Rome would not enter a war or do something that put its people at risk. Carthage did not care about its general population's safety. Could this attitude be one of the reasons Rome was able to destroy it so easy? While I cannot say for certain if the reason Carthage fell was due to its government, I can say that during the time Rome was a republic, it was unstoppable, and Carthage never had that power. It appears to me that governments, when in the hands of the people, work better than monarchies or oligarchies.
Currently, there are no countries that are in Fascist control. There are many parties around the world in different countries that do not label themselves fascist because of negative connotations however many of their beliefs align very similarly to Fascist beliefs. For example, in America, there is a party called the, and I quote, the “American Nazi Party”. There is also the America First Party, the “White Patriot Party” and many more. How some of these parties still exist in today’s society is
The Romans had a Republic state with loyal citizens to the authority but Carthaginians ran Aristocratic form of government and did not understand how citizens could be loyal to a governing body on the other land Carthaginians military command was permanently in the hand of able solder and not in the hand of magistrates as opposed to Rome. (Morey C.W.
Many historians look at this issue with hindsight, comparing Hitler’s government to the model of one today. Instead, Hitler’s government should be analysed while keeping in mind that Germany was a totalitarian state. Since the country believes in a one ruler system, the government is very likely to be structured similarly as well. This in turn raises the question, through the system Hitler implemented, how were politicians able to prove themselves worthy of power to Hitler? Did this structure of the government truly hinder the rise of these politicians?
Dictatorship is a type of government that is being led by a single person or party who decides and holds all political power of a nation. Some examples of dictators are Hitler from Germany, Mao Zedong in China, and Benito Mussolini in Italy. The emergence of dictatorship occurred when the Roman Senate established it in 510 B.C. so they can control the rebellions occurring at that time. Rome originally had two consuls; however, there are cases where they just needed one person to make proper decisions so one of the consuls becomes the dictator.
Consultative style is focused on the final result by using the skills of others. A dictator is a person exercising absolute power, especially a ruler who has an absolute, unrestricted control in a government, whereas participative leader involves the whole members of the group to identify the goals and to work for a desired result. Therefore participative leadership and dictatorship are two styles which are completely differ from each other. However, society sometimes mix them. For instance, great leader and president of Russian Federation Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is considered to be both dictator and participative leader.
GETTING CERTAIN INTENSITY WITH AUTOCRACY In the simplest form, autocratic leadership described as gathering all power and privilage in one hand. Rudin states that kind of leaders was rushing to give achievement and penalties or having no feelings for others ' thoughts at all. (1964) In history, there are many autocratic leaders that left a good footprint on historical road and most of them showed successful leadership, had control over people mostly. Thus, autocratic leadership is the best way of having control over a group. Some may argue that autocratic leadership leads to dictatorship and dictatorship leads to resentment among people.
The answers given may be; a society where everyone votes, or by dictionary definition “a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of the state; typically through elected representation.” However when analyzing the etymology of the word democracy we come to find out that demos means the people and kratia means rule or power in greek. As stated in the article “The Problem with Democracy Today,” contrary to other political institutions who holds the power is not clearly stated “if the regime is a
Introduction 1.0 Background Study “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord Acton Power plays an important role in the foundation of civilization and this has been the law of nature since ages. The most royalist way to show intelligent use of power is none other than POLITICS. However, it is known that power corrupts and absolute power will definitely corrupts absolutely. Politics is popularly known and seen as the power to legislate. Concentration of the same power in one hand may turn out to underrepresentation or no representation at all of the populace.
The executive making strategies not consulted with the governing body or the lawmaking body bringing enactment without the activity of the official, thus, creating conflict between them. One of the benefits of a parliamentary government is that it 's speedier and simpler to pass laws. Likewise, in parliamentary framework, the power is all the more equitably separated. The presidential government has inclinations towards dictatorship. On account of the general force given to one individual, presidential frameworks could rapidly change into dictator administrations if circumstances grant.