Editing Dictatorship (section)

==Types of dictatorships==
A classification of dictatorships, which began with political scientist [[Barbara Geddes]] in 1999, focuses on where power lies. Under this system, there are three types of dictatorships. [[Military dictatorship]]s are controlled by military officers, [[One-party state|one-party dictatorships]] are controlled by the leadership of a political party, and [[personalist dictatorship]]s are controlled by a single individual. In some circumstances, [[Monarchy|monarchies]] are also considered dictatorships if the monarchs hold a significant amount of political power. Hybrid dictatorships are regimes that have a combination of these classifications.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=20–22}}

=== Military<span class="anchor" id="Military dictatorship"></span> ===
{{main|Military dictatorship}}
[[File:Marines-march-on-Government-Building-Seoul 1962-05-17.jpg|thumb|Soldiers occupy [[Seoul]], South Korea as part of the [[May 16 coup]] that placed General [[Park Chung Hee]] in power.]]
[[File:President Suharto, 1993.jpg|180px|thumb|[[Suharto]], President of Indonesia from 1967 to 1998, ruled through a military-backed dictatorship marked by widespread human rights abuses and corruption.]]
Military dictatorships are regimes in which military officers hold power, determine who will lead the country, and exercise influence over policy.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|p=20}}<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Friedrich|first=Carl|date=1950|title=Military Government and Dictatorship.|journal=The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science|volume= 267|pages= 1–7|oclc=5723774494|doi=10.1177/000271625026700102|s2cid=146698274}}</ref> They are most common in developing nations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. They are often unstable, and the average duration of a military dictatorship is only five years, but they are often followed by additional military coups and military dictatorships. While common in the 20th century, the prominence of military dictatorships declined in the 1970s and 1980s.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Danopoulos |first=Constantine P. |title=The Decline of Military Regimes: The Civilian Influence |publisher=Routledge |year=2019 |isbn=9780367291174 |editor-last=Danopoulos |editor-first=Constantine P. |pages=1–24 |chapter=Military Dictatorships in Retreat: Problems and Perspectives}}</ref>

Military dictatorships are typically formed by a military coup in which senior officers use the military to overthrow the government. In democracies, the threat of a military coup is associated with the period immediately after a democracy's creation but before large-scale military reforms. In [[Oligarchy|oligarchies]], the threat of a military coup comes from the strength of the military weighed against the concessions made to the military. Other factors associated with military coups include extensive natural resources, limited use of the military internationally, and use of the military as an [[Oppression|oppressive]] force domestically.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Acemoglu |first1=Daron |last2=Ticchi |first2=Davide |last3=Vindigni |first3=Andrea |date=2010 |title=A Theory of Military Dictatorships |url=https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/mac.2.1.1 |journal=American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics |language=en |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=1–42 |doi=10.1257/mac.2.1.1 |hdl=1721.1/61747 |issn=1945-7707|hdl-access=free }}</ref> Military coups do not necessarily result in military dictatorships, as power may then be passed to an individual or the military may allow democratic elections to take place.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=34–38}}

Military dictatorships often have traits in common due to the shared background of military dictators. These dictators may view themselves as impartial in their oversight of a country due to their nonpartisan status, and they may view themselves as "guardians of the state". The predominance of violent force in military training manifests in an acceptance of violence as a political tool and the ability to organize violence on a large scale. Military dictators may also be less trusting or diplomatic and underestimate the use of bargaining and compromise in politics.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Kim |first=Nam Kyu |title=Routledge Handbook of Illiberalism |publisher=Routledge |year=2021 |isbn=9780367260569 |editor-last=Sajó |editor-first=András |pages=571–581 |chapter=Illiberalism of Military Regimes |editor-last2=Uitz |editor-first2=Renáta |editor-last3=Holmes |editor-first3=Stephen}}</ref>

=== One-party<span class="anchor" id="One-party dictatorship"></span> ===
{{Main|One-party state}}
[[File:RIAN archive 851899 Pioneers and schoolchildren greet delegates and guests of XVII convention of trade unions of the USSR.jpg|thumb|An assembly at the [[Kremlin Palace of Congresses]] in Moscow, Soviet Union]]
One-party dictatorships are governments in which a single political party dominates politics. Single-party dictatorships are one-party states in which only the party in power is legalized, sometimes along with minor allied parties, and all opposition parties are banned. [[Dominant-party system|Dominant-party dictatorships]] or electoral authoritarian dictatorships are one-party dictatorships in which opposition parties are nominally legal but cannot meaningfully influence government. Single-party dictatorships were most common during the Cold War, with dominant-party dictatorships becoming more common after the fall of the Soviet Union.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal |last1=Magaloni |first1=Beatriz |last2=Kricheli |first2=Ruth |date=2010 |title=Political Order and One-Party Rule |journal=Annual Review of Political Science |volume=13 |pages=123–143 |doi=10.1146/annurev.polisci.031908.220529|doi-access=free }}</ref> Ruling parties in one-party dictatorships are distinct from political parties that were created to serve a dictator in that the ruling party in a one-party dictatorship permeates every level of society.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=39–42}}

One-party dictatorships are more stable than other forms of authoritarian rule, as they are less susceptible to insurgency and see higher economic growth. Ruling parties allow a dictatorship to more broadly influence the populace and facilitate political agreement between party elites. Between 1950 and 2016, one-party dictatorships made up 57% of authoritarian regimes in the world,<ref name=":4" /> and one-party dictatorships have continued to expand more quickly than other forms of dictatorship in the latter half of the 20th century.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Magaloni |first1=Beatriz |last2=Kricheli |first2=Ruth |date=2010-05-01 |title=Political Order and One-Party Rule |journal=Annual Review of Political Science |language=en |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=123–143 |doi=10.1146/annurev.polisci.031908.220529 |issn=1094-2939|doi-access=free }}</ref> Due to the structure of their leadership, one-party dictatorships are significantly less likely to face civil conflict, insurgency, or terrorism than other forms of dictatorship.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fjelde |first=Hanne |date=2010 |title=Generals, Dictators, and Kings: Authoritarian Regimes and Civil Conflict, 1973—2004 |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0738894210366507 |journal=Conflict Management and Peace Science |language=en |volume=27 |issue=3 |pages=195–218 |doi=10.1177/0738894210366507 |s2cid=154367047 |issn=0738-8942}}</ref><ref name="Terrorism In Dictatorships">{{Cite journal |last1=Aksoy |first1=Deniz |last2=Carter |first2=David B. |last3=Wright |first3=Joseph |date=2012-07-01 |title=Terrorism In Dictatorships |url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1017/S0022381612000400 |journal=The Journal of Politics |volume=74 |issue=3 |pages=810–826 |doi=10.1017/S0022381612000400 |s2cid=153412217 |issn=0022-3816}}</ref> The use of ruling parties also provides more legitimacy to its leadership and elites than other forms of dictatorship<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal |last=Pinto |first=António Costa |date=2002 |title=Elites, Single Parties and Political Decision-making in Fascist-era Dictatorships |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/contemporary-european-history/article/abs/elites-single-parties-and-political-decisionmaking-in-fascistera-dictatorships/B0B01AD1C565221CC855FA1B2B2FDE6B |journal=Contemporary European History |language=en |volume=11 |issue=3 |pages=429–454 |doi=10.1017/S0960777302003053 |s2cid=154994824 |issn=1469-2171}}</ref> and facilitates a peaceful transfer of power at the end of a dictator's rule.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|p=200}}

One-party dictatorships became prominent in Asia and Eastern Europe during the Cold War as communist governments were installed in several countries.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=39–42}} One-party rule also developed in several countries in Africa during decolonization in the 1960s and 1970s, some of which produced authoritarian regimes.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Darkwa |first=Samuel Kofi |url=https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-031-14667-1 |title=Jerry John Rawlings: Leadership and Legacy: A Pan-African Perspective |date=2022 |publisher=Springer International Publishing |isbn=978-3-031-14666-4 |editor-last=Kumah-Abiwu |editor-first=Felix |location=Cham |pages=37–38 |language=en |chapter=One-Party Rule and Military Dictatorship in Africa |doi=10.1007/978-3-031-14667-1 |s2cid=253840274 |editor-last2=Abidde |editor-first2=Sabella Ogbobode}}</ref> A ruling party in a one-party dictatorship may rule under any ideology or it may have no guiding ideology. Marxist one-party states are sometimes distinguished from other one-party states, but they function similarly.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lidén |first=Gustav |date=2014 |title=Theories of dictatorships: sub-types and explanations |url=https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/39064 |journal=Studies of the Transition States and Societies |language=en |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=50–67 |issn=1736-8758}}</ref> When a one-party dictatorship develops gradually through legal means, it can result in conflict between the party organization and the state apparatus and [[civil service]], as the party rules in parallel and increasingly appoints its members to positions of power. Parties that take power through violence are often able to implement larger changes in a shorter period.<ref name=":5" />

=== Personalist <!--'Personalist dictatorship' and 'Personalist dictator' redirect here-->===
{{Further|Autocracy|Cult of personality}}{{See also|Personalismo|Dynasty#Hereditary dictatorship}}
[[File:The statues of Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il on Mansu Hill in Pyongyang (april 2012).jpg|thumb|left|Citizens of North Korea bow to statues of former dictators [[Kim Il Sung]] and [[Kim Jong Il]] in 2012.]]

'''Personalist dictatorships'''<!--boldface per WP:R#PLA--> are regimes in which all of the power lies in the hands of a single individual.<ref name=":12" /> They differ from other forms of dictatorships in that the dictator has greater access to key political positions and the government's [[treasury]], and they are more commonly subject to the discretion of the dictator. Personalist dictators may be members of the military or leaders of a political party, but neither the military nor the party exercises power independently from the dictator. In personalist dictatorships, the elite corps are usually made up of close friends or family members of the dictator, who typically handpicks these individuals to serve their posts.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=215–216}}<ref>{{cite journal|last=Peceny|first=Mark|date=2003|title=Peaceful Parties and Puzzling Personalists.|journal=The American Political Science Review|volume= 97| issue =  2|pages= 339–42|oclc=208155326|doi=10.1017/s0003055403000716|doi-broken-date=1 January 2025 |s2cid=145169371}}</ref> These dictatorships often emerge either from loosely organized seizures of power, giving the leader opportunity to consolidate power, or from democratically elected leaders in countries with weak institutions, giving the leader opportunity to change the constitution. Personalist dictatorships are more common in Sub-Saharan Africa due to less established institutions in the region.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=42–45}} There has been an increase in personalist dictatorships since the end of the Cold War.<ref name=":12">{{Citation |last=Frantz |first=Erica |title=Personalist Dictatorship |date=2024 |work=The Oxford Handbook of Authoritarian Politics |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.8 |publisher=Oxford University Press |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198871996.013.8 |isbn=978-0-19-887199-6 |quote=Personalist dictatorships are regimes in which a single individual controls access to political office and influence over policy, and no institutions exist that are autonomous of this individual (Geddes 2003). This contrasts with other more institutionalized forms of authoritarianism, where politics may be dictated by a single political party (as in dominant-party dictatorships) or a military junta (as in military dictatorships). Political parties may exist in personalist dictatorships, but they largely lack political autonomy.}}</ref>

Personalist dictators typically favor loyalty over competence in their governments and have a general distrust of [[intelligentsia]]. Elites in personalist dictatorships often do not have a professional political career and are unqualified for the positions they are given. A personalist dictator will manage these appointees by segmenting the government so that they cannot collaborate. The result is that such regimes have no internal [[checks and balances]], and are thus unrestrained when exerting repression on their people, making radical shifts in foreign policy, or starting wars with other countries.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Van den Bosch |first=Jeroen J. J. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cxYeEAAAQBAJ |title=Personalist Rule in Africa and Other World Regions |date=2021-04-19 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-000-37707-1 |pages=10–11 |language=en}}</ref> Due to the lack of accountability and the smaller group of elites, personalist dictatorships are more prone to [[corruption]] than other forms of dictatorship,{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=134–135}} and they are more repressive than other forms of dictatorship.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Frantz|first1=Erica|last2=Kendall-Taylor|first2=Andrea|last3=Wright|first3=Joseph|last4=Xu|first4=Xu|date=2019-08-27|title=Personalization of Power and Repression in Dictatorships|url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/706049|journal=The Journal of Politics|volume=82|pages=372–377|doi=10.1086/706049|s2cid=203199813|issn=0022-3816}}</ref> Personalist dictatorships often collapse with the death of the dictator. They are more likely to end in violence and less likely to democratize than other forms of dictatorship.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=61–67}}
[[File:Stans08-036 (3134870208).jpg|thumb|The rotating statue of [[Saparmurat Niyazov]] in [[Turkmenistan]]]]
Personalist dictatorships fit the exact classic stereotype of authoritarian rule.<ref>Frantz 2018</ref> Within a personalist regime, an issue called "the dictator's dilemma" arises.<ref>Wintrobe 2012{{Full citation needed|date=December 2024}}</ref> This idea references the heavy reliance on repression of the public to stay in power, which creates incentives for all constituents to falsify their preferences, which does not allow for dictators to know the genuine popular beliefs or their realistic measure of societal support.<ref>Kuran 2011</ref> As a result of authoritarian politics, a series of major issues may ensue. [[Preference falsification]], internal politics, data scarcity, and restriction on the [[freedom of the press]] are just a few examples of the dangers of a personalistic authoritarian regime.<ref>Robinson Tanneberg 2018</ref> Although, when it comes to polling and elections a dictator could use their power to override private preferences. Many personalist regimes will install open ballots to protect their regimes and implement heavy security measures and [[censorship]] for those whose personal preferences do not align with the values of the leader.<ref>Donno 2013</ref>

The shift in the power relation between the dictator and their inner circle has severe consequences for the behavior of such regimes as a whole. Personalist regimes diverge from other regimes when it comes to their longevity, methods of breakdown, levels of corruption, and proneness to conflicts. On average, they last twice as long as military dictatorships, but not as long as one-party dictatorships.<ref>{{Cite report |title=Authoritarian Breakdown: Empirical Test of a Game Theoretic Argument |last=Geddes |first=Barbara |date=2004 |pages=18–19}}</ref> Personalist dictatorships also experience growth differently, as they often lack the institutions or qualified leadership to sustain an economy.<ref>Van den Bosch, Jeroen J. J., Personalist Rule in Africa and Other World Regions, (London-New York: Routledge, 2021): 13-16</ref>

=== Absolute monarchy ===
{{Main|Absolute monarchy}}
[[File:Salman of Saudi Arabia (2017-10-05) 2.jpg|thumb|King [[Salman of Saudi Arabia]]]]
An absolute monarchy is a [[monarchy]] in which the [[monarch]] rules without legal limitations. This makes it distinct from [[constitutional monarchy]] and [[Crowned republic|ceremonial monarchy]].{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=240–241}} In an absolute monarchy, power is limited to the royal family, and historical factors establish legitimacy. Monarchies may be dynastic, in which the royal family serves as a ruling institution similar to a political party in a one-party state, or non-dynastic, in which the monarch rules independently of the royal family as a personalist dictator.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|p=259}} Monarchies allow for strict rules of succession that produce a peaceful transfer of power on the monarch's death, but this can also result in succession disputes if multiple members of the royal family claim a right to succeed.{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|p=254}} In the modern era, absolute monarchies are most common in the [[Middle East]].{{sfn|Ezrow|Frantz|2011|pp=46–48}}