distinguish between democratic election and any other way of elections
Answers
Answered by
1
Democratic and authoritarian are two very different and contradicting forms of political regimes. They differ in the way a country or a state is managed. In attempting to identify and discuss the differences between the two regimes, we should think what implications do the two regimes have on the political system. How are they different in terms of the institutions they inherent? How are rulers elected and which one provides the more comprehensive representation? How does the law making process differ, what implications do they have on the judiciary and civil rights? Is the distribution of power different in the two regimes? And finally which one is more prosperous economically and in providing a stable political system. I start off by trying to define the general characteristics of the two regimes.
Authoritarian regime is a political rule forced upon its citizens without their consent. In other words, there is no conception of free and fair elections and rulers rule in their own interest over the mass. Rulers do not face the threat of 'exit' or 'questioning' and thus are not accountable to anyone. Organisations that are critical of the regime and attempt to discuss potential alternatives are either banned or severely punished. Freedom of speech and the existence of unbiased media are inconceivable. Inflow of information is either manipulated or not allowed as it may develop a possible threat to the regime. Some examples of states with these characteristics are Iraq, North Korea, Egypt, and UAE.
Singe party states, dictatorships and military regimes are types of authoritarian rule. The first two of these are similar to each other. Single party states allow only one political party to compete in elections and rule over the state and dictatorships arise when the leader of the single party accumulates power and forces it upon the citizens. The third form of non-democratic rule is known as a 'military regime'. In such a regime the ruler, mostly the commander in chief of the army accumulates military power and takes over an elected government. In all three kinds of authoritarian rule described above, the rulers rule in their interest, without the consent or approval of the people.
In contrast, a democratic system of government in theory sways into the direction of representative rule. Leaders are directly or indirectly elected. Such a system allows free and competitive elections without any restriction on the number of political parties, an absent feature in authoritarian rule. The ability of independent organisations to function without any restrictions, the existence of interest groups and the accountability of the government is vested in such a political system. Some examples of such states are the US, UK, Australia and France.
Authoritarian regime is a political rule forced upon its citizens without their consent. In other words, there is no conception of free and fair elections and rulers rule in their own interest over the mass. Rulers do not face the threat of 'exit' or 'questioning' and thus are not accountable to anyone. Organisations that are critical of the regime and attempt to discuss potential alternatives are either banned or severely punished. Freedom of speech and the existence of unbiased media are inconceivable. Inflow of information is either manipulated or not allowed as it may develop a possible threat to the regime. Some examples of states with these characteristics are Iraq, North Korea, Egypt, and UAE.
Singe party states, dictatorships and military regimes are types of authoritarian rule. The first two of these are similar to each other. Single party states allow only one political party to compete in elections and rule over the state and dictatorships arise when the leader of the single party accumulates power and forces it upon the citizens. The third form of non-democratic rule is known as a 'military regime'. In such a regime the ruler, mostly the commander in chief of the army accumulates military power and takes over an elected government. In all three kinds of authoritarian rule described above, the rulers rule in their interest, without the consent or approval of the people.
In contrast, a democratic system of government in theory sways into the direction of representative rule. Leaders are directly or indirectly elected. Such a system allows free and competitive elections without any restriction on the number of political parties, an absent feature in authoritarian rule. The ability of independent organisations to function without any restrictions, the existence of interest groups and the accountability of the government is vested in such a political system. Some examples of such states are the US, UK, Australia and France.
Anonymous:
Did u wrote it urself or took help of any other site?
Answered by
0
In Democratic elections there r free and fair election. It means that there nobody can force you to vote for a particular party and every vote has equal valuation. There are multiparty elections in which there are 2or more parties to contest elections and ppl have a real choice, they can choose their leader by considering all the qualities that they want in him.
In no Democratic elections, the situation is just opposite, there ppl don't have a real choice, there r no free and fair elections ie ppl r forced to vote for a particular party and sometimes there's no equal valuation of votes.
Let's take the example of China. China calls itself a republic coz they contest elections to form gov. But do u think ppl have a real choice there? The ans is no, not at all, there's only one party there is the Communist party of China and ppl have to vote for that only. They are forced to vote for it as they don't have a choice !
I hope now it's clear to u abt the difference between the elections in Democratic and non Democratic countries. If u have any doubt do comment below
In no Democratic elections, the situation is just opposite, there ppl don't have a real choice, there r no free and fair elections ie ppl r forced to vote for a particular party and sometimes there's no equal valuation of votes.
Let's take the example of China. China calls itself a republic coz they contest elections to form gov. But do u think ppl have a real choice there? The ans is no, not at all, there's only one party there is the Communist party of China and ppl have to vote for that only. They are forced to vote for it as they don't have a choice !
I hope now it's clear to u abt the difference between the elections in Democratic and non Democratic countries. If u have any doubt do comment below
Similar questions