Some Forms of Political Government

Anyone who has taken an elementary course in political science or history has probably (if they didn't doze through the entire course) encountered terms such as autocratic (also known as authoritarian), totalitarian, democratic, constitutional, and anarchic. Thus are usually described various forms of governments. The United States, for example, is known as being constitutional (with elected representatives passing laws instead of the people at large). The democratic elements of our political structure are permitted (and limited) by our Constitution. Burma (Myanmar) is widely recognized as being autocratic. Iran is totalitarian, although it calls itself democratic (as do virtually all totalitarian regimes). And many rural societies across the world, almost all of whom live within the borders of nations subscribing to other political systems, are anarchic in nature. Democracy is probably the most fragile and unstable of all of the above, usually having to combine with another system to survive in some form. For example, as previously stated, democracy in America is combined with constitutionalism. In places like Russia or Pakistan, on the other hand, it is more a combination of autocracy and democracy that seems to be more stable (although Pakistan seems to have problems with anything these days).

It strikes me that these political systems don't just apply on a national level: they also apply to groups and situations that we live out our lives in. Families in general have a varying mix of the totalitarian, autocratic, and anarchic. Workplaces are generally a mix of the autocratic and anarchic, although most companies deem themselves to be constitutional (with their company policies, or, if a union is involved, a collective bargaining agreement). Most churches are a mix of the autocratic and totalitarian, and it may be argued that their scriptures may serve as a sort of "constitution". And just driving around in traffic with others is simultaneously constitutional (traffic laws) and anarchic (everybody going to different destinations independently of each other). As a matter of fact, once you remove the top "icing" of constitutionalism, democracy, autocracy, or totalitarianism, much of the "cake" of a society underneath is essentially anarchy!

It is the family and the workplace, though, in which we spend most of our social time. One of the things that I find interesting about social systems is that, regardless of the imposed system, whenever that system breaks down, there seems to be an instinctive anarchic "backup" system that automatically kicks into play. Anarchy, as a political system, can simply be the breaking down of the "higher" systems to the lowest social level possible. Usually that means down to the family level, but not always. The closest thing to anarchy that we have as stated political philosophy, officially speaking, in America, is libertarianism. Both libertarianism and anarchy stress the sentiment that people know what's best for themselves and want to be left alone. To me that's fine in a perfect world, where people respect each other and don't cross their "lines in the sand". But we all know that this isn't the way things work, and we need a higher authority sometimes to protect us from each other.

Personally, I can handle various amounts in my life of constitutionalism, democracy, autocracy, and (my favorite) anarchy. But I absolutely LOATHE totalitarianism in any form. Any kind of social situation in which I find myself being compelled to give or do something that I do not want to give or do that also makes the demand that I behave as if I really DO want to give or do that thing is totalitarian. We instinctively cringe when thinking of totalitarian national governments, but sometimes it runs rampant on a smaller social level in environments like workplaces, schools, families, churches, and even among friends.