Democracy is increasingly seen to be something ideal when many events occur in the process of practice. Various regimes trying to make democracy a reality in many businesses in it. Although it is an authoritarian regime which significantly inversely related to democracy instead. Authoritarian regime is a system that can also be called the traditional customs. This regime as an inheritance, which the ruling that there is a single leader who obtained the right leadership and then run a government based on a single rule that made (personal rule).
Because this
way is considered undemocratic, then evolutionary process is emerged. The first
form of dictatorship is dictatorship by an emerging of organization leaders. In
the chronology of history, this can be seen since the military coup by Napoleon
Bonaparte as a pioneer of a new type of personal rule that is rule by the
leader of an organization. Real case is the scope of the military seizure of
power in non-democratic regimes that make up modern. The types of military coup
is corporate (the command of senior military officer and as a corporate body),
factional coup (commanded by senior lower and only a few Faction), and counter
coups type (resistance by disaffected factions and ambitious).
Next comes
also pioneered a new type of dictatorship of Louis Napoleon, the populist
presidential Monarchy. But this is rare. President populist monarchy does not
have strong organizational support, and this is an opportunity for military
leaders or strong political parties. After that came the new type of
dictatorship, namely the one-party rule which then shifts the military rule. Another
threat to democracy is the emergence of fascism which also beat communism
because the area is even wider. Communist itself is actually a personal rule. A
variety of printed history through a variety of phenomena to the shift from
authoritarianism to democracy. This change began with Portugal and
democratization in post-Franco Spain in mid-1970, and democratization in the
communist regimes in eastern Europe. Because the core of authoritarianism is about
personal rule. Even though it is a military group or organization.
Organizations are instruments and containers used to make a personal rule
leaders.
Authoritarian
regime leader is an individual. But it distinguished between the monarchy and
dictatorship. Monarchy is a tradition that is older and different from other
forms of modern dictators rule. The parallels are certainly on the way absolut
in a single lead. Historically, monarchies it could arise because of political
reasons. As we all know the monarchy in the Middle East to protect oil wealth. Another
reason is because they have this tradition (as a dynastic monarchy). But in the
middle east, the uniqueness of its monarchy is different from the way west
monarchy (primogeniture), as well as the right of the people in Arabic to make
a complaint to the monarch (known as the desert democracy).
While the
monarchical dictators, frequent abuse of power. Leaders will neglect the
military organization or party. This relation changes only make the
organization as a tool to achieve certain personal power. Another type is also
emerging that is sultanist. It is more related to the methods and motivational
leader. After that came the concept created to explain the inclination of the
presidential Monarchy Third World. In Indonesia we know at the time of Suharto
era. In this concept of reversal relationship. Where should the president be
the agent and should be the main interest of the voters.
The core of
authoritarian leadership are two types, the first rule is personal. In personal
rule is divided into three, namely the monarchy (traditional or legacy),
personal dictators that arise relating to the rules of the organization, and
the populist presidential Monarchy (indeed selected, but later became a
dictator. Arises because the process of democratization).
The second
type of organizational rule. Organizational These can be either military or
single party. Military rule has the form of open and disguised. Open rule where
the leader may not form a junta. The leader has his own ambitions to be a
personal ruler and did not want to be limited by the junta. While there are
rules disguised as military leaders to make a signature rules to protect the
government or the presidency, while other government duties filled by military
officers. But when they retire, people should take over the role of electoral
competition for the spring legislative / presidential. From the history of
Burma until democracy is finally happening, we can know that the military
government that is actually driving because they indirectly control the
civilian government from behind the scenes. Besides the military, there is also
a single party in the organizational rules. This type is more ideological
nature that can be identified to be fascist, Communist and third world. In a
single party there are different structural forms that core on the way to prevent
any party puppets of party competition. So the rules of monopoly is also
formed. In this type, there are aspects of sense of belonging, namely through
the ideological aspects that gave rise to three subtypes, namely fascist (long
gone), Communist (printer one superpower in the 20th century, with the basic
ideology of Marxism-Leninism), and subtype Third World ( dictatorship set up
the winning party during the period dokolonialisasi until finally the wave of
democratization swept).
What is the
reason they rule? Some are based on religion (that their rule is 'the grace of
God' or 'the divine right of kings'. Another reason is the basis of ideology.
It is more global. A concrete example is the ideology of Lenin that was adopted
as a commitment to Marxism.
Then how the
structure and processes of control and policy? The totalitarian system is the
extreme way of dictatorship. Nothing against the state. Not only become a
totalitarian ideology, but also control the hearts and minds of people. In a
totalitarian, technology is not preferred. They just tend to focus on the role
of leadership. Another system is authoritarianism. In this system, although
there is limited political pluralism, the absence of ideology as a guideline
regime. But totalitarianism can be a semi-authoritarian, we called it
post-totalitarian. The purpose of all it is the parties who dutifully follow
the rules (even if the claim is not effective). More extreme authoritarian
(likely effective) and a few dictators adopt it at the top of repression. While
the way of one-party would have been different. But the same goal, namely to
control the state and society. Authoritarian special also affect the social,
economic and foreign policies. In making policy, there is no democratic election
thus policy-making is clearly different, which makes the authoritarian rule can
be more ideological and corruption in the rules of its own. And personal
dictator will make policy without considering the knowledge or expertise. Because
he is considered the most know (patronage opportunities).
Conclusion:
Many who
call themselves democracy though obviously he is a fascist (and then call it as
'authoritative democracy' or 'German democracy'). This shows how democracy is
something that is ideal. Many ways are used to implement, but the fact is,
though there are multi-party system, still a lot of electoral fraud, for
example is the establishment of puppet parties. Actually, democracy is an
evolutionary process. So is authoritarian, an evolutionary process. Either form
entirely new species or subspecies in the form, authoritarian may survive or
flourish. This may occur because the process of evolution as organisms that can
adapt. And in this context, authoritarian can survive in the new political
climate.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar