Apart from the similarity as regard to its lack of concern for civil liberties and its restrictions on political competition and criticism, an autocratic system is therefore different from a totalitarian system in the ways mentioned below.
1. There is the absence of a dominating political ideology such as communism or fascism or liberalism. Many autocratic regimes lay great stress on nationalism, but in a vague and generally rather ineffectual way.
2. In the absence of an effective mass party or ideology, an and autocratic regime has more need for resort to open force and coercion in order to enforce political obedience.
3. Political power is less institutionalized (by comparision with an effective totalitarian or liberal-democratic system), and the basis for rule is found either in a traditional, political elite or in a new, modernizing elite, the latter often being drawn in large part from the armed forces.
4. Civil liberties are weak supported and the mass media and judiciary are more directly controlled by the government.
5. Rule is arbitrary and often highly personalized with little respect for the law or legal rights.
This category of the political system is very heterogeneous. It differs from the liberal-democratic model in kind and from a totalitarian model in degree only. Some scholars believe that autocratic system are transitory regimes. They lack industrial and economic development that would gradually lead them into either liberal-democracies or totalitarian system. Included in this group are state with traditional ruling groups such as saudi arabia, ethiopia and nepal, and with such governments as algeria and egypt.
Apart from the similarity as regard to its lack of concern for civil liberties and its restrictions on political competition and criticism, an autocratic system is therefore different from a totalitarian system in the ways mentioned below.
1. There is the absence of a dominating political ideology such as communism or fascism or liberalism. Many autocratic regimes lay great stress on nationalism, but in a vague and generally rather ineffectual way.
2. In the absence of an effective mass party or ideology, an and autocratic regime has more need for resort to open force and coercion in order to enforce political obedience.
3. Political power is less institutionalized (by comparision with an effective totalitarian or liberal-democratic system), and the basis for rule is found either in a traditional, political elite or in a new, modernizing elite, the latter often being drawn in large part from the armed forces.
4. Civil liberties are weak supported and the mass media and judiciary are more directly controlled by the government.
5. Rule is arbitrary and often highly personalized with little respect for the law or legal rights.
This category of the political system is very heterogeneous. It differs from the liberal-democratic model in kind and from a totalitarian model in degree only. Some scholars believe that autocratic system are transitory regimes. They lack industrial and economic development that would gradually lead them into either liberal-democracies or totalitarian system. Included in this group are state with traditional ruling groups such as saudi arabia, ethiopia and nepal, and with such governments as algeria and egypt.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..