Which is More Stable: Democracy or An Authoritarian Regime - Essay Example

? Which is More Stable: Democracy or An itarian Regime?     Introduction In determining the level of stability of either authoritarian or democratic leadership styles, a number of arguments raised by political theorists has to be taken into account. Undeniably, both regimes have their pros and cons but a thorough investigation will reveal the weaknesses that may render one system to be unstable. A wider population in our today’s world is quickly moving from the traditional authoritarian regime to democratic one. This alone is pointing out that there must be some systemic flaws within the authoritarian regime that leads to instability thereby affecting the possibility of a long-term prospect. This discussion will be based upon the transition of Angola, a South African country, from authoritarian regime to democracy. Since gaining independence from Portugal, Angola has only had one multi-party election held back in the year 1992 (Hague & Harrop, 2007, p. 58). This new era was in parallel with the ‘third wave’ of the 1990s global democratic transition in which more than 60 states took part. Although the nation-state is the property of its citizenry, it was elites, not masses, who originally created and ruled it. In the third phase, the masses conquered the right to participate in government decision making and, hence, democratic states (or democracies) were created. Despite the obvious advantages, authoritarian regimes enjoy in terms of general control – it appears, these regimes are unstable mainly because of their internal organization and manner in which they attained as well as retained power. Governments that are run democratically have a better structure that indicates how transition from one leader to another can be handled peacefully (Newton & Van Deth, 2005, p. 65). Very peaceful elections are normally the means to choose rival leaders and it means stability is guaranteed. On the other hand, transition of power in an authoritarian regime is unclear and may be easily tainted with civil war as it happened in Angola. Democracy allows the citizens of a country to choose different leaders basing on their skills of leadership they have in different sectors. This means that failure of one leader does not mean that a whole state fails; rather a replacement with a leader who can accomplish the tasks normally takes place. Authoritarian leaders tend to stick to power no matter what failures befall them (Carmani, 2011). Angola, a country rich in diamonds and oil, has yet to enjoy the full benefits of these natural resources due to poor management by the authoritarian regime. This directly affects the citizen’s quality of life. Freedom of speech, a very powerful tool in any regime that practices democracy, can be used positively in warning leaders of any serious problems or threats to the government. The governments can then make changes or take effective measures in advance to avoid any failures. It is a mean of citizens to express their views and if the government takes precautionary measures, major problems such as famine that affect authoritarian regimes are easily avoided (“Marching towards riches and democracy in Angola”, 2008). Freedom of speech is suppressed in authoritarian regimes and the regime in power ensures that it instills fear among the population to avoid any uprising. The free nature associated with democratic regimes allows for a more dynamic economy. Governments struggle to meet demands of citizens without politicizing the process or raising the taxes. Stability of a nation and economic growth are things that go hand in hand. Angola has suffered slow economic growth if any due to its instability when it comes to leadership. Good professional governance can ensure redistribution of wealth to the poor without compromising the life the rich were accustomed to. The leaders we have seen in power under authoritarian regimes such as Angola will enrich themselves and the elite at the expense of the poor struggling citizens (Hague & Harrop, 2007). A continuity of such a regime and suffering among the larger population will most definitely make rise to rebellion and instability. Citizens of a democratic regime can express their resentment due to the structure of political liberty created. Even though the government is in need of soldiers and taxes, political leaders are made to appear humble before the citizens who are ultimately in charge. Furthermore, their rejection to power makes them even more humble and this whole process can help reconcile the citizens to the demands of the government. However, it’s not easy for an authoritarian regime to shift entirely to a liberal democratic regime. A more approachable system that is likely to be adopted by those in power is an illiberal democracy. Hague and Harrop (2007) distinguish liberal and illiberal democracies as well as contrast these with authoritarian regimes. Illiberal democracy, also known as partial democracy, is a regime that allows citizens to take part actively in elections but cuts them off from the activities that the ones in power exercise. This is because the general population lacks civil liberties. Restoring the faith of ‘being in charge’ to the people of Angola is an ongoing process that promises a brighter future. It is clear that after Angola held the elections, the country sunk back to the post-independence horrific civil war (Amundsen, 2011). The existing national liberation movement that became a party was democratized through the reforms but went on to rule afterwards. The current government has been promising and postponing fresh elections since 2002 when the conflicts ended (Carmani, 2011, p. 74). Research records that the two sides in the civil war are still the main political parties that will contest these elections. Criticism arising due to poor performance and instability will be exploited through change of regime (Newton & Van Deth, 2005). All these ways clearly demonstrate why democratic regimes are stable and better in developing effective policies that will satisfy people’s desires. A more satisfied population is not likely to engage in rebellious uprisings thereby ensuring a stable platform for economic growth. Bibliography Amundsen, I, 2011, Angola Party Politics: Into the African Trend, Cengage: Cengage Learning. Caramani, D, 2011, Comparative Politics. Oxford University Press. Hague, R, & Harrop, M, 2007, Comparative Government and Politics: An Introduction Oxford: Oxford University Press. Marching towards riches and democracy in Angola, 2008. The Economist. [online] Available at: . Newton, K, & Van Deth, J, 2005, Foundation of comparative politics: Cambridge University Press. Read More