Authoritarian regime: a transitional species or a permanent phenomenon?

Traditionally, both in political science and in jurisprudence, it is customary to distinguish three types of state regimes: a democratic, totalitarian and authoritarian regime. The latter occupies an intermediate position between the first two. Sometimes it is called transitional, but most researchers believe that this species has the right to independent existence. Is it so?

Proceeding from the fact that modern states offer for research, one can state the following: an authoritarian regime is a special way of exercising power in a country in which all its fullness is concentrated in the hands of a certain person.

The presented definition is sometimes criticized. Some political scientists advise adding the phrase "or parties" to what was already said. They explain their position by the fact that the authoritarian regime is a combination of methods different from democratic methods and methods of exercising power in the country. This means that in this phenomenon it is possible to include both fascism and totalitarianism as extreme variants of authoritarianism. But this statement is controversial. And the basis for such a dispute are certain characteristics that distinguish the authoritarian regime.

Its symptoms may look like this:

1. The determining factor is that the power in the state is carried out according to the will of one particular person. As is known, under fascism or totalitarianism such rights are enjoyed by the party and its members.
2. The principle of separation of powers is shown nominally, the organs of the corresponding branches are, as a rule, represented by persons personally appointed as the "leader".
3. Legislative power is in fact subordinate to the leader. Such a situation can be ensured by a quantitative preponderance in the legislative body of representatives of a sympathizing party leader.
4. The judicial power is legal, but not legitimate.
5. The right to vote, both passive and active, is purely decorative.
6. The method of state regulation is characterized by administrative coercion and order.
7. Censorship is "mild", citizens retain the right to express their opinion.
8. The relation "state-personality" has the character of subordination of the second to the first.
9. The authoritarian regime is based on the formal proclamation of the rights of the individual and / or citizen.
10. Law enforcement agencies are subordinated only to the goals of a political leader.

Apparently, the features presented characterize the authoritarian regime as a phenomenon of a dualistic order. Signs and democracy (to a lesser extent), and totalitarianism (more) are present in the object under study. And from the extent to which each of them is manifested, the direction of the transition from one state regime to another depends.

There is a situation in which the establishment of an authoritarian regime Is vital. As a rule, this situation develops only in case of emergency situations, including: long-term natural disasters, man-made disasters and martial law. In this case, the legally elected head of state is forced to invest in the executive power some aspects of the legislative and judicial. All this is explained by the need to promptly respond to the challenges of an emergency.

But all the same, the examples given differ in a limited period, after which the transition to the type of government that existed before should be carried out.

Therefore, returning to the question indicated at the beginning, it can be said that the authoritarian regime appears in two ways: temporary (when objective circumstances require it) and permanent (when the leader who comes to the management makes the above-mentioned actions intentionally). Therefore, there can be no unequivocal answer to this question.