Traditionally, it was through a putsch and violence that autocrats assumed power. Recent examples, however, demonstrate that in today’s world it is done by free elections.
This was the case in Gaza, when Hamas won. Also in Egypt, before the Muslim Brothers undermined free institutions. Today, Abdel el-Sisi appears to rule with the consent of the people.
In Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, populist autocrats have been elected. In Russia, after attempts at democracy, the autocrat Putin has assumed power and has, according to the polls, the support of between 65% and 80% of the people.
In Hungary, Viktor Orbán has just won his third election. In Turkey, Recep Erdoğan has become ever more repressive since coming to power.
In the Arab world and in North Africa there is bad news from Libya, Syria, Yemen and Tunisia. Lebanon is once again on the verge of civil war.
One ideology, communism, died. Another took its place – Islamism. There are no more big wars, but many small civil or tribal wars. In the Ukraine there is a return to the 19th and 20th centuries.
The West – stagnation, energy problems, high unemployment and debt do not provide examples the world wishes to follow. Putin has recognized this and is playing a successful poker game.
But in the long run autocrats cannot succeed. They know how to gain and maintain power, but not how to reform their countries and make them competitive. For that, you need the rule of law and freedom.
Source: Josef Joffe in Die Zeit, April 24
Kurt Gaubatz recalls Churchill’s famous dictum: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947)
The timing of this famous remark is significant. Churchill won the war, but in the election of July 1945, he was defeated.
When the news came out, Churchill was taking a bath (was there ever a statesman who spent more time in the bath?) He remarked “They have a perfect right to kick me out. That is democracy”. When he was offered the Order of the Garter, he asked “Why should I accept the Order of the Garter, when the British people have just given me the Order of the Boot?”.
He returned to power in 1951. The remark about democracy was made when he had lost power and had every reason to be bitter. Fortunately he kept his sense of humor even in the most trying circumstances.
Ronald Hilton - 09.05.03
Does Winston Churchill’s dictum still hold?
George Orwell commenting on the use of ‘Meaningless words’ in politics:
‘The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different…Other words used in variable meanings, in most cases more or less dishonestly, are: class, totalitarian, science, progressive, reactionary, bourgeois, equality’.
George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language,” 1946.