The DU Lounge
Related: Culture Forums, Support ForumsLong standing democracies that have become dictatorships?
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by JudyM (a host of the The DU Lounge forum).
We certainly hear a lot about how the US could be trending towards an authorization dictatorship under Trump. While he certainly has strongman ambitions and a total disregard for the rule of law, I find arguments that the US in general is ready to just give up and let Trump do whatever he wants to be rather dramatic. I think if push comes to shove, Americans would quicky rise up and put an end to any attempts by Trump to declare himself some kind of dictator.
And that has made me wonder if there have ever been long standing democracies that have become total dictatorships before. Yes, we have plenty of examples of democracies becoming 1 party states ruled by authoritarian dictators. Germany in the 1930s is a clear example. But when that happens, including in Germany's case, democracy was a new thing. The democratic system in Weimar Germany had only be around for like a decade before it was reverted back to a dictatorship. Or there are "republics" in history that have descended into autocracy but that was usually where only like 5% of people were allowed to vote, like in Rome a few thousand years ago.
All of this has me wondering if there has ever been a country that had a well established, stable democratic system for centuries, like the United States, that suddenly just let a dictatorship happen pretty much out of nowhere. I can't think of any time in history where that has happened.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
Response to Laelth (Reply #1)
Dr. Jack This message was self-deleted by its author.
Dr. Jack
(675 posts)Wasn't it only a few rich, land owning people that could vote? That might apply to the US is only billionaires were allowed to vote and the rest of were kept out of the system. At least that is my understanding of the Roman Republic.
unblock
(52,502 posts)what country has had a functional democracy for centuries, giving real political power to the poor?
actually, even the u.s. doesn't very neatly fit in, given that slaves and women couldn't vote for a long time, and poll taxes discriminated against the poor, and we still have targeted disenfranchisement and a major tilt in political power toward moneyed interests.
WhiteTara
(29,736 posts)have never had an overlord and somehow, I think that may be the only difference. But it is what it is.
Thekaspervote
(32,823 posts)I wish posters here would not post such negative opinions that lead to more opinions of the same. Its hard enough to just get thru the day sometimes, without imagining every dark scenario.
Dotard wants us to think we are powerless, without options or choices. By constantly posting negativity and not countering, it we chip away at our ability to change the narrative and the situation.
We can survive if we are willing to fight on, push forward and not give in to the evil that is the orange anus ..and his ilk
unblock
(52,502 posts)people put too much emphasis on specifics, like is donnie stupid or evil or corrupt. who cares, he needs to go.
would would it be a dictatorship or oligarchy or one-party state or some other form of authoritarian government? who cares, we need to get rid of them.
the fact is that our democracy is under attack from donnie, republicans, right-wingers, a few billionaires, and russia.
the fact is, quite a number of institutions have already fallen and the attack continues.
we no longer have a department of justice keeping republicans in check.
they have corrupted, at least to some extent, the post office, the fda, the cdc.
the supreme court hasn't completely jumped off the rails, but we can be sure they'd side with republicans again, as in bush v. gore, at least if they think they can get away with it.
there are many ways to keep people from voting or from having their vote properly counted, and republicans are pushing on all fronts.
if they win, the corruption on institutions will continue. whether it will be a dictatorship or whatever is beside the point. if they win, they will permanently corrupt the voting process to the point that we will cease to have an effective democracy.
november 3 may well be the day we find out that it's too late and our democracy actually died four years ago.
all we can do is vote, vote, vote, and hope it's not actually too late.
sanatanadharma
(3,761 posts)Each 25th August Uruguay celebrates Constitution Day, dating to 1830. Uruguay was influenced by the constitutions of France and the USA.
Certainly the nation has had political disputes about the constitution and it has been modified several times. The Uruguay civil war spread out over a good part of a century.
The nation has an engaged citizenry, multiple political parties and mandatory voting; politics and democracy are respected.
Nonetheless, dictatorship happened (1973-1985); largely due to "law and order' propaganda.
I have lived here a year and a half and my knowledge is limited. See Wikipedia.
"President Juan María Bordaberry closed parliament, and ruled with the assistance of a junta of military generals. The official reason was to crush the Tupamaros, a Marxist urban guerrilla movement. The leftist trade union federations called a general strike and occupation of factories. The strike lasted just over two weeks. It was ended with most of the trade union leaders in jail, dead, or exiled to Argentina. As part of the coup all associations including trade unions were declared illegal and banned; the Constitution of Uruguay of 1967 was practically voided.
Unions and political parties remained illegal until a general strike in 1984 forced the military to accept civilian rule and the restoration of democracy in 1985. "
sandensea
(21,720 posts)Bordaberry - like Cheeto - was elected in '72 on a law-and-order platform (somewhat justified in those days, to be fair), as well as coming after two decades of economic stagnation (1 in 10 Uruguayans had moved to neighboring Argentina by then).
But as support for him faltered, he resorted to a self-coup - with enthusiastic support from the landed families and (of course) a right-leaning middle-class clamoring for "strength."
Ultimately, his high-handed, autocratic style prompted the military to replace him in '76 with the more genteel - but no less conservative - Dr. Aparicio Méndez (a little like ousting Trump, and installing McConnell instead).
Méndez - like the Videla dictatorship in Argentina - relied on right-wing lobbyists to make domestic policy, which economically largely resembled Bush's "ownership society" (massive speculation fueled by easy credit).
Like all bubbles, Uruguay's (and Argentina's) popped in 1981 - pushing an already-weak economy into a severe recession unlike any seen since 1930 (10% GDP drop in one year).
That's what led to the dictators' yielding to free elections in '84 - after which Uruguay began a lengthy road to recovery.
Today, as you know, it's known as the most egalitarian, well-run, and prosperous (but smallest) of Latin America's countries. Unless this dictatorship-admiring poser Lacalle Pou manages to drive it into the ditch again - as Argentina's Macri recently did.
Binkie The Clown
(7,911 posts)Other countries under other non-dictatorial systems have turned to dictators many times. Rome, Germany, Russia, China, Cuba, numerous South American countries have been known to switch back and forth between dictators and democracies,...
Ptah
(33,057 posts)JudyM
(29,294 posts)Not Lounge material, please post in GD instead.