• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What are the main differences between 'liberal democratic', 'authoritarian' and 'totalitarian' political systems?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

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. ...read more.

Middle

Another sub category would be a military regime where the power has more been seized and the military are either directly in control or they are in close alliance with appointed government officials. Military regimes are in use in Pakistan. Totalitarianism is an extremist authoritarian system which is not really in use anymore. Totalitarianism has been defined by Fredrich and Brzezinski (1963); a totalitarian state is based on a strong, clearly defined ideology and operates under a one party political system. The ideology seeks to change society and the people who make it up; it is a completely invasive system which controls all aspects of life. The media and mass communication are controlled by the state, presenting only the messages the party want to be heard. The masses are kept in line by force with a brutal police system in place. The final characteristic identified by Fredrich and Brzeznski is that the state exercises complete control over the economy. All of these combine to produce the desired result of eradicating civil society and 'the private'. Linz (2000) defined totalitarian systems as 'a regime form for completely organizing political life and society' Hague (2004: 53). The fascist and communists states which existed in Europe in the twentieth century were totalitarian in style. The first, most fundamental difference between 'liberal democratic' and 'authoritarian' regimes is the democracy; non-democratic states are authoritarian. ...read more.

Conclusion

Trying instead, wherever possible to keep good relations with any country they may wish to trade with. The differences between authoritarian and totalitarian system are obviously harder to define as the systems are so similar in many ways. The main theoretical difference, which obviously spurns other practical ones, is that under a totalitarian regime there is a very definite ideology and the aim of the regime to penetrate every aspect of life and change society with this ideal in mind. Authoritarian states on the other hand operate merely as a system of power 'from above' where the subjects have no recourse. Because of this difference a totalitarian system will be much more extreme and invasive than an authoritarian one. In a totalitarian state there is no civil society, trade unions, businesses etc independent of government. Totalitarian systems, as they are so radical by definition do not offer any long term options; the regimes is attempting and enforcing change, once this change has been successfully implemented the system would then strictly speaking no longer be a totalitarian state and would simply be authoritarian. In conclusion authoritarian and totalitarian systems are very similar though they do have some fundamental differences whereas liberal democracy is inextricably different from both. The most important difference is the legitimacy of the power being exercised by the government. This massively affects the stability of a nation; people who feel they have control over the politics in their country are much less likely to revolt. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays

  1. What are the key features of a liberal democratic state?

    elections in this country. An example of this rule being put into practice recently is on the debate over Iraq. The Prime Minister, Tony Blair is facing fierce opposition and public opinion to go to war with the U.S. Now unless Blair can change there minds which he has been

  2. Is the Media an independent political actor?

    their political ambitions, a charge which ultimately compromises the primary function of the press in a liberal democracy. Those who believe in the idea that we live in a pluralist democracy would argue that the participation of the media as the "watchdog of the public interest"9 acknowledge the crucial role that the mass media plays in the political process.

  1. Malta at the turn of the 19th Century.

    Thus the emigration had to more organise and planned, maybe in some cases also aided by the government. Political Formations Usually, political parties have there own belief and base of support through which it is spread by means of their leader or by any other means of communication, namely a newspaper.

  2. To what extent was religion the main causeOf rebellion in the reign of Henry ...

    Mary had been bastardised by Henry and others, by the divorcing of Cathrine of Aragon. But now Mary had been reinstated as Princess, so this now created a huge rift towards the Boleyn faction. Through out court there had always been a fight between those that supported the Aragon faction, and those who supported the Boleyn faction.

  1. The basic concepts of a Liberal Democratic Theory of the State by describing the ...

    It can be seen that these electoral systems are quite different although the basic elements remain the same. In both of these systems, one person has the right to one vote only and they have the right to vote for the candidate of their choice in secret.

  2. 'THE SEPERATION OF POWERS: FACT OR FICTION UNDER THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION?'

    By long-standing tradition, the Government (executive) is formed by the leader of whichever party in the Commons can command a majority. As a result, the executive is able to exert considerable pressure over the legislature. This situation has been worsened by the rise of the party system in Parliament.

  1. The Negative Impact Of World War 1 On Italy: Weaknesses Of The Liberal State, ...

    Those on the 'right' of politics increased in number and became more extreme in their views as they felt that the Liberals were too weak and indecisive to be able to protect their interests. Instead of crushing the 'socialist threat' the Liberal governments appeared weak, offering concessions to workers in order to stop the strikes and riots.

  2. How has the role and impact of military rulers and civilian politicians differed in ...

    Pakistan has been running on constant borrowings from one government or other. The debt which Pakistan was facing when Musharraf took over was approximately US$ 38 billion 22.At that time Pakistan was on the verge of defaulting. Musharraf after a long time was the first leader who really worked hard to prevent Pakistan from the verge of defaulting.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work