Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Oh, Stasik, hi.
The authoritarian regime in history is more of a norm, while democracy is an aberration. For almost the entire six-thousand-year or so history of states on Earth, authoritarianism has been overwhelmingly dominant. So the question is quite strange.�
If we start from the point of view of political culture, then from the very moment of its appearance to the formation of persistent forms of a culture of participation, authoritarianism is more than natural. A stable democracy can arise if a society goes through a successful modernization process, and this has not happened with most modern states. Actually, only the countries of the golden billion, and a couple of other states, are truly ready for democracy right now.
If democracy is imposed or created artificially in an unmodernized society in which there is no consensus on democratic values, then there are two ways: either democracy will be supported by elites who will develop democratic orientations among the population (for example, Taiwan), or everything will again slide into authoritarianism, or even totalitarianism (the Weimar Republic, the Russian Republic of 1917).