What are the main differences between 'liberal democratic', 'authoritarian' and 'totalitarian' political systems?
Defining political systems is a difficult thing to do as no single system is completely static, they often change dependant on things like war and trends in regimes, such as the recent insurgence in 'liberal democracies' means that the classifications of systems changes over time. The British Westminster system is considered to be a 'liberal democracy' however in the Second World War there were several powers exercised by the government which do not fit with this type of system for example control was exercised over the media and labour and elections were put off. These powers were only used as a result of the emergency situation, seemingly with the support of the masses and once the war was over the situation reverted to that of the pre war era but this illustrate how it can be difficult to apply all encompassing guidelines which finitely define a certain political system. Taking this into consideration though it is still important to have some level of classification in place so that the systems can first of all be more easily understood and also so that they can be assessed as to how effective they are and how they could be improved.
In order to consider the differences between three political systems: 'liberal democratic', 'authoritarian' and 'totalitarian' the individual definitions must first be established then any similarities and differences evaluated and finally the practical consequences of these must be highlighted.
Liberal democracy is a very popular political system in modern times. It has several defining attributes. Within a liberal democracy there is more than one political party, the parties compete in regular elections and all citizens have an equal vote. The citizens elect a representative who will act on their behalf. There is a constitution that regulates government, within the constitution the rights of the individual are defined, these rights are very important; as a result liberal democracies allow organised, voluntary groups, such as trade unions and pressure groups which can operate independent of government. There is at least a degree of seperation of powers as a method of keeping the system in check with the constitution. Though liberal democracy is an attempt to allow the masses the opportunity to be decide on collective issues, by electing a representative to speak for them the emphasise placed on civil liberties makes this impractical: 'the scope of democracy is limited by constitutional protection of individual rights, including freedom of assembly, property, religion and speech.' Hague (2004: 35)
Defining political systems is a difficult thing to do as no single system is completely static, they often change dependant on things like war and trends in regimes, such as the recent insurgence in 'liberal democracies' means that the classifications of systems changes over time. The British Westminster system is considered to be a 'liberal democracy' however in the Second World War there were several powers exercised by the government which do not fit with this type of system for example control was exercised over the media and labour and elections were put off. These powers were only used as a result of the emergency situation, seemingly with the support of the masses and once the war was over the situation reverted to that of the pre war era but this illustrate how it can be difficult to apply all encompassing guidelines which finitely define a certain political system. Taking this into consideration though it is still important to have some level of classification in place so that the systems can first of all be more easily understood and also so that they can be assessed as to how effective they are and how they could be improved.
In order to consider the differences between three political systems: 'liberal democratic', 'authoritarian' and 'totalitarian' the individual definitions must first be established then any similarities and differences evaluated and finally the practical consequences of these must be highlighted.
Liberal democracy is a very popular political system in modern times. It has several defining attributes. Within a liberal democracy there is more than one political party, the parties compete in regular elections and all citizens have an equal vote. The citizens elect a representative who will act on their behalf. There is a constitution that regulates government, within the constitution the rights of the individual are defined, these rights are very important; as a result liberal democracies allow organised, voluntary groups, such as trade unions and pressure groups which can operate independent of government. There is at least a degree of seperation of powers as a method of keeping the system in check with the constitution. Though liberal democracy is an attempt to allow the masses the opportunity to be decide on collective issues, by electing a representative to speak for them the emphasise placed on civil liberties makes this impractical: 'the scope of democracy is limited by constitutional protection of individual rights, including freedom of assembly, property, religion and speech.' Hague (2004: 35)
