regime we mean a method or system of government, especially one that has not been elected in a fair way.
Roy Macridis talks about nature of regime as follows-
1] Regime generates commonly share goals and provides for socialization.
2] It developed a mechanism for decision making.
3] It establishes mechanism for articulation and aggregation of interest.
4] It provides way and means to select decision makers and facilitate their succession.
5] It maintains order by providing for effective controls against disruptive social forces.
6] It manages to be capable of self representation. These are the requirements of a regime – that is how regime is a concrete reality.
Well system approach is an abstract and is more meaningful in developed societies. In the backward societies it is difficult to differentiate between different political rules – why – because there is less structural differentiation.
Regime specific approach-
1] What is the pattern of organization of commands
2] Organization of consent- how non democratic regimes mobilize the popular support.
3] The configuration of interest- how the interests of the different sections of society are taking care of and how conflicting interest is managed and secondly what patterns of interest articulation are developed in non democratic regimes.
4] How organization of rights take place in non democratic regimes. In democratic regimes rights are made claim against the state i.e. confronting the state. But, in non democratic regimes right is the basic service of the government to give it to its people.
Authoritarian regimes-
Sub types-
1] Tyrannies
2] Dynastic regime
3] Military regimes
4] Single party regimes.
Major features of authoritarian regimes-
1] The weight of the military is overwhelming in authoritarian system.
2] In authoritarian system popular participation is very low and deliberate distance maintains between people and the government. Political power is concentrated in the hands of few selected people. While, in totalitarian regime there is “force participation”.
3] Civil and political rights do not exist in authoritarian systems and even if they exist they are highly qualified (restricted) while in totalitarian system people have formal constitutional rights.
4] In authoritarian systems, elections referendum etc, are occasionally conducted but this is to just mobilize the consent of the people and legitimate their own authoritarian role e.g. Pakistan under Mushraf.
5] There is no political ideology to mobilize the support of the people.
6] While trying to subordinate societal and interest groups, authoritarian systems do not undertake an extensive penetration and restructuring of the society. It is unlike in totalitarian system.
7] The governing elites consist of different elite groups and therefore authoritarian regimes are oligarchic in character. A handful of people manage the business of government.
Thus authoritarian regimes are different from totalitarian, monarchies and democracies.
1] Tyrannies-
There are two types of tyrannies
1] Ancient
2] Modern
What is the nature of ancient tyrannical rule?
1] So far as, organization of structure is concerned, nature of political power is absolute and personal.
2] So far as, the organization of interest is concerned they are characterized by subordination and extortion.
3] So far as, the organization of support and consent is concerned it is based on coercion and complexity.
4] So far as, the natures of rights are concerned, there is total absence of rights.
Aristotle says where a single person governs over others without any form of responsibility and with a view to his own advantage rather than that of his subjects.
Subjects are almost like slaves. This is the nature of tyranny.
Following are three aspects of tyranny explained by Aristotle-
1] Keep the citizens in object disposition.
2] Not to allow the people to have confidence in each other.
3] The people are kept in the state of complete powerlessness.
Certain major features of tyrannies are-
1] Tyrannies are intensely personal regimes and therefore there are no rooms for institutionalization.
2] A tyrant has to organize a guard and secure their loyalty by way of sharing some of the spoils i.e. goods and services, otherwise no tyrant can survive.
3] He has to create a set of rules and procedures for the distribution of benefits to his associates.
4] Sometimes he also has to delegate some of his powers to his associates and then he remains in a constant fear of conspiracy.
5] In a tyranny, political power is exercised arbitrarily and whimsically i.e. at the cost of the interest of the majority of the people.
Well even in modern times, we have tyrannies.
Modern tyrannies-
First, of all, rise in science and technology has increased the power of modern tyrannies. Anyway following are three features as under-
1] In modern tyrannies the organization of command becomes more complex as compare with the classical tyrannies. In modern tyrannies the instrument of coercion are carefully developed through police and army. Now this is the beginning of institutionalization. In classical tyrannies we have no institutionalization.
2] Nature of coercion – this includes prevention, repression, surveillance, and intimidation. Due to rise of technology, they can easier penetrate into the society.
3] Basic services have to be provided in modern times e.g. education, public health, transportation, domestic and national security etc. the classical tyrannies could ignore these services, because people also did not expect that.
Well there are several classic examples of modern tyrannies; however, lets take one of them as –
Trujillo’s rule in Dominican Republic (1930-1961).
Haward Wairda published dictatorship and development (1968), a work related to Trujillo’s rule. He says that after 1926, Trujillo’s gradually rose to high rank within the army and with the help of American forces, he came to power for almost 30 years. He did not come to power through launching a military revolt. But, he came to power through election- non democratic election. In short he conducted election through the help of his military- controlling the electoral process and force the competitors to withdraw. When he came to power what happened was that-
1] He ruled the country through two institutions army and political party. Through his force party acquired mass based forcing every citizen to become its member.
2] He amassed tremendous personal wealth and owned most of the lands. He also controlled the national bank and owned the entire press.
3] He alone controlled the all imports and exports and was the biggest milk producer.
4] The only structure left was Catholic Church. He actually helped it and so gain support from it.
Why his rule was not totalitarian?
1] Ideology was kept for the rationalization of the rule of the tyrant, and not to offer inspiring alternative vision of a new society. While in totalitarian regimes there is a vision of a new society.
2] The function of ideology was to ideologize the ruler, and not to mobilize the masses. While in totalitarian ideology mobilizes the masses.
3] It was feared rather than involvement that characterized the public behavior. But in totalitarian regimes authority makes the people to involve in politics.
Other examples of modern tyrannies are-
1] Somoza’s rule in nicaragoe.
2] Batista’s rule in Cuba.
3] Papa ooc duvalliers rule in Haiti.
4] Bokasa’s rule in central Africa.
5] Idi Amin.
Dynastic Regimes-
Classic examples of dynastic regimes are Saudi Arabia and the sultanate of Brunei.
Monarchies are: Bahrain, Jordon, Oman, Kuwait, Nepal, Morocco, Qatar, and even Haiti.
Well, the kind of monarchy exist in dynastic regimes is different from constitutional monarchies such as Japan and England.
In dynastic regimes:
1] Monarchies actually govern. It is not symbolic.
2] They come to power according to certain established rules and conventions.
3] Power is shared by Royal family. It is essentially familial in character.
4] It is almost a patrimonial form of government. King is the father of people.
5] Unlike tyrannies, dynastic regimes do rule within certain restraints imposed by local customs, religious cannons, certain local understandings and conventions.
6] The wealth of the kingdom is indistinguishable from the personal wealth of the monarch. This is not the case with the constitutionalized monarchies.
7] He does not have to forcibly extort the wealth of the people. People willingly give it to the king of monarch.
8] There is lack of participation and representative institutions.
Totalitarian regimes-
Following are the subtypes of totalitarian regimes as:
1] Communist Totalitarian.
2] Fascist totalitarian.
Nature of power in democratic and in totalitarian regimes comparison:
1] In a democracy the elite is plural i.e. there are many elite groups who share the power and compete openly. But in totalitarian regime it is monolithic in character e.g. communist party in Soviet Union.
2] In a democracy there are different ideologies. But in totalitarian regime the elite is committed to official ideology.
3] In a democracy sometimes different elite groups are part of the ruling elite: it is inclusive in character. But elite in totalitarian regime is exclusive in character: either you are part of it, or you are not.
4] The elite in a democracy is competitive, whereas the elite in totalitarian system is noncompetitive, and therefore is integrationist.
The goal of fascist regime is to integrate the society- integration is imposed from above. This is what communists do they make you Marxist.
Nature of totalitarian system? Composition of the elite. Soviet Union is an example. How entry into the elite class is secured.
1] To work for the apparent i.e. to work for the party bueaurocrat party. Totalitarian regime compels people to participate in the system – different units. And so they provide opportunity for the people for political recruitment, and then, people get associated within the party – they acquire power and so become powerful. In totalitarian system party structure is highly organized and complex.
2] To seek entry through intellectual participation of competition: e.g. ideocrats in Soviet Union. Intellectual capable men philosophize the party, advocate and justify the ideology this is how that party intelligence emerges.
3] To seek entry to become technocrats having technical skills and knowledge. This is off course with every system.
4] Intimation and threat of force used by regime in order to secure participation. It is watchful of people’s activities.
Recruitment to command structure:
Securing a party membership in a democracy is easier than in a communist party. E.g. communist party pf soviet union. Anyway let’s list following:
1] There are special schools for training in:
Propaganda
Agitation
Ideology
Political organization
Manipulation.
To be an active party member one has to follow these processes. And they become political engineer.
2] There is a network of political organization e.g.
There are octorbists: young boys and girls between 7 to 9 years old. This is an early political socialization.
Then there are pioneers between 9 and 14 years old.
Then there is Komsomel i.e. young communist leagues. Functions of Komsomel are:
1] Control radio and TV stations.
2] Exercise close supervision over school activities etc.
3] Publish special newspapers and address to the young people.
4] Direct the activities of octorbists and pioneers.
5] Higher education is exclusively reserved for Komsomel members.
3] Joining the communist party of Soviet Union: application must approve by the members. Then there is a process of 3 years. In the process one must acquire the knowledge of Marxism- after that one can be qualified for membership. Then they would accept the system as natural. Because a totalitarian regime institutionalizes the public life at high level, so they can command.
How the consent is mobilized?
In totalitarian systems consent is secured through a systematic political mobilization.
1] There is an induced participation.
2] Focus is on the integration of the people.
3] Democracy relies on value autonomous associational activities. Whereas totalitarian regime tries to penetrate these associations, it tries to restructure these associations, and it also tries to reduce these associations, to subordinate instrument of ruling party.
How interest is organized?
Soviet Union, three major developments are:
1] All industrial and manufacturing concerns are taken over by the state.
2] There was elimination of “Kulaks” and planning for agriculture and food distribution. Three modes of planning agriculture are –
1] Collective cooperatives.
2] Sate forms
3] ½ acre lands allowed to be owned privately.
3] All the labour interest was organized through trade unions.
Fascist regimes:
This is another type of totalitarian regime. Well, how organization of commands takes place?
Here we will refer to Italy 1922-1944 and Germany Nazi 1933-1945. Well major characteristics are:
1] Concentration of power in central government: in Italy decision making was centralized in the hands of top governmental organizations. The minister of interior dismissed everyone in the provincial administration and appointed new administrators, and local councils. There is total identification of party and government.
In Germany- Hitler abandoned federal system and established unity government. He dismantled local government units, etc.
2] There was no separation of power:
1] Law making process was through declaring decrees.
2] Executive and legislative functions were concentrated in the hands of party leader.
3] Abolishing of existing and potential centers of opposition.
4] Total control of election by party leader.
5] Total subjugation of judiciary – no independence.
3] Single party regime features are:
1] Party monitors and controls the government at all levels.
2] There were interlocking arrangement between party officials and government officials.
3] There was a whole sale infiltration of the government by party officials.
4] There was careful network of front organization through which the party recruited the new members and new leaders.
5] There was subordination of all inferior organs, party, and government to the superior authorities and ultimately to the leader.
6] There was an increasing use of intimidation and force to ensure the compliance of both party and government personnel.
4] Glorification of the leader as a norm- leader is projected as supreme authority. “Leader is opposing to sovereign”. Leaders try to have charismatic power e.g. Hitler and Mussolini.
Nature of governing elite:
By and large fascist regimes rely heavily on traditional elite. Traditional elite composed of:
1] Members belonging to royal families.
2] Members belonging to aristocratic class.
3] Members associated with the church.
4] Military elites and business groups.
5] No place for working class. In a communist regime laborer is a major component of governing elite, but in fascist regime it is not so.
Recruitment in the fascist regime:
1] Major thirst is a recruiting the youngsters.
2] There is an elaborate network of youth organization ranging from 10 to 18 years age. Normally is open only after 18 years old.
3] There are special schools set up to train the members and members are chosen on the basis of:
- Courage.
- Loyalty to the leader.
- Obedience to higher authority.
- Anti-Semitism.
- Faith in racial purity.
Political recruitment takes place:
1] The coercers – who are expert in the use of force. They are recruited for Para military organizations and their function is to create terror.
2] The administrators- who work within the central organization of the party.
3] The ideologues- who interpret will of the leaders; who propagate party ideology; who manage political campaign; who work as journalist and media persons.
How consent is mobilized in fascist regime:
1] Elimination of all actual as well as potential centers of opposition.
2] Formation of new networks of association, to replace the existing ones associations are: cultural, athletic, trade guides, etc. in 1935 Nazi organization emerged in every sector of the society. Fascist regime penetrates deep in every walk of life.
3] Intimidation and force means are:
A] Prevention of descent through massive arrest.
B] Direct acts of violence.
C] Summery execution.
Then there was office of the security police which was almost a parole government.
Then specialized bureaus established to deal with communist, to deal with church, to deal with homosexuals, to deal with religious sects.
Then special units setup to clean up the conquered areas.
Then to transport prisoners and civilians to labour camps, and to collect the Jews for sending them to death camp.
This is how, the entire command is established.
Military regimes:
Before Second World War there were no military regimes.
Well in Africa between 1970 and 1984 there were numbers of military regimes such as, Burundi, Chad, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Uganda, etc.
Well, Finer S.E. published his work “The Man on the horseback: Rule of military in politics (1962)”.
He tries to develop a typology of different military regimes. He found at least 5 types:
1] Indirect limited regime- here, the military exercises control over the govt. only intermittently. It controls the government to secure specific objectives. We can take example of Brazilian government 1950s.
2] Indirect complete regime- Finer says, the military continuously controls the all activities of the civilian government. Sometimes military emerges as a political organization and sometimes it rules by military men operating as free agents or personal ruler. e.g. Batista’s rule in Cuba 1937-54. And calle’s rule in Mexico 1930s etc. Finer gives 5 features of this regime:
1] Administer the country with declaring marshal law.
2] Suspension of assemblies.
3] Regimes arrest opposition groups and leaders.
4] There is total censorship of press.
5] Military ruler introduces new constitution in order to legitimate the regime.
3] Dual regime- he says a political party or some organized civilian support is developed by a military dictator as a reliable civilian forces that can act as counterpoise to the views and influence of the army. Actually, it is a two face regime. e.g. Pakistan and Bangladesh.
4] Direct military regime- In such a regime it is “military junta” that actually takes charge of the government and this is how the military itself works as a government. Everything is under the control of military.
5] Direct quasi- civilianized military regime- Finer says that, this seeks to give evidence of civilian support through some kind of supportive political party, i.e. in fact, party is not in power, but military ruler is in power. Ruler is supported by the party.
In his analysis, finer says that all the military regimes are not a like in terms of controlling the system.
Now, the second typology comes from Nordlinger (1977) published: “soldiers in politics: military coups and government.” He also introduces 3 types of military regimes:
1] Moderate type- Nordlinger says that it has limited goals and rules indirectly. It has specific purpose. It intervenes with certain economic goals, e.g. if an economy is not good, it intervenes and when economy recovered, then it withdraws.
2] Guardian type- Again goals are limited but there is a direct rule. It takes charge as long as the purpose is served, then it leaves. They are not interested in power.
3] Ruler type- military emerges as ruling class. It becomes highly politically ambitious. Military takes over the state and prefers to rule the country extensively.
A major contribution comes from Huntington who produced two major works:
1] “The soldiers and the state (1967)”, 2] “political order in changing society (1968).”
Huntington says, a military regime comes to existence when there is a militarization of civil rights. He talks about praetorian society- in such a society army is fully politicized clergy, then politicized trade unions, politicized civil services, universities, business corporations, etc. the business is transacted through bribes. Secondly workers continuously go on launching strikes and create political unrest thirdly, students are involved in riots.
Now the question is that how a military regime emerges?
Huntington says that it is the mind set of the people who accept the military rule. Or militarizing the minds of the people and then pave the way for military rule. He also has developed 3 major types of military rule.
1] Oligarchical praetorian society: he has identified at least 4 major features.
A] This is the oldest and least complex society predominantly present in 19th century Latin America, and very common in the Middle East.
B] There is low traditional level of political participation limited to dominate social forces e.g. big landlords, the clergy, and the military.
C] Military, however, lacks autonomous existence.
D] In such a society personalitic rule prevails.
2] Middle class radical type practorian society:
He gives following features as under:
A] Such a society arises from a breakthrough or reform coup by; middle ranking officers i.e. military comes to power.
B] This middle class radical officers overthrow the oligarchic rule and they come with a program of national integration and development with some extent of political participation.
C] They play a prominent role in allowing some sort of political participation to certain other modernized sections of the society and try to seek legitimate to their rule.
3] Mass practorian society: he says-
One- military plays both the reactive as well as guardian role on behalf of middle class employing a vet’s quo to protect the middle class interest against the lower class.
Second-mass practorian society includes the political participation of lower classes such as urban unorganized laborers living in slum areas but the military seek to break their entry to the governing class.
One party regime:
Tucker published his work in 1961. He tries to explain the phenomenon of party regime in terms of “revolutionary mass movements”. He says there are 3 types of party regime as:
1] Communist regime.
2] Fascist regime.
3] Nationalist regime.
We have discussed both communist and fascist regimes already.
About nationalist regime, he gives examples of Kemalist Turkey; Nationalist China; Nasser’s Egypt; Bourguibu’s rule in Tunisia; etc.
He says that in there regimes there are revolutionary mass movements and all these regimes are outcome of revolutionary mass movements.
Another authority is- Huntington and Moor edited a volume in 1970s: “Authoritarian politics in modern society: dynamics of established one party system.” They offer a classification of one party regime as under:
1] Revolutionary one party system: - these systems encompass totalitarian systems. They seek either to liquidate or assemblage the politically subordinate sections of its dividend society, and they seek to eliminate all sorts of bifurcations based on class, race, caste etc, most fascist and Nazi regimes have relied on liquidation rather than assemblition. He further says that the African and third world one party systems relied on assemblition by seeking to emphasis national unity and by minimizing the sources of social conflicts.
2] Established one party system: - Huntington gives us following main features as under-
A] It successfully overcomes the issue of dividend society i.e. it can establish sense of unity among people. They do this because they have larger social and political goals.
B] It has a more administrative character than a revolutionary character. We can take example of Russia and china.
C] There is a decline in party/ mobilized popular participation and the importance of ideology in shaping goals and policy decisions.
D] Political leadership tends to have lost its personalists leadership, charismatic leadership, autocratic quality and to have become Oligarchical and bureaucratic i.e. the quality of leadership changes and it sustains through bureaucracy.
E] The party is no longer an initiator of policy. In a way this is the death of the party. Rather party is a mediator of policy initiatives.
3] Exclusionary one party systems: - Huntington says that it either suppresses or restricts political activities of the politically subordinate sections of the society and particularly that of the dividend society. How exclusion is achieved – two strategies are-
A] Strategy of de-mobilization care is taken to politically silent the sections of the society, e.g. deny right to vote etc.
B] Strategy of suppression this amounts to political repression.
Classical examples of exclusionary one party systems are- South Africa, Northern Ireland, Taiwan, turkey under kemal etc.
How one party regime is legitimized?
So far as the African states are concerned at least there are five major arguments –
1] Traditional or communal: in pre-colonial Africa there exist a “typical African democracies” or “community democracy”.
Western democracy experience cannot be applied in African traditions. They talk of consultation, discussion, and consensus as characteristics of decision making process in community. This is against majority rule in western democracy. They say we don’t require opposition parties, etc.
2] Popular will- since the people has overwhelming voted for the national liberation party, so the party is accepted by the people. All such parties in Africa initially were mass movement’s parties and people are happy with this and so it is natural phenomenon in African societies.
3] Lack of class: all African societies are tribal societies. Multiparty phenomenon emerges when we have classes. Because different classes have different interest.
4] Nation building- they argue that the first task is to build African societies into a one nation, otherwise there will be dividend societies. Different political parties would have different political views therefore create problems in the process of nation building. So through the instrumentality of one party mechanism we can be more successful.
5] Development: every newly born nation requires two things
1] National integration.
2] Development.
For this we must have single party phenomenon so that there can be consensus for economic development. All these factors legitimize one party system.
Why military intervenes in civil affairs or why military regime comes to existence?
Well, finer gives four major arguments to explain this as:
1] National interest: military always perceives itself as the custodian of national interest. They blame civilian authority for not able to protect national interest. They have three rules as-
* They sometimes play the role of arbitrator.
* They sometimes play the role of vetoer. They use veto to present a particular party from becoming powerful, etc.
* They sometimes play role of ruler. They come to power as a ruler and take charge of the government and the state.
They enter either to save country from a possible civil war or from a possible external aggression.
2] Corporate self-interest: every structure and institution can be understood in terms of group activities. So military has its own consciousness and has its own vested interest. They intervene to secure their interests- interests are:
A] Military always desires to protect its professional autonomy.
B] It is deeply concerned with the military appointments should conform the standards, norms, practices, and established procedures. They also think there should not be political interference while recruiting the army personnel.
C] It is very sensitive to disciplinary matters.
D] As a corporate body military always concerned with modernization of armaments and defensive equipments.
3] Individual self-interest: finer talks about 3 major individual self interests:
A] Desire for better payment.
B] Easier promotion
C] Opportunities for attractive jobs in civilian organizations after they retire from the army.
4] Social i.e. ethnic or class self-interest: sometimes military interferes because it perceives that there is a threat to their social interest. Military always composed of different religious, ethnic, etc.
Personalists rule:
Tyrannies and monarchies could be understood as personalists rule. However recent studies show that there are various types of personalists rule.
Actually Linz has identified modern sultanism as a type of personalist rule. Modern sultanism is based on extensive use of fear and personal guide. Army and police happen to be personal staff of these regimes. The rulers through his power enrich himself and his family. There is no mass party and mass mobilization. Such regimes are found in small countries with largely agricultural economies as well as in few urban centers. Most of the Middle Eastern monarchies are modern sultanism. Haiti in 1950 is also a classic example of modern sultanism.
Linz also talks about oligarchic democracy, can caudillismo (rule by military chieftain), and caciqnismo (rule by local political bosses) as other types of personalist rule.
Well, other authorities on this are Jackson and Rosebery. Jackson published: “personal rule in Black Africa (1982)”.
Jackson’s typology is as under-
1] Prophetic personal rule- the great emphasis is on ideology e.g. Khomeini in Iran.
This type tries to hold the society to fit the principles and goals of ideology, and this is how they try to justify total monopolization of power. Some African societies also fall in this category.
2] Princely personal rule- it is based on patron Dan relationship i.e. power relationship between the ruled and the ruler. Ruler is patronizing the people. Secondly, there is no emphasis on ideology; rather emphasis is more on political manipulation.
3] Autocratic personal rule- this tends to share power with other leaders either coming from military or army, or coming from religious leadership. Sometimes totalitarian regimes degenerate into personalist rule e.g. Stalin.
4] Tyrannical personal rule- it is based on fear and rewards to ruler collaborators. Those who oppose the ruler will be punished and finished politically e.g. saddam Hussein, in Iraq or Haiti.
Well, political scientist holds that personalist rule can be distinguished from other types of dictatorships.
Proto democracies:
This is another type of nondemocratic regime that has been discovered recently by Paul Brooker.
This is a typical central Asian phenomenon. We can take examples of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, etc.
In fact, they are neither totalitarian, nor full fledged democracies- they are heading towards democracies.
He talks of peculiarities of these regimes. The incumbent president here is required to have following:
1] Those who have been the communist party’s boss has also role i.e. after the collapse of Soviet Union communist leaders do play a vital role in politics.
2] He has to establish more repressive personal rule thon the previous ones e.g. thon yelastin.
3] Ruler is required to have established the former communist party in the nationalist or democratic guise as an official party.
4] Most of the times these leaders extent their presidency beyond the period stipulated by the ruler or constitution.
Now how do they justify this?
Paul Brooker sometimes call them as authoritarian democracies which are justified by-
1] It is essential for establishing liberal economy.
2] It is essential in transition period, because a shift from one pattern of govt. to another.
3] It is also essential to change the mindset of the people.
Thus these regimes are not authoritarian and totalitarian in the traditional sense of the term. They are experiencing democracy.
He says that proto democracies particularly after 1990s can be considered as non democratic regimes.
There is also fundamentalist religious regime as a type of nondemocratic regimes.
How nondemocratic regimes consolidate the rule?
Two ways are a] legitimizing the regime b] adopting effective means of control.
A] Legitimizing the regime- the work- democracy and the market (1991) by Przewwski, says: most of nondemocratic regimes are not legitimated. They remain in power for more than 40 years.
Some others maintain that nondemocratic regimes are not legitimated and so they require no legitimacy.
Well, finer has discussed following ways taken by nondemocratic regimes to legitimize their rule: ideology, electoral democratic means, legality, and national interest or patriotism. Now how this is achieved. Finer argues two things 1] the need to establish some form of protection against countercoups by some section within the military.
2] There is also need to establish more efficient and economical means of securing civilian obedience than simply relying on force. Well, let’s discuss these ways-
1] ideology- many of nondemocratic regimes committed themselves to some kind of official ideology they justify the regime. e.g. Nasser in Egypt in 1952.
He said “van guar” military is a real agency of revolutionizing the Egyptian revolution. Or Indonesia in 1965 suhurto introduced a new doctrine: dual function of military. Indonesian arm forces have a social political function which covers ideological, political, cultural, social, and religious matters or e.g. African leaders who always talks of African democracy.
2] Electoral democratic means- in most of the regimes military has always argued that we are there in power to “restore democracy”. They also say we will have a party system- three types are:
* Noncompetitive multiparty system e.g. in east Germany etc.
* Semi competitive party system e.g. Mexico.
* One party system with multicandidate elections e.g. china, Hungary, etc.
3] Legality- either nondemocratic regime introduces new constitution and legitimizes their role e.g. most of Marxist scholars defined constitution. Or they introduce substantial amendments to the existing constitution so that make it suitable to new regime.
4] National interest or patriotism- they justify their role in the name of national interest, saying that there is a threat to national interest. They talk of four types of threat as-
* Anarchy
* Social revolution
* Civil war
* Secession- partition of the country.
Well, whenever legitimizing this above mentioned failed then there we will face with the other issue as,
B] Adopting the effective means of control-
Following are the strategies used by them-
1] Deploy competent security and intelligence organ in the form of secret police. This becomes an important political structure. As far as nondemocratic regimes concern followings are the patterns-
1] Sometimes this police force is inherited from the previous regime.
2] Revolutionary regime normally does not recruit the police from previous regime, so they establish their own forces, e.g. Iran after Islamic revolution.
3] Sometimes there are party security units e.g. “militia” in Iraq there were Baathist guard.
4] Sometimes the civilian police force is augmented.
2] Employ political police. This exercises a coercive part:
1] Political police may exercise torture.
2] Detention in labour and concentration camp.
3] Execution- disappearance of certain prominent figures.
4] To impose sanctions such as –
- disciplining the state employ.
- dismissing him from job.
- deny of a job.
- To block the carrier of the employ.
- deny of certain business opportunities.
3] Third strategy is to employ informers:
* Regular informers
* Amateur informers.
In East Germany, out of 17,000,000 populations 11,000,000 were employed as informers.
4] Use of modern technology to exercise control: in Iraq video cameras installed in both public and private places.
The Nazi employed party block leaders each of them were in charge of 40 households to look and report what people do, etc.
5] State ownership of means of production: in almost all communist systems, means of production are socialized. Even this happened in African states. Through this the control every aspects of people lives.
6] Announce marshal law administration: military junta and marshal law combined together and have a control. In the most of the Middle East states junta known as “national security council” e.g. turkey etc.
In some countries control is exercised through military colonalization e.g. Pakistan under Ayoob Khan, etc.
7] There is control through civilization of the regime: military regimes try to civilize the rule by way of conducting election, introducing new constitution, etc.
Policy performance of the nondemocratic regimes: they have to control the behavior of the people means adopted are:
Legitimization of the regime, effective control, and regime must perform successfully on policy matters.
Well, referring to the recent studies on policy performance finer talks about military regime- saying:
1] Military regimes do not have any common or distinctive approach to economic and social policies. Out of existing military regimes, nine regimes were market capitalist regime. Twelve were capitalist socialists, and only four regimes were socialist.
2] He says military regimes are less extreme than the party dictatorship. Most of them are centrist in their approach. If they are rightist then their policies are less extreme than the fascist regime. And if they are leftist their policies are less extreme than the communist e.g. pern in 1970s this regime second quite radically socialist, but it was not that characteristic of this regimes are:
1] Army established revolutionary govt.
2] They immediately nationalize local and foreign companies.
3] It provided for health care and education.
4] The regime introduced radical land reforms.
5] In industries they introduce principle of workers participation in management. 50% of the ownership of share was transformed to the workers. Well in implementations of their theories they failed. This was unlike communist regime.
Now in the fascist regime-
When Mussolini came to power in Italy, he committed himself to imperialist policy. He said the fascist party desire to establish a new roman empire around the Mediterranean Sea.
The Nazi in Germany. Hitler committed to the goal of “lebensraum” means conquering living spaces in east Europe and Soviet Union.
They implied two things:
1] The whole economic was going to be orientated towards military needs.
2] It also meant as policy of autarchy economic self sufficiency.
At the social level, the regime committed to reform of custom and revival of cultural pride. What is foreign in culture must be removed.
Now in the communist regime- major features of this communist policy are:
1] Centrally plan economy.
2] Abolition of private ownership.
3] Collectivization of agriculture.
Means they did not nationalized it. E.g. in china 1958-1960s we had “great leaf forward”. A massive program of industrialization despite the fact that china’s revolution heavily relied on peasantry.
Well, four major features need to be taken into account as far as collectivization concerned:
1] State did not take up the ownership of agriculture.
2] It replaced individual or household ownership with collective ownership of large farm govern by elected management committee.
3] The peasant was force to give up control over marketing.
4] Production quotas were setup.
We can give examples of Hungary where there was market socialist model. Cuba, North Korea, etc.
Well, recently communist regimes follow policy of economic liberalization, because of globalization e.g. china and Vietnam four issues are:
1] They are replacing collectivized agriculture by the household based system.
2] They are encouraging state owned industries to operate more in the market than in the planned sector of the economy.
3] They are encouraging the development of private business.
4] They are stimulating much more international trade and foreign investment.
They say this program is experimental and this is the bottom of program. That is why, china did not collapse but Soviet Union collapsed. The adoptability of its economic system helped china.
Third wave of democracy:
Well, Huntington mentioned that there was a setback to democracy and after 1920, most European nations turned into fascist regimes.
In the Second World War fascist regimes were defeated. Most of the African and Asian states become independent etc.
Third wave of democracy began in 1974 to 1989. This spread in the south Europe then spread to Latin and South America. This wave hit the Philippine (the eastern world) and finally reached to the eastern Europe etc. fourthly, people themselves initiated democratization. Popular democratic waves emerged. He says: when there has been democratization it always been challenged by what he says “Reverse wave of Authoritarianism” e.g. democracy was challenged in Africa, and in the most east European states.
He says: even third wave of democracy is challenged by new form and new forces of democracy. New forms of nondemocratic regimes are coming up. Four major new forms of nondemocratic regimes are:
1] Authoritarian nationalism- nationalism can be emancipating and also otherwise.
Nationalism becoming more and more authoritarian in every nation. State may be democratic, but people are authoritarian e.g. India.
2] Emergence of religious dictatorships- Iran after 1979 is a classic example. It is not fundamentalist, because a fundamentalist state cannot survive in modern times.
3] Communal dictatorships- it is particularly in the form of linguistic or ethnic communalism.
4] Populist dictatorships- Mexican dictatorship, e.g. and most of the Latin American states.
A dictator takes the populist position and stands. There is total disrespect for institutions and organizations. Politics heavily rely on symbolic distribution.
There is likely going to be the future forms of nondemocratic regimes.
Dear Student, this text is based on the class lectures of Professor Yashwant Sumant, Department of Politics & Public Administration, University of Pune. References can be found on the official site of Pune University, Department of Politics & Public Administration, subject of Politics of Non Democratic Regimes, Syllabus 2004-2009. This note prepared by Ahmad Reza Taheri (2004-2006). This note needs edition.
