Autocracy

Autocracy
(Return to Life Philosophies) An autocracy is a form of government in which the political power is held by a single, self-appointed ruler. The term autocrat is derived from the Greek word (lit. "self-ruler", or "he who rules by one's self"). Compare with oligarchy ("rule by the few") and democracy ("rule by the people"). Today it is usually seen as synonymous with despot, tyrant and/or dictator, though each of these terms originally had a separate and distinct meaning. Autocracy is not synonymous with totalitarianism, as this concept was precisely forged to distinguish modern regimes that appeared in 1923 from traditional dictatorships. Nor is it synonymous with military dictatorship, as these often take the form of "collective presidencies" such as the South American juntas. However, an autocracy may be totalitarian or be a military dictatorship. The term monarchy also differs in that it emphasizes the hereditary characteristic, though some Slavic monarchs, specifically Russian Emperors traditionally included the title "autocrat" as part of their official styles. This usage originated in the Byzantine Empire, where the term autokratōr was traditionally employed in Greek to translate the Latin imperator, and was used along with Basileus to mean "emperor". This use remains current in the modern Greek language, where the term is used for any emperor (e.g. the Emperor of Japan), regardless of the actual power of the monarch. Historically, many monarchs ruled autocratically but eventually their power was diminished and dissolved with the introduction of constitutions giving the people the power to make decisions for themselves through elected bodies of government. The autocrat needs some kind of power structure to rule. Very few rulers were in the position to rule with only their personal charisma and skills, however great these may be, without the help of others. Most historical autocrats depended on their nobles, the military, the priesthood or others, who could turn against the ruler and depose or murder them. As such, it can be difficult to draw a clear line between historical autocracies and oligarchies.

__Wiki-links__: [|Autocracy]

__Types of Autocracy__: Dictatorship Military Junta

__**The Structure**__: Though no actual Structure is clearly defined it is important for the Autocrat to have some form of enforcement. Few (if indeed any) Autocratic rulerships were plesant or desired for the people the entire time, and thus strength was needed at least to seduce the populus if not to force them into submission. This arm of power could be the military, a controlled religion or form of indoctrination, nobility wielding military power, or other means of blackmail and threat including terror. -Sam)(ael-

-The Strengths of an Autocracy are much similar to a Monarchy. Very little in the way of limits are imposed upon the leadership and thus decisions are made quickly by one instead of many. -The strength that monarchy has of a possible utopia with a good and wise ruler is negated though. An Autocracy rarely cares about the people and is usually once again enforced by unpopular and unfair tactics. -An Autocrat is rarely succeptible to blackmail or threats like a monarch who must at least maintain some public face.
 * __Strengths__**:

-Sam)(ael-

-Autocracy must live completely in fear of the people. Whether using seduction or force or especially terror, the ruling body will eventually be seen for what they are. Usurpers of the people. That will always be a danger and a fear no matter how strong the force of their rule. -The forces that an Autocracy uses to control the people are usually dangerous to the Autocrat themselves as they can become murderous and betray the current leadership. The opposite danger is that the force can become negligent of their duties and weaken the iron rule. -An Autocrat is far more succeptible to assassination from any angle, especially the oppressed people.
 * __Weaknesses__**:

-Sam)(ael-


 * __Lessons/Resources on Monarchy__**:

Though a true Autocracy is hard to pin down in history you can find examples of their tactics and rule in various attrocities. -Fidel Castro in Cuba made things so bad for the people that cubans would attempt to swim the huge distances to America. In addition the man lived constantly in fear of the people and other nations sickened by his attrocities offered help. The US for instance allowed any Cuban to cross that border citizenship (With appropriate processing). -Saddam Hussein ruled by terror. He tortured and murdered extensively and his sons did the same to frighten the people into submission. Even when he was finally captured his people still shouted allegience to him. Not out of any form of love... But out of fear that he would slaughter any people who betrayed his rule if he had not actually been captured. These fear tactics became so opressive that once Saddam became a possibly real threat that other nations once again were morally justified in removing him whether or not the threat was entirely valid. The people of other nations could not stomach him and therfore he was removed even without being a real threat to their nations.
 * __Examples__**:

-Sam)(ael-