Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Modern political science catalogues three régimes of government: (i) the democratic, (ii) the authoritarian, and (iii) the totalitarian. [8] [9] Varying by political culture, the functional characteristics of the totalitarian régime of government are: political repression of all opposition (individual and collective); a cult of personality about The Leader; official economic interventionism ...
According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the Soviet Union during the period of Joseph Stalin's rule, along with Nazi Germany, was a "modern example" of a totalitarian state, being among "the first examples of decentralized or popular totalitarianism, in which the state achieved overwhelming popular support for its leadership."
Totalitarian democracy is a dictatorship based on the mass enthusiasm generated by a perfectionist ideology. [1] The conflict between the state and the individual should not exist in a totalitarian democracy, and in the event of such a conflict, the state has the moral duty to coerce the individual to obey. [2]
According to Yale professor Juan José Linz there are three main types of political regimes today: democracies, totalitarian regimes, and authoritarian regimes, with hybrid regimes sitting between these categories. [6] [7] The term regime is often used critically to portray a leader as corrupt or undemocratic. [8]
An authoritarian leadership style is described as being as "leaders' behavior that asserts absolute authority and control over subordinates and [that] demands unquestionable obedience from subordinates." [1] Such a leader has full control of the team, leaving low autonomy within the group.
Kleptocracy (from Greek κλέπτης kléptēs, "thief", or κλέπτω kléptō, "I steal", and -κρατία-kratía from κράτος krátos, "power, rule"), also referred to as thievocracy, [1] [2] is a government whose corrupt leaders (kleptocrats) use political power to expropriate the wealth of the people and land they govern ...
Charismatic authority grows out of the personal charm or the strength of an individual personality. [2] It was described by Weber in a lecture as "the authority of the extraordinary and personal gift of grace (charisma)"; he distinguished it from the other forms of authority by stating "Men do not obey him [the charismatic ruler] by virtue of tradition or statute, but because they believe in him."
Ferdinand Marcos developed a cult of personality as a way of remaining President of the Philippines for 20 years, [113] [114] in a way that political scientists [who?] have compared to other authoritarian and totalitarian leaders such as Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler, [115] but also to more contemporary dictators such as Suharto in Indonesia ...