Autorytaryzm XXI wieku czy nam grozi?
Loading...
Date
2010
Authors
Advisor
Editor
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Wydział Nauk Politycznych i Dziennikarstwa UAM
Title alternative
Abstract
Democratic systems are neither perfect nor satisfactory, therefore theoreticians offer different
models of democracy. Consequently, democracy is understood in different ways, which
are presented in this paper. The most interesting ones are proposed by R. Dahl, A. Lijphart and
J. Schumpeter. The latter calls into question the notion of the ‘common good’ and an individual’s
rationality in political life. The paper discusses different models of democracy: representative,
consensual and polyarchic. A democratic system is based on principles and abounds in
great advantages, the most desirable of which include peace (democratic states have not waged wars) and the fact that the market economy is more efficient. In order to maintain
polyarchic institutions a state needs to meet certain conditions which cannot be maintained
everywhere.
If these conditions are not fulfilled, the system can be deemed to be nondemocratic. If only
some conditions are present, the system will be highly unstable. This instability leads the research
on authoritarianism to develop dynamically. Authoritarian systems are political systems
of limited political plurality that are free from the accountability of society, yet
authoritarianism is also a certain type of mentality and personality. The research Adorno and
his colleagues conducted in the mid-twentieth century introduced the notion of an authoritarian
personality; The Polish research also demonstrates an interesting correlation between authoritarian
features, which are presented in the paper.
Description
Sponsor
Keywords
Citation
Przegląd Politologiczny, 2010, nr 1, s. 25-34.