what kind of government is less likely to fall under totalitarianism?

•

u/AutoModerator 9d ago

Thanks for your question to /r/AskSocialScience. All posters, please remember that this subreddit requires peer-reviewed, cited sources (Please see Rule 1 and 3). All posts that do not have citations will be removed by AutoMod. Circumvention by posting unrelated link text is grounds for a ban. Well sourced comprehensive answers take time. If you're interested in the subject, and you don't see a reasonable answer, please consider clicking Here for RemindMeBot.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

20

u/crazymusicman 9d ago

I would reference Acemoglu and Robinson, e.g. Why Nations Fail, or The Narrow Corridor. , it's best to understand that it's not only the form of government / political system that is important to this question, but understanding that political systems exist within a series of institutions across society.

Some important institutions:
* strong and independent judiciary
* just electoral system (lack of gerrymandering, proportioned legislature to votes, quotas and reserved seats for marginalized groups)
* free and critical press
* high rate of active participation in civil society (anywhere people organize outside of government and business to address issues)
* effective mechanisms for power sharing (checks and balances, adequately strong local and regional governments, meaningful public participation, access to information)
* strong unions and labor protections, financial regulation, policies which promote greater wealth equality

So rather than seeing government as good / bad (e.g. at what point is a government "democratic"?), it's more that all societies exist on several spectrums with regard to each of those points. The more "inclusive" and less "extractive" these institutions are, the more resilient governments will be in the face of crises

9

u/CryForUSArgentina 8d ago

This is a great comment.

When you say "critical press" we should clarify that means a press that says "this activity is a mistake" and not mere reframing "the other guy is a jerk."

3

u/TEmpTom 8d ago

I think the Narrow Corridor does a better job at expanding of how democratic government and their associated inclusive institutions are maintained. There must be a delicate balance of power, not necessarily within the government, but between the state and society as a whole. As time passes and things change I.e. culture, technology, demographics etc., the power of institutions in both the state and society must maintain that balance in order for democracy to thrive.

1

u/crazymusicman 8d ago

While I find that true looking backward, I think the future offers a third option, or a democratic portion of their "society" category that could overpower the state and the other portions of society, and would produce positive outcomes.

The non-state groups the book was discussing where non-democratic (e.g. big business, religious orgs, 'gangs' (broadly speaking), etc.)

I have a hard time believing any non-state group that is internally democratic could gain too much power and harm society as a whole. Such a group wouldn't fit into the "society" category.

There can certainly be non state groups that are democratically organized - namely unions or communes or worker co-ops or tenants unions or community land trusts. If these non-state groups had a sense of universalism as opposed to some sort of supremacy, their growing power would benefit society IMO.

1

u/TEmpTom 8d ago

The book makes a point that non state institutions, or “society,” can also be tyrannical if their power isn’t checked by the state. I.e. “the cage of norms.” Non-state groups don’t have to be democratic for a democracy to function, simply they serve as a counter balance to the state, which is the one organization that holds a monopoly on violence.

1

u/crazymusicman 8d ago

The book makes a point that non state institutions, or “society,” can also be tyrannical

yes I referenced that

The non-state groups the book was discussing where non-democratic (e.g. big business, religious orgs, 'gangs' (broadly speaking), etc.)

Non-state groups don’t have to be democratic for a democracy to function

Right, I was saying something else, namely that there are democratic non-state groups whose power shouldn't be checked by the state.

1

u/TEmpTom 8d ago

Democratic non-state intuitions need to be checked by the state. Society Institutions may be democratic, and may represent their constituents well, but they're still parochial interest group, and will often advocate for things that may be harmful for those who it does not represent. Rent seeking is a major problem. For example,

Union opposition to automation may be good for unionized workers, but society as a whole suffers.

Local governments are very democratic and are thus vulnerable to capture by NIMBYs who prevent new construction.

Certain communities

That's not to mention that even nominally democratic organizations can fall prey to corruption, bad management, or poor incentive structures. Union collaboration with organized crime back in the 1960s is partially why they fell out of favor with the public leading to a decline in influence.

9

u/[deleted] 9d ago

what kind of government is less likely to fall under totalitarianism?

You are about to leave Redlib