Illiberal Democracy: Difference between revisions

{{Info|Authoritarian Right|Authoritarian Right}} ([[File:CoolestDictator.png]] Bukeleism, [[File:Hindenburg.png]] Hindenburgism, [[File:Nashi.png]] Nashism, [[File:Päts.png]] Patsism, [[File:Sadat.png]] Sadatism,[[File:Taishō.png]] Taisho Democracy)<br>

**[[File:Zio.png]] [[Zionism]] (afterAfter 1979)

**[[File:Bakiyev.png]] [[Authoritarian ConservatismMachiavellianism|Kurmanbek]] [[Kleptocracy|Bakiyev]] (1949-) [[File:Cball-Kyrgyzstan.png]] {{PBW|Kyrgyzstanball|Kyrgyzstan}}

**[[File:AuthcapZiaurRahman.png]] [[Authoritarian Capitalism#Bangladesh|Ziaur Rahman]] (1936-1981) [[File:Cball-BANG.png]] {{PBW|Bangladeshball|Bangladesh}}

**[[File:OtzmaYehuditBen-Gvir.png]] [[Kahanism|Itamar Ben-Gvir]] (1976-) [[File:Zio.png]] Israel

**[[File:NeoGaulleHouphouet-Boigny.png]] [[GaullismAuthoritarian Capitalism|Félix Houphouët-Boigny]] (1905-1993) [[File:Cball-CoteDivoire.png]] Ivory Coast

**[[File:SocauthDinaBoluarte.png]] [[SocialIlliberal AuthoritarianismDemocracy|Dina BoularteBoluarte]] (1962-) [[File:Cball-Peru.png]] {{PBW|Peruball|Peru}}

quote="Just because a state is not liberal, it can still be a democracy. And in fact we also had to and did state that societies that are built on the state organisation principle of liberal democracy will probably be incapable of maintaining their global competitiveness in the upcoming decades and will instead probably be scaled down unless they are capable of changing themselves significantly.<ref>This is not an inaccurate statement, “liberal” and “democracy” often come into conflict with each other and the state must choose which one it really wants to be.</ref>"

'''Authoritarian Liberal Democracy''' describes a hybrid regime combining elements from [[File:Liberal_Democracy.png]] [[Liberalism|Liberal Democracy]] and [[File:Sec.png]] [[Authoritarianism]]. AuthLibDem governments entail power being concentrated in the hands of unaccountable officials—typically unelected [[File:Technocracy.png]] bureaucrats and [[File:Dem.png]] elected representatives who benefit from increased political apathy alike—which leads to a reduction in civil liberties. Local administrations, which tend to be the most truly democratic in the sense of high activity among citizens, increase political apathy. Liberal institutions which are supposed to be impartial actors (e.g., [[File:Krit.png]] courts) end up serving [[File:Parti.png]] partisan goals and their associated [[File:Crony.png]] special interest groups. AuthLibDem governments also empower [[File:PolState.png]] federal law enforcement agencies and routinely violate [[File:Civlibert.png]] civil or [[File:Consti.png]] constitutional rights (e.g., the Espionage Act and the Patriot Act, under [[File:Cball-US.png]] American Presidents [[File:Woodrow.png]] Woodrow Wilson and [[File:GHWBGWB.png]] George H.W. Bush, respectively). It can be argued AuthLibDem regimes combine technocratic and electocratic elements.