Government Systems and Political Ideologies

Military dictatorship

Origins

A military dictatorship is a form of government where the military has political power. However, it is not identical to a stratocracy as the military does not directly rule the state under its control. Military dictatorship was first seen in Peru, 1821. Most military dictatorships are formed when the military deems that there is political instability or dangerous ideologies forming within the country or state, and overthrows the ruling government in what is called a coup. Therefore, military dictatorships are more prevalent in chaotic countries such as Iraq, where Saddam Hussein held a military dictatorship until he was recently overthrown. Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East have been common areas for military dictatorships. However after the Cold War military governments have been in decline as the popular excuse of communism was no longer valid.

Features

Military regimes tend to portray themselves a neutral party that leads again corrupt and ineffective civilian politicians. They usually have little respect for human rights and show little tolerance for any political opponents. A military regime is also rarely willing to give up power unless forced to by popular revolt. To prevent this, military dictatorships such as Myanmar control the accessibility of the Internet and other forms of communication with which citizens may obtain information or ideologies. The leader of a military dictatorship is usually a member from the military’s most senior leadership, called a junta. The majority of ministry and cabinet posts are held by military officers, with the minority and less important being held by civilians.

Pros and Cons

Stability as leaders will not change easily. Military dictatorships oppress democratic parties and movements, giving little chance for the country to return to democracy. Without the element of constant change that democracy brings, the direction that a military dictatorship remains on the whole unchanged for the long term.

Tough military rule ensures low rate of crime. Examples of tough military rule can be seen from the recent violent crackdown on protest in Myanmar. With a constant fear of severe punishment for any signs of misconduct, crime rates and public safety will be better than other countries.

However, military dictatorship results in lack of exposure for citizens. Military governments tend to restrict Internet access for fear of citizens accessing pro-opposition sites or gaining anti-government information through sources such as email or search engines. Restriction of internet access, especially to search engines, results in less exposure to information and knowledge. Military rule also violates human rights; civilians have limited freedom.

Suppressing democracy takes away freedom of choice for citizens. Freedom of speech is also limited and sometimes violently oppressed, as can be seen from the recent crackdown on protests in Myanmar. Political isolation results in lack of support from other countries. Most military governments isolate themselves from other countries in order to prevent their citizens from being exposed to other forms of rule. This results in their country or state lacking experience in handling certain issues that other countries may have.

Impact on Society

Economically there are also pros and cons towards military dictatorship. Having a dictatorship ensures stability and organisation, as factories are sometimes government owned. However, political isolation results in loss of learning experiences from developed democratic countries such as the U.S. As a result, most military governments are still at a lower level of industrialisation. Education might or might not contain a militant message, depending on the nature of the government. For example, Iraq’s education carried a very strong militant message as compared to Myanmar, whose education minister is a civilian. However, lower levels of industrialisation and control over the Internet makes civilians less exposed in terms of technology and information. Propaganda is often used in military governments to spread either pro-government or patriotic messages. In the 2003 war with America, the information minister of Iraq claimed that they were winning when they were in fact losing in an effort to keep up support for the military government. It is also logical to think that, in light of the recent violent crackdowns, Myanmar has also utilised propaganda to soften the public stance against the military government.

References

Burma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2008, March 23). Retrieved March 23, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myanmar .

Military dictatorship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2008, March 21). Retrieved March 22, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_dictatorship .

Propaganda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2008, March 23). Retrieved March 23, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda#The_Iraq_War .

Tan, A. K. J. (1998, September 15). APCEL Report : Myanmar. Retrieved March 22, 2008 from , Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore Web site: http://sunsite.nus.edu.sg/apcel/dbase/myanmar/reportmy.html.

	Military dictatorship Origins A military dictatorship is a form of government where the military has political power. However, it is not identical to a stratocracy as the military does not directly rule the state under its control. Military dictatorship was first seen in Peru, 1821. Most military dictatorships are formed when the military deems that there is political instability or dangerous ideologies forming within the country or state, and overthrows the ruling government in what is called a coup. Therefore, military dictatorships are more prevalent in chaotic countries such as Iraq, where Saddam Hussein held a military dictatorship until he was recently overthrown. Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East have been common areas for military dictatorships. However after the Cold War military governments have been in decline as the popular excuse of communism was no longer valid. Features Military regimes tend to portray themselves a neutral party that leads again corrupt and ineffective civilian politicians. They usually have little respect for human rights and show little tolerance for any political opponents. A military regime is also rarely willing to give up power unless forced to by popular revolt. To prevent this, military dictatorships such as Myanmar control the accessibility of the Internet and other forms of communication with which citizens may obtain information or ideologies. The leader of a military dictatorship is usually a member from the military’s most senior leadership, called a junta. The majority of ministry and cabinet posts are held by military officers, with the minority and less important being held by civilians. Pros and Cons Stability as leaders will not change easily. Military dictatorships oppress democratic parties and movements, giving little chance for the country to return to democracy. Without the element of constant change that democracy brings, the direction that a military dictatorship remains on the whole unchanged for the long term. Tough military rule ensures low rate of crime. Examples of tough military rule can be seen from the recent violent crackdown on protest in Myanmar. With a constant fear of severe punishment for any signs of misconduct, crime rates and public safety will be better than other countries. However, military dictatorship results in lack of exposure for citizens. Military governments tend to restrict Internet access for fear of citizens accessing pro-opposition sites or gaining anti-government information through sources such as email or search engines. Restriction of internet access, especially to search engines, results in less exposure to information and knowledge. Military rule also violates human rights; civilians have limited freedom. Suppressing democracy takes away freedom of choice for citizens. Freedom of speech is also limited and sometimes violently oppressed, as can be seen from the recent crackdown on protests in Myanmar. Political isolation results in lack of support from other countries. Most military governments isolate themselves from other countries in order to prevent their citizens from being exposed to other forms of rule. This results in their country or state lacking experience in handling certain issues that other countries may have. Impact on Society Economically there are also pros and cons towards military dictatorship. Having a dictatorship ensures stability and organisation, as factories are sometimes government owned. However, political isolation results in loss of learning experiences from developed democratic countries such as the U.S. As a result, most military governments are still at a lower level of industrialisation. Education might or might not contain a militant message, depending on the nature of the government. For example, Iraq’s education carried a very strong militant message as compared to Myanmar, whose education minister is a civilian. However, lower levels of industrialisation and control over the Internet makes civilians less exposed in terms of technology and information. Propaganda is often used in military governments to spread either pro-government or patriotic messages. In the 2003 war with America, the information minister of Iraq claimed that they were winning when they were in fact losing in an effort to keep up support for the military government. It is also logical to think that, in light of the recent violent crackdowns, Myanmar has also utilised propaganda to soften the public stance against the military government. References Burma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2008, March 23). Retrieved March 23, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myanmar . Military dictatorship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2008, March 21). Retrieved March 22, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_dictatorship . Propaganda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2008, March 23). Retrieved March 23, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda#The_Iraq_War . Tan, A. K. J. (1998, September 15). APCEL Report : Myanmar. Retrieved March 22, 2008 from , Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore Web site: http://sunsite.nus.edu.sg/apcel/dbase/myanmar/reportmy.html.
Navigation Home Introduction Government Systems Introduction Aristocracy Anarcho-communism Dictatorship Monarchism Totalitarianism Libertarianism Meritocracy Oligarchy Republic Communist state Direct Democracy Representative Democracy Political Ideologies Introduction Anarchism Communism Communitarianism Conservatism Democracy Fascism Feminism Nationalism Socialism Case Studies Introduction China Germany Iraq Italy Japan Malaysia Myanmar Russia Singapore Taiwan United Kingdom USA About Us Introduction Coach Members Team Collaboration and Diversity References Drag me!
Interactives Games Surveys Evaluation Interviews Transcript Drag me
A to Z government systems A system where a Government is unnecessary and undesirable whichmeans that everything is based on voluntary cooperation by individuals and groups A system where a Government is unnecessary and undesirable which means that everything is based on voluntary cooperation by individuals and groups One person who has absolute rule over a country or a state and is usually hereditary or they claim as being given divine right with or without advisors. A system combining Anarchism and capitalism A system where there is no State or capitalism A system combing Anarchism and savagery where savagery means acceptance comes easily. A system where there are no hierarchies such as political or economic hierarchies. A system where labour is emphasized and thus it has trade unions that replace the State A system where there is more democratic decision-making A government with only a few people who are thought to be best qualified. A system where the people vote on the legislation and executive bills instead of electing leaders to do it for them. A concentration of power in a leader who is not constitutionally responsible to the people A one person government. A system that is ruled by enlightened monarchs. A system that is suitable for Islams as this system represents the political unity of the Muslims A system that combines republic and capitalism together. A system where the health of the community is the first priority A system where there is no such thing as a private property because the goods are owned by the government and is available to anyone if needed A system where many opinions are taken into consideration before making decisions The system of Constitutional Monarchy has a Head of State that does not change as the governments change and a Government. Only the elected Officials can pass laws, the Head of State acts as an advisor to the Officials. Leaders are elected by the people but the leaders have a limited power over the people and must go according to constitutional laws A system where there are civic assemblies which represents the country's economic, social, industry and cultural aspects A system where the making of laws must arise from the public if not the law cannot be approved. A system where there is democratic representations in a country without the use of elections. A democratic republic is a country where there is freedom of speech, election and press. A system where two rulers have equal shared absolute power over the country Government organization or group in with unlimited power A true democratic system where the people elect their leaders System where ruler with absolute power over the country. A system similar to that of tyranny where all is controlled by one man. A system ruled by dukes or duchesses A system combining Anarchism but with saving the environment as their first priority. A monarchy whose ruler is elected by the people. A monarchy that is Arab-suited A system that concentrates on the society's welfare as a whole and thus seeks patriotism. A system used by the medieval age where warriors and nobility rule. A system where the oldest are the leaders A system ruled by grand dukes or grand duchesses A system where the power lies with the loser level of government such as the name suggests, grassroots A system for the Jews because non-Jews would not be granted full citizenship. A monarchy where the kingship is passed to the sons when the father dies. A system with the Pope as its leader. A system where the people elect their leaders but the leaders have the freedom to do what they want. A system combining democracy with a religion, Islam A name that is given to many Muslim countries Government by those who want power and personal gain. A system where judges rule and rules by natural rights A system where judges rule but based on the judges opinions A system where the people elect the leaders to make decisions for them. A system which emphasizes on liberty, freedom for the people. A system where absolute power is given to magicians and wizards A government where females rule. Government by those with talent. A system where military force is used to establish freedom and liberty. A military-based government that has absolute rule over the country A system combining oligarchy, democracy and monarchy. A democratic system where there are no government parties. A small group which makes up the government which is usually corrupted and do things for their own sake. Government by the majority. A system where the people are allowed to coose whatever government system they want. A system similar to the parliamentary system except that the head of state does not have that much power. A system where the parliament checks on the executive branch of the government A system where voting is limited and where politicians take care of the governing of the country A system where the people vote on the legislation and executive bills instead of electing leaders to do it for them. Timocracy, Government controlled by the rich. A state where government uses police by means to control the life of the citizens. A monarchy where the monarch's title is linked to the people. A system where the executive branch is independent of the legislative branch. A monarchy where the monarch's title is prince A system combining democracy and religion A system where the government is elected by the people and the government has the responsibility in acting in people's interest. A system where there is restricted democracy A system where robots rule One person who proclaims himself as king which would usually lead to hereditary monarchy. A system similar to that of a presidential system except for the fact that the president and prime minister gets involved in everyday decision-making. A system where there is only 1 government party running the country and no other party is allowed to enter for elections. A system combining socialism and democracy A system that emphasizes on socialism that also has aspects of free market in its economy. A democratic system where workers are represented in government too. A system where the rulers are those highly-skilled and qualified. Maritime (relating to navigation or commerce on the sea) government Government of a state by divine rule, usually by people who are guided by the deities Government of a state by God. A democratic system where the leader is elected but has absolute rule. Absolute state which the people must follow orders from. Tribalism existed during the time of primitive men. Thus, it has a sense of primitive in it. However, it also emphasizes on communism and equality. A government ruled by an oppressive and severely unjust ruler. A system with administrative divisions governed by a person who is governed by the viceroy. A system combining democracy and parliamentary system which is somewhat similar to the United nations is adopting Auto: Manual: Drag Me