Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Throughout history, authoritarian leaders have adopted different policies towards religion, from state atheism to drawing support from religion or co-opting religious leaders and institutions. [7] As part of civil society, organized religion serves as a mediator between the state and citizens, even under authoritarian governments. [8]
Authoritarianism and democracy are not necessarily fundamental opposites and may be thought of as poles at opposite ends of a scale, so that it is possible for some democracies to possess authoritarian elements, and for an authoritarian system to have democratic elements.
According to Encyclopedia Britannica, the Soviet Union during the period of Joseph Stalin's rule 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."
The official religion of Nepal was Hinduism but in 2006 Nepal became democratic country and constitution declared it as a Secular state with freedom of religion is guaranteed by Constitution. During the rule of the Monarch, there was democratic rule, and for a brief time, a partyless religious democracy of the Panchayat (Nepal) system.
After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world. A liberal democracy may take various constitutional forms: it may be a republic, such as Estonia, Ireland, Germany, and Greece; or a constitutional monarchy, such as the United Kingdom, Japan or Spain.
A democracy is a political system, or a system of decision-making within an institution, organization, or state, in which members have a share of power. [2] Modern democracies are characterized by two capabilities of their citizens that differentiate them fundamentally from earlier forms of government: to intervene in society and have their sovereign (e.g., their representatives) held ...
Religious stances on democracy and liberalism vary and can change. [101] The Catholic church opposed liberal democracy until 1965, when Second Vatican Council endorsed religious freedom. [101] Religious democracy which prioritizes non-liberal religious values over liberal values has been criticized for not being a liberal democracy. [102]
Having a state religion is not sufficient to mean that a state is a theocracy in the narrow sense of the term. Many countries have a state religion without the government directly deriving its powers from a divine authority or a religious authority which is directly exercising governmental powers.