Is the political regime the destiny of the people or their conscious choice?
The political regime is a system of statedevices, methods that the authorities use to maintain order, ways of responding to the public mood. What contributes to its preservation for many decades, and what can cause discontent of the population of the country and cause a change in the ruling power?
Once we talked about the differences in these concepts,it is logical to focus on their typology. Political science identifies democratic and terrorist (authoritarian and totalitarian) types of regimes. As for the forms of government, there are many more:
- State: federal (Australia), Islamic (Afghanistan), multinational (Bolivia), unitary (Sri Lanka).
- The Republic, including federal (Austria), unitary (Bangladesh), Islamic (Iran). The republican form of government is inherent in most modern states, including Russia.
- Monarchy - constitutional (Japan), absolute theocratic (Vatican), absolute (Brunei), parliamentary (Spain). Monarchy, as such, is Oman.
- The Parliamentary Principality (Andorra).
Features of political regimes according to Aristotle
Studying the materials for this article, I was surprisedapproach to the political regimes that were proposed by Aristotle. It seemed to me that in his work "Politics" the essence of the state system was set out in the most accessible and correct interpretation. So, Aristotle singled out 6 major political regimes. Of these, three were the right forms, and three were their perverted variations.
- The correct political regime is (in the opinion of the great philosopher) monarchy, aristocracy and political science. Their correctness lies in the fact that the actions of the government are aimed at the benefit of citizens.
- A distorted political regime is a distortion of the principles of "correctness." They include tyranny, oligarchy and democracy. In these management systems, the actions of the authorities are aimed at "good for themselves".
Interesting is the fact that Cicero attranslation of this treatise, according to some sources, changed the concept of "polity" concept "republic", which radically affected the possibility of a correct perception of the text. (The Republic in those days was one of the names of the Roman Empire.)
Legitimacy of regimes
Surely, many are interested in the question of why some regimes that should cause fierce rejection remain unshakable for many centuries?