# Ideally, what additional checks and balances would democracies have to prevent authoritarianism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 8, 2017, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410 "2017-06-08T02:03:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/21 "2017-06-12T07:13:16Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > IMO, the main check for authoritarianism is term limits, set in stone, like the US Presidential ones. You can’t be a proper dictator if you know that a few years from now you will be out of power and people you’re lording over may judge you pretty harshly. I don’t see any evidence for that, rather it reminds me of the weird Roman Superstition where Julius being rumored to call himself “king” was reason to kill him, but calling himself “Caesar” and acting like a King was no Problem. It’s esp. weird considering that only the President has term Limits, but the Supreme Court judges cling onto their post until they die, and the lower places, like Gouvernor of a state, often don’t have term Limits. If you trust the Population enough to elect the president directly\*, why not trust them to re-elect the POTUS if his work is good enough? And you can see with Trump how it doesn’t deter anything - not only is he old anyway, who knows if he will live enough for second term? - he’s now shifting wealth and powerful positions to his Kids and friends. Do you really think those friends will not protect him when his term is up, regardless of how many Terms? - yes, there’s the bad Lever of electoral college - but I mean compared to indirectly like voting a Party into majority into Parliament who then selects the PM / chancellor from their midst ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/22 "2017-06-12T07:22:33Z")
About term Limits for POTUS: I’ve often heard the reasoning is that it prevents a dynasty from forming - handing down power from father to son like kings. But just look at how Bush sr. paved the way with his influence so that Bush jr. could “win” the election (what if that Florida judge had ruled different, being independt of pressure?) And today, running for POTUS requires millions of Money and powerful friends - or being a Populist like Trump who managed to convince average Joes that he was on their side and knew about their Problems. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/23 "2017-06-12T07:27:18Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > As to **astorian’s** second question: I wouldn’t want my President, your President or _anyone’s_ President to act like Trump is acting. This isn’t “That is the wrong person to be getting away with that”-It is “It is wrong for _any_ person to get away with that.” That’s another good Point. If a large part of your Population is raised by (religious or otherwise) authoriatarians in the ideology of “Might makes right” or “If the right guy at the top does it, it’s okay (because he’s the right guy), but if the wrong guy does exactly the same Thing, it’s wrong (because he’s the wrong guy” then there is no wish by the Population to curtail the powers of POTUS or anybody else at the top (only the wish to make it to the top themselves one day). Similar to “If our County does X (torture of POWs, spying on civilians, trade barriers…) it’s okay, because we are the good guys, but if foreign Country does it to us, that’s terrible, because they are evil”. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/24 "2017-06-12T13:14:27Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > Then (and I was shocked-- SHOCKED, I tell you!) (Reagan) was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s practically the day after he left office, but his family swore he was absolutely fine the whole time he was serving. “Practically the next day” != [six years](http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi0u9q_sLjUAhXIeSYKHe6DC94QFghNMAc&url=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com%2FHealth%2FMindMoodNews%2Fronald-reagan-alzheimers-presidency%2Fstory%3Fid%3D12633225&usg=AFQjCNH3HKtbIO3boaO1vCqAyFmZKofXzQ&sig2=k5V5HcBsflggo6zuK5SuXw), and his doctors != his family. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![davida03801](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5e925/32.png) [@davida03801](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davida03801)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/25 "2017-06-12T13:27:41Z")
Trump is an authoritarian ? Please give me some concrete examples of this other than your fantasy. Seriously this is derangement syndrome fantasy talk. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/26 "2017-06-12T18:15:44Z")
The formal structure of the constitution of a country means nothing if the Powers that Be don’t actually follow that constitution. The Soviet Union had a great constitution that protected all kinds of freedom. And it meant nothing, because the ruling party ignored it as the meaningless propaganda it was. Authoritarian government can only be prevented by a population that is committed to preventing authoritarian government. If the population gets sick of resisting authoritarian government, then it will have authoritarian government no matter what formal checks and balances and constitutional guarantees are written down on some scraps of paper. Note that I’m not exactly claiming that the people will have authoritarian government because they want it, although that sometimes happens. Rather that the price of liberal governance is eternal vigilance. Just because a majority don’t want authoritarian government doesn’t mean they won’t have it thrust upon them. If they don’t take active steps every day, every month, every year, every generation, then eventually some strongman is going to seize power. And this is why the election of Trump is such a disaster. Sure, he’s a buffoon with the mind of a child. Except that could easily be dealt with, we have an easy solution to the problem of an incompetent executive. The problem is that our country is so degraded that those actions that in normal times be taken to rid us of this loathsome person cannot be taken. His party supports him, and enough people support his party, that they cheer as our country’s unwritten constitution crumbles. But they have to support Trump, because the other side was Hillary! Except the scary lady can’t hurt you any more, she’s gone now. So you’ve avoided the disaster of Hillary becoming president, but only by the equivalent of chewing off your own leg to escape a trap. And now you’ve got to pretend, Black Knight style, that it’s merely a flesh wound, nothing to see here. ---
**Author:** ![snoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@snoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snoe)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/27 "2017-06-12T19:17:11Z")
(Somewhat echoing what others, including a **lemur** just now, have said:)) I don’t think formal solutions beyond what we already have are what’s key here. If such solutions become necessary, they’re not going to be sufficient. At the risk of sounding like [Bertolt Brecht’s apparatchik](https://www.poemhunter.com/poem/the-solution/), we need a citizenry that won’t tolerate authoritarianism in sufficient numbers to make authoritarianism possible. So they’ve got their **basic needs met** (hey, hello again, [Mr. Brecht!](http://www.metrolyrics.com/what-keeps-mankind-alive-lyrics-tom-waits.html)); they **know enough about how government works** to make informed decisions; and they **know enough about history** to know why they should care about not sliding into authoritarianism in the first place. Oh, and they’ve got a **robust, free, and independent press guided by strong professional and ethical norms** to give them the information they need. We’re already falling at least somewhat short on all these counts, by my reckoning – and our current president is indifferent or outright hostile to most or all of them. Still, I have a decent amount of hope that our current institutions are robust enough to clear this infection. Strengthening those institutions, rather than coming up with some weird trick,\* seems like a more productive – and easier – way to go. - Empower US Marshals to arrest admitted theocrats for crimes against democracy! Limit all government employees to 18 months in their job! Make the President work a grocery store cash register one day a week – _in disguise_! Drug testing for all public officials! Loyalty oaths – _enforceable by guillotine_! Civics tests for voting! ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/28 "2017-06-13T12:19:27Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > The formal structure of the constitution of a country means nothing if the Powers that Be don’t actually follow that constitution. The Soviet Union had a great constitution that protected all kinds of freedom. And it meant nothing, because the ruling party ignored it as the meaningless propaganda it was. Still going in many South American countries: on paper, good laws for protection of enviroment and workers rights or Native Indians rights to their territory; in reality, nobody enforces them or cares about them. > [@](#): > > Note that I’m not exactly claiming that the people will have authoritarian government because they want it, although that sometimes happens. Rather that the price of liberal governance is eternal vigilance. Just because a majority don’t want authoritarian government doesn’t mean they won’t have it thrust upon them. If they don’t take active steps every day, every month, every year, every generation, then eventually some strongman is going to seize power. Just look at These Points that severely hinder real modern Democracy in the US: - Gerrymandering (I don’t know offhand any other modern Democracy that allows it - any accusation of unfair voting districts would be taken very serious) - Suppression of voter rights (not only one state, and at least one court ruled that the law had been custom-made to suppress voter’s rights) Heck for that: voting on weekdays instead of sundays, to accomodate one religious Extremist Group (not the Jews, the fundie Christians not wanting to travel on holy Sunday) instead of making it easy for the working Population - Filibustering. I know that many Yanks argue it’s necessary - but the fact that you can’t find a way to get minority Party their rights without just talking People until they’re bored is not a sign of maturity in politicans elected by the Population. And yet there is no majority of the Population activly Standing up and demonstrating each week to Change this. Obviously it’s not important enough for the majority of the Population to get active and try. And the People who want a kleptocracy or Authoritarian Regime see this passivity and lack of concern as sign of how much they can get away with. Another example: Free speech is Very Important in the US, including demonstrations. Many People have pointed out that in order to resist Trump, People should demonstrate as Long as it’s allowed. However, given how much People rever the right to demonstrate, it’s not worth the Trouble to pass a law against it like Putin did. All that’s necessary is a highly armed Police force on one side, one or two Agent provocateurs, and the govt. can crack down on the protesters, Arrest a couple of hundreds and smear the whole movement as “rioters”. This happened successfully with Black Lives Matter Movement. See [5 Ways Powerful People Trick You Into Hating Protesters | Cracked.com](http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-ways-powerful-people-trick-you-into-hating-underdogs/) ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2017, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/29 "2017-06-17T23:28:31Z")
Apparently Germany has a system called militant democracy to prevent authoritarians from taking power. > **[Defensive democracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streitbare_Demokratie)** > > Defensive democracy is a term referring to the collection of laws, delegated legislation, and court rulings which limit certain rights and freedoms in a democratic society in order to protect the existence of the state, its democratic character and institutions, minority rights, or other aspects of the democratic system. The term is related to a conflict that may emerge in a democratic country between compliance with democratic values, particularly freedom of association and the right to be elect... > [@](#): > > Tools of the ‘Streitbare Demokratie’ > > Several articles of the German constitution allow a range of different measures to “defend the liberal democratic order”. > > Art. 9 allows for social groups to be labelled “verfassungsfeindlich” (“hostile to the constitution”) and to be prohibited by the federal government. Political parties can only be labelled enemies to the constitution by Germany’s highest court, the Bundesverfassungsgericht (federal constitutional court), according to Art. 21 II. > > According to Art. 18, the Bundesverfassungsgericht can restrict the basic rights of people who fight against the “verfassungsgemäße Ordnung” (constitutional order). As of 2008, this has never happened in the history of the Federal Republic. > > The federal and state bureaucracies can exclude people deemed “hostile to the constitution” from the civil service according to Art. 33 (Berufsverbot). Every civil servant is sworn to defend the constitution and the constitutional order. > > According to Art. 20, every German citizen has the right to resistance against anyone who wants to abolish the constitutional order, though only as a last resort. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2017, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410/30 "2017-06-18T01:55:49Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > Still going in many South American countries: on paper, good laws for protection of enviroment and workers rights or Native Indians rights to their territory; in reality, nobody enforces them or cares about them. > > Just look at These Points that severely hinder real modern Democracy in the US: > > - Gerrymandering (I don’t know offhand any other modern Democracy that allows it - any accusation of unfair voting districts would be taken very serious) > > - Suppression of voter rights (not only one state, and at least one court ruled that the law had been custom-made to suppress voter’s rights) > Heck for that: voting on weekdays instead of sundays, to accomodate one religious Extremist Group (not the Jews, the fundie Christians not wanting to travel on holy Sunday) instead of making it easy for the working Population > > - Filibustering. I know that many Yanks argue it’s necessary - but the fact that you can’t find a way to get minority Party their rights without just talking People until they’re bored is not a sign of maturity in politicans elected by the Population. American democracy, American society in its original form embraced the value of inequality, with one race being superior to others, with males being superior to females, with those with money being superior to those without it. Modern Europeans, Canadians, and other more functional democracies understand that in a true democracy, in a culture where masses of people should rule, all people need to be protected equally. This goes beyond just making sure that people of certain races don’t get fire-hosed for trying to vote; this means creating social end economic conditions that promote integration of people and a strong working class. Gerrymandering and suppression of voter rights are obvious assaults on the idea of equality in American democracy. But even the time-honored tradition of filibustering needs to be observed in its proper context. Many of the institutions intended to protect minority rule were intended to protect a specific type of minority rule – that of rural, white, southern states that had less population than those in the north. There is nothing scientific about the filibuster and it’s not particularly a tool that modern democracies embrace. The American constitution, American democracy is a dinosaur, which is why few countries now model their democracy after ours. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ideally-what-additional-checks-and-balances-would-democracies-have-to-prevent-authoritarianism/788410.md?page=1)