Authoritarianism is one of the most widespread regimes of our time. It developed mainly in a number of liberated countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, as well as in the USSR when, after the death of Joseph Stalin, the transformation of the totalitarian regime into an authoritarian one began.

1. concentration of power in the hands of one person or group, society is alienated from power, there is no mechanism for its succession, since the elite is formed by appointment from above;

2. the rights and freedoms of citizens mainly in the political sphere. Laws, as a rule, are on the side of the state, not the individual;

3. the official ideology dominates in society, but tolerance is shown towards other ideological movements loyal to the ruling regime;

4. limitation and strict regulation of political rights and political behavior of both individual citizens and socio-political organizations. The activities of parties and opposition are prohibited or limited;

5. the vast public sector is strictly regulated by the state, but can easily coexist with private enterprise;

6. censorship is carried out over the media, which are allowed to criticize certain shortcomings of government policy while maintaining loyalty to the system;

7. absence of a huge repressive apparatus. There are no mass repressions in society;

8. If the results of activity are positive, the regime can be supported by the majority of society. A minority is fighting for a transition to democracy. Civil society can exist, but is dependent on the state;

9. allowing citizens everything that is not prohibited by the state;

10. The regime is characterized by unitary forms of state with strict centralization of power. The rights of national minorities are limited.

1. military regime (for example, the junta led by Pinochet in Chile, the rule of Marshal Pilsudski in Poland);

2. theocratic regime (the power of a religious clan that established in Iran after the 1979 revolution);

4. regimes characterized by the existence of mass parties (for example, in Mexico) and the behavior of non-competitive or semi-competitive elections.

The most widespread type of authoritarian regimes are military regimes, which arise during the period of liberation of a number of countries from colonial dependence and the formation of national states. In traditional societies, the military turned out to be the most cohesive social group, capable of uniting all layers of society based on the idea of ​​national definition. At the same time, after the military comes to power, the political course may be different. Thus, in some countries it led to the removal of the corrupt elite from power and served the interests of national states (for example, in Indonesia, Taiwan). In other cases, the military itself became the executor of the will of powerful financial groups and states, for example, most military regimes in Latin America were financed by the United States.

An authoritarian political regime, as a rule, evolves into democracy. For example, after the Second World War, Spain had an authoritarian regime for a certain time, but under the influence of industrialized Western countries and the United States, which sought to expand the scope of democratic values, it evolved into a democratic political regime.

Other publications:

Totalitarianism and democracy: people and power
Totalitarianism is mainly considered as a social system characterized by extreme centralization of power. This phenomenon is presented as a system of violent political domination, where the dominant elite is completely...

General characteristics of the leading political parties in Belarus
In the former Soviet Union, the only constitutional party was the CPSU, within which there were no factions or institutionalized differences of opinion. The first step towards a multi-party system was the decisions of the 19th Party Conference...

The meaning and place of conflict in political life. Relationship between different types of conflicts
The parties to this type of conflict are individual states or groups of states (coalitions). The causes of these conflicts can also be very diverse (economic, political, ideological, territorial, etc.). At the core...

Spain during the authoritarian regime of Francisco Franco (1939-1975)

1939 - 1975

Social basis and ideological doctrine of Francoism. Political system of the Franco regime

The authoritarian Franco regime established itself in Spain as a result of the bloody, destructive Civil War. Enormous human losses, numerous human dramas and the moral breakdown of society have seriously hampered the process of national reconciliation. The tragedy of the Civil War remained in the collective memory of the Spaniards for many years. The main political processes in the country were, to one degree or another, derived from the results of the Civil War. Economically, post-war Spain was set back several decades. Nevertheless, the Franco regime lasted for almost 40 years. It was one of the longest periods of authoritarian rule in the modern history of Western Europe. After the end of the Second World War, which determined new guidelines for European and world development, Spain was virtually isolated, which made it difficult for the country to economically recover and return to the system of international relations as a full-fledged actor.

In the 30s and 40s, the Spanish reaction under anti-republican and anti-communist banners united socio-politically heterogeneous forces: the financial and land oligarchy, the top of the army and the church, representatives of a significant part of the middle strata of the city and countryside. The Frankist regime, protecting their interests, created favorable opportunities for the enrichment of these categories of citizens, including through measures of state-monopoly regulation.

The dictatorship of F. Franco reigned in the country on April 1, 1939. Its support was the army, repressive bodies and the fascist party “Spanish Phalanx” created in 1937. The democratic constitution of 1931 ceased to be in force. All political parties and trade union associations that supported the republic were banned, and most of the reforms carried out by the Popular Front were canceled. The judiciary during the Franco period functioned on the basis of wartime emergency legislation. The political system that developed in the country was focused on protecting the regime and its institutions. Largely on the model of Fascist Italy, the state in Spain was organized as “corporate, centralized, paternalistic.” Its distinctive features were the territorial unity of the country and a rigid vertical government, where, of course, there was no place for either regional autonomy or the idea of ​​ethnocultural identity of the peoples inhabiting the country.

The colossal power that F. Franco concentrated in his hands during the Civil War received “legitimate” status according to the law promulgated on August 8, 1939. On August 9, the second government of F. Franco was formed (the first Franco government operated until August 1939). In its composition, the dictator included representatives of the high command of the army, several Carlists and clerics. Ideologically, from 1939 to 1942, the key role in the formation of the country’s political system belonged to the fascist party “Spanish Phalanx”. The program of the “Spanish Phalanx” included the following points: the formation of so-called “vertical” trade unions, which united entrepreneurs, employees and workers on a forced corporate basis; the establishment of youth, student and women's associations, whose activities were imbued with the ideas of Spanish nationalism and Francoism; the creation of a powerful propaganda and censorship apparatus capable of suppressing any democratic manifestations in politics, the press, literature, art and imposing the ideas of Francoism on all layers of Spanish society.

In 1941, the Spanish Falangists developed a draft law on the organization of the state, largely copying the corporate totalitarianism of the Italian fascists. However, F. Franco rejected this bill, considering that it did not adequately take into account the national-traditionalist specifics of Spain. It must be emphasized that from the first days of its existence (until 1975), the Francoist regime did not represent an organizational and ideological “monolith”; on the contrary, in its basic structures there was constantly rivalry and outright confrontation between various groups with their own narrow selfish interests or fighting for spheres of influence. The dictator skillfully used this rivalry to achieve his own goals, resorting to the tactics of “mutual checks and balances,” in particular through personnel changes. In August 1942, he formed a new cabinet of ministers. The Phalangists were represented in the cabinet in smaller numbers than before. This “maneuver” testified to F. Franco’s desire to reduce the excessive political influence that the Spanish Phalanx acquired after the end of the Civil War.

By decree of July 17, 1942, the Cortes were created, which performed only advisory functions. 438 deputies of the Cortes were called procuradores. Members of the Cortes were ministers, members of the National Council of the Spanish Falange, chairmen of the Supreme Court and the Military Tribunal, mayors of 50 provincial capitals, university rectors, major government officials, etc. The head of state appointed 50 prosecutors to the Cortes from persons who held high positions in the military, administrative, spiritual or social spheres. The Francoist Cortes were a collection of major government and party officials who were ready to faithfully serve the authoritarian regime.

The government (Council of Ministers) was headed by F. Franco. No bills could be introduced into the Cortes without the consent of the government. The dictator had the right of veto over any bill passed by the Cortes. Ministers were also appointed and removed personally by Franco. He also appointed governors of 50 provinces, senior officials, judges, generals, admirals, and gave consent to the transfer of clergy within the structure of the Catholic Church. The Catholic religion was declared the state religion. The clergy received salaries from the state treasury.

In each sector of the economy there was a central branch trade union, to which its provincial and local branches were subordinate. Industry trade unions (there were 26 of them) had a “vertical” structure, i.e. included business owners, administrative staff, employees and workers. The industrial trade union, which had administrative powers, was headed by a delegate appointed by the government. In turn, the trade union delegate reported to the government minister. The administrative apparatus of the trade unions was also not elected, but appointed by the government. The state strictly regulated production, wage levels, prices and supplies. An administrative decision was needed to create a new industrial enterprise.

Local government, which existed during the Second Republic, was abolished. Local power was exercised by persons appointed by the government: in the provinces - governors, in municipal districts and large cities - alcaldes.

Francoism supplemented political terror against its opponents with ideological terror. Fidelity to the ideals of the “crusade against communism” was considered by the regime as a fundamental principle of the country’s domestic and foreign policy. Francoism, as an ideological doctrine imposed by the regime on Spanish society, was based on anti-democracy, authoritarianism, anti-communism, anti-Semitism, clericalism, fascist nationalism, paternalistic elitism, and state centralism. It contained traditionalist 1, monarchical and religious concepts developed during the 19th-20th centuries. such ideologists of reaction and conservatism as M. Menendez Pelayo, R. de Maestu, J.A. Primo de Rivera, A. Herrera, J.M. Gil Robles and others. Francoism accumulated all these ideas and adopted Spanish traditionalism, the idealization of the “originality” of Spain, the theme of “one and indivisible” Spain, the exalted proclamation of the unity of the Spaniards in the face of class struggle, the fetishization of the army as a guarantor of regime stability.

Francoism was permeated with the ideas of caudilism - a reactionary ideological and political movement that justified the establishment of totalitarian government led by a recognized national leader endowed with political and military power. Caudilism dates back to the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. fueled by political and socio-economic instability generated by the degradation of the monarchical regime, oligarchic methods of government in the country and attempts by the army elite to actively intervene in political processes. The dictatorship of General M. Primo de Rivera and the creation of the fascist party (1933) largely corresponded to the ideological postulates of caudilism. After F. Franco came to power, caudillism in Spain was actually legalized, and the dictator himself was presented by official propaganda in the period from 1939 to 1975 as “the savior of the nation and the state.” During this time, F. Franco, who combined the posts of Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, head of state and government, was officially called “by the grace of God, caudillo of Spain, responsible before God and history.” Thus, Francoism opposed itself to the ideas of enlightenment, democracy, liberalism, communism, social democracy and Freemasonry.

The defeat of Hitler's Germany in World War II threatened the existence of the dictatorial regime and Francoist ideology in Spain. F. Franco took energetic measures to adapt the country to the new international situation. In July 1945, he formed a new government, in which representatives of clerical circles began to play a leading role (M. Artajo, J.M. Fernandez Ladreda, X. Ruiz Jimenez). The most odious fascist postulates were “removed” from official propaganda. Democratic elements were “introduced” into the political system (largely for appearances and especially to calm public opinion in democratic countries). In particular, in 1945, a document called “Fuero of the Spaniards” was promulgated, which declared the rights of the Spanish people, but, naturally, there was no mechanism for legal guarantees or the implementation of these rights in “Fuero”. At the same time, the “caudillo of Spain” signed the law on a national referendum, according to which the head of state had the right to submit bills proposed by the Cortes to a national referendum.

In 1947, in accordance with the law of succession to the head of state, Spain was formally proclaimed a monarchy, but the establishment of royal power had to occur after the death of F. Franco, who was declared ruler for life. The law provided for the creation of a Royal Council of representatives of the generals, high clergy and officials. According to the proposal of this body and the government, in the event of the death of F. Franco or his resignation, the Cortes were to elect a king (from the Spanish Bourbon dynasty) or a regent.

In the 50s and 60s, the authoritarian regime managed to expand its social base. The traditional supporters of Francoism - the landed aristocracy, the industrial oligarchy, the highest military, bureaucratic and clerical circles - were joined by the “new” bourgeoisie, which managed to enrich itself through government subsidies, government orders and elementary speculative transactions. The middle urban and rural bourgeoisie opened up new opportunities for growth in personal well-being.

The economic boom of the 60s and the first half of the 70s in the country strengthened the position of the “new” Spanish bourgeoisie, but at the same time increased its dissatisfaction with the economic policies of the regime. The enterprising part of the Spanish bourgeoisie longed for reforms. Under these conditions, the conflict between state authoritarianism and a dynamic market economy took on acute forms. Francoism tried to get out of this situation through liberal innovations in the social field and the inclusion of technocrats from the religious and political organization “Opus Dei” (“God’s work”) into the public administration system 2 .

The cabinet reshuffles made in 1957 indicated that F. Franco relied on a technocratic oligarchy, the core of which were representatives of Opus Dei, led by L. Lopez Rodo. The government of technocrats enjoyed the support of F. Franco's closest associate, Admiral L. Carrero Blanco, who played an increasingly prominent role in the political life of the country. The new cabinet set a course for modernizing the country while maintaining the principles on which the ruling regime was based.

In addition to economic reform, the renovationist activities of technocratic governments in the period from 1957 to 1965 manifested themselves in other directions: a certain modernization of the regime itself, increasing the efficiency of the central government apparatus and administrative structures at the provincial and municipal levels. In 1967, F. Franco, “under pressure” from L. Carrero Blanco and technocratic ministers, agreed to the adoption of the Organic Law on the State. In accordance with the law, the posts of head of state and head of government were separated, a partial reform of the Cortes was carried out, and opportunities were identified for the creation of political associations, however, on the condition that they share the basic principles of the national movement, i.e. Francoism. From July 22, 1969, at the suggestion of F. Franco, in the event of his death, Prince Juan Carlos Bourbon (current King of Spain Juan Carlos I 3) was declared the successor to the head of state, who the next day took the oath of allegiance to F. Franco and the fatherland.

In 1969, a new cabinet was formed, the key figure of which was Admiral L. Carrero Blanco. Despite the successes in the economic sphere, in general the government of L. Carrero Blanco adhered to a conservative course, which manifested itself in limiting political changes. The reform forces in the new cabinet were called aperturists.

In 1973, F. Franco, due to deteriorating health, was forced to temporarily (for the period of treatment) transfer control of the country to Admiral L. Carrero Blanco. The admiral reshuffled the cabinet, including representatives of various political sectors from among the Francoists. However, this government did not begin work. On December 20, 1973, in Madrid, L. Carrero Blanco was killed by militants of the Basque underground organization ETA.

After the death of L. Carrero Blanco, the caudillo appointed C. Arias Navarro 4 as chairman of the government. The new cabinet included representatives of those sectors that formed the support of the regime, with the exception of technocrats from Opus Dei. At the first stage of his activity, C. Arias Navarro developed and submitted to the Cortes a plan of reforms aimed at democratizing the procedure for electing heads of local administrations, simplifying bureaucratic obstacles in creating political associations, expanding the powers of official trade unions, delineating powers between the state and the church, and a number of others. For the most part, C. Arias Navarro's plans remained on paper.

The political course pursued by C. Arias Navarro, conservative in essence, aroused criticism from the reformist circles of Francoism. As a sign of disagreement with C. Arias Navarro, two government ministers resigned: the Minister of Information and Tourism, Pio Cabanillas, and the Minister of Finance, Barrera de Irimo. Even among convinced Francoists, voices were heard louder and louder, demanding concrete measures to reform the country. The ideological and political crisis experienced by the regime was exacerbated by the illness and death of the caudillo on November 20, 1975.

It should be noted that the political regime created by F. Franco after the fall of the Second Republic, and the system of power of the period 1975-1978. Despite the external similarity of political institutions and attributes of power, they differed significantly from each other. At the first stage of the regime's existence, the influence of German Nazism and Italian fascism was clearly visible in its structures, methods of government and official propaganda. After the defeat of fascism during the Second World War, F. Franco and his circle began to quickly adapt to changing internal and external conditions. This process of “adjustment” continued in the 50s and 60s. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to give a brief and comprehensive definition of the Franco regime as a whole. If from 1939 to 1945, in terms of the form and methods of government, Spain was a military-totalitarian dictatorship of the fascist kind, then later, until 1957, the “recipe” of power was dominated by authoritarianism, ideologically fueled by the postulates of Francoism and Catholicism. Since 1957, Francoist authoritarianism gradually merged with oligarchic technocracy. Later, the ideologists of Francoism characterized these changes as the “original” path of Spain, which strived for sustainable socio-economic development and at the same time jealously guarded national traditions and, of course, religion. Nevertheless, for 36 years, all political power was in the hands of F. Franco alone.

Opposition to the Franco regime. The emergence of the Basque separatist organization ETA

After the end of the Civil War, representatives of various anti-Franco forces (communists, socialists, republicans, Basque and Catalan nationalists, trade union leaders, etc.) made efforts to restore their organizational structures underground and launch a struggle against the authoritarian regime. Hopes were also placed on the assistance of the democratic states of the West, which had defeated German Nazism and Italian fascism. Until 1949, partisan detachments, consisting mainly of communists, operated in Spain. However, the expectation that after the end of World War II the fascist regime of Franco would be destroyed did not materialize. Moreover, in the 50s, the Franco regime managed to strengthen its position both within the country and in the international arena. In this regard, anti-Francoists were forced to build their struggle strategy based on a long-term perspective.

The main opposition force to Francoism in the 50s and 60s were the working class, democratic intelligentsia and student youth. In the late 40s and early 50s, the first major speeches of the Spaniards took place, held under economic slogans. Mass protests and strikes by workers “shaken” and led to the collapse of one of the most important pillars of the regime - the “vertical” trade unions, which forcibly united almost the entire economically active population of the country. In the mid-70s, these trade unions lost social support, since the majority of workers openly went over to the side of the new type of trade union movement that emerged in the late 50s in the form of Workers' Commissions 5, which were influenced by communist ideology, or the revived General Union of Workers. This situation testified to the futility of Franco's attempts to turn the working class into an obedient ally through “integration” into its system.

The growing activity of the working class in the fight against the Franco regime had a powerful impact on other sectors of Spanish society, in particular on students. From purely academic demands, the bulk of students moved on to putting forward radical slogans directed against the regime. The conflict between the regime and the students has become permanent. In 1956, powerful student protests took place in Madrid, leading to a government crisis. By the mid-60s, student protests had become an important factor in the struggle for the democratization of political life. In 1965, as a result of student demands, the Phalangist university student union was dissolved. In its place, the Democratic Union of University Students was organized.

At the end of the 60s, the intelligentsia became an active participant in various opposition actions - rallies, demonstrations, round tables. A new generation of Spanish intelligentsia, although of different ideological views and beliefs, rejected Francoism.

In the 60s and 70s, forces opposing Francoism were grouped around several political parties and organizations that operated primarily abroad or underground. Among these organizations, the Christian Democrats, led by M. Jimenez Fernandez and J.M., stood out. Gil Robles, the Social Democrats led by D. Ridruejo, the liberals, whose leader was X. Satrustegui, the PSOE (Spanish Socialist Workers' Party), which in those years was headed by R. Llopis, and the PCI, led by General Secretary S. Carrillo.

In July 1974 in Paris, the leading anti-Franco parties, led by the PCI, agreed to create a broad opposition alliance, the Democratic Rally. A year later, the “Platform of Democratic Unification” was formed, in which the main role was played by the young leaders of the PSOE, led by F. Gonzalez 6 and A. Guerra.

The anti-Franco movement grew stronger due to the international component. Back in August 1945, in Mexico, in opposition to the government of F. Franco, a Spanish republican government in exile was formed, headed by X. Giral. In April 1946, the government included representatives of the PCI, Galician nationalists and conservative Republicans. This government was recognized by 9 states. In February 1947, it was headed by the Republican R. Llopis. The government in exile continued to operate in subsequent years until the fall of the Franco regime.

National movements in Catalonia and the Basque Country were also in opposition to the authorities. They fought for the restoration of autonomy and in defense of ethnonational identity. All national movements in the country in the 60s were characterized by a combination of national demands with the general tasks of the struggle against the regime. Francoism viewed national movements as an attack on the “unity of the nation” and brutally suppressed them. Repression by the authorities led to the fact that since the late 60s, Basque nationalist organizations that took radical positions switched to terrorist methods of struggle.

The armed struggle against Francoism was led by the Basque underground organization ETA. Founded in 1959, ETA expressed the interests of Basque ultra-radical nationalist circles. The ideological views of ETA leaders were not static and were formed under the influence of market factors. ETA put forward slogans of struggle against the Francoist dictatorship and “Spanish enslavement”, in support of granting independence to the Basque Country, as well as a number of anti-fascist, democratic and moral-humanistic demands. The social sections of the ETA program, as well as the principles of the future political structure of the Basque Country, were set out only in general terms with an emphasis on the development of democracy, civil rights and freedoms.

ETA carried out its first terrorist attack in 1968. On August 2, the head of the Political Directorate of the San Sebastian Police, M. Manzanas, known for his sadism towards political prisoners, was killed. This high-ranking police official personified the Francoist regime in the eyes of Basque patriots. After the murder of M. Manzanas, by order of the authorities, a state of emergency was declared in the provinces of Vizcaya and Guipuzcoa, 434 people were arrested, 189 were thrown into prison, 75 Basques were forcibly deported to France and Belgium. According to the Basque weekly Enbata, in August 1968, 32 Catholic priests were thrown into the dungeons of the regime on trumped-up charges of involvement in a terrorist attack. In April 1969, the police managed to detain a whole group of Etar activists in safe houses. ETA's activities were disorganized.

In December 1970, a trial of 16 Basque patriots accused of involvement in the murder of M. Manzanas took place in Burgos. Contrary to the intentions of the authorities, the “Burgos Trial” (as the press of many countries, including the USSR, called this process) turned into a trial of Francoism itself and contributed to an unprecedented growth in the popularity of ETA both in Spain and abroad. During the court hearings, the Etarians accused the dictatorship of violating the basic rights and freedoms of the Basques. On December 9, the military tribunal handed down a harsh sentence to the accused: 6 Etarovites were sentenced to death, the rest to long prison terms (a total of more than 700 years). Leaders of many countries, including France, Belgium, Italy and the Vatican, have asked for clemency for those convicted. F. Franco was forced to replace the death sentence for 6 patriots with long prison sentences.

Thanks to the openness of the trial, ETA gained international fame. Her activities were associated with the just struggle of the Spaniards against tyranny. In a short period of time, the organization overcame internal divisions and restored its considerably thinned ranks. According to British researcher R. Clarke, “police repression played a key role in the replenishment of ETA with new fighters” 7 .

On December 20, 1973, as a result of a terrorist attack organized by ETA members, the Chairman of the Spanish Government, Admiral L. Carrero Blanco, F. Franco's closest associate and his intended successor, was killed.

Thus, Francoism was unable to suppress the growing opposition from below. He also failed to preserve the foundation on which he tried to erect the building of “great Spain.”

From autarky to economic liberalization

Under the conditions of World War II, the Franco regime was forced to resort to a policy of economic autarky in order to self-suffice the country with basic food and industrial goods. The course taken by the government was manifested in a targeted restriction of imports, encouragement of national producers by introducing preferential tariffs and taxation for them, state regulation and economic planning, and control over production. The Ministry of Industry and Trade, as well as the specially created Spanish Institute of Foreign Exchange, exercised strict control over foreign trade. The law on the protection and development of national industry and the law on the regulation and protection of national industry, adopted in 1939, were intended to create preferential conditions for Spanish manufacturers. In 1941, the National Institute of Industry was created, which actively contributed to the creation of large energy, metallurgical, chemical, automobile assembly and aviation state enterprises (CEAT, ENDESA, CASA, ENSIDES, etc.).

Agricultural producers were required to sell a significant portion of their crops at fixed prices set by the state. The purchasing organizations were the National Grain Service and the National Commissariat for Supply and Transport. The policy of economic autarky, carried out in conditions of an acute shortage of essential goods, turned out to be able to provide the population with food and industrial goods only to a minimal extent. The card system for food distribution, introduced on May 14, 1939 by the government of F. Franco, lasted until June 15, 1952. For a long time, a “black market” of goods existed in Spain, and speculation flourished. Strict restrictions on imports, government regulation, and numerous bureaucratic obstacles hampered the development of industry and agriculture and prevented the modernization of production and the introduction of advanced technologies. The majority of the country's population, mainly the poor, experienced extreme poverty due to an acute lack of means of subsistence.

There was growing dissatisfaction with the policies being pursued in society, including among entrepreneurs and commodity producers. Realizing the social threats threatening the regime, the new government of the country, formed in July 1951, put forward as its most important tasks raising the living standards of the population, modernizing production, and reforming the economy along the path of its gradual liberalization.

The liberalization of the economy was facilitated by the Spanish-American agreement signed in 1953, according to which Spain was provided with preferential loans for an impressive amount of $1.5 billion at that time. With this money, Spain began to purchase food, chemical fertilizers, animal feed, machinery and equipment. Despite continued legal restrictions, foreign investment began to flow into Spain.

Economic liberalization policies have affected agriculture. Since the mid-50s, the Ministry of Agriculture has gradually abolished the practice of compulsory cultivation of arable land and forced sale of part of agricultural products at fixed prices. The sale of grain and livestock products was increasingly carried out at market prices.

Government reforms contributed to economic recovery. In the period 1951 to 1957, annual GDP growth in Spain averaged 4.5% (higher GDP growth rates in Western European countries during that period were observed only in Germany and Italy), the country's foreign trade turnover during the same period increased by almost 10 once. There was, albeit a slow, increase in per capita income: for example, in 1940 this figure was only $2,000 (at 1985 prices), in 1950 - $2,500, in 1960 - $3,600. , in 1966 - $5,500, in 1970 - $6,600.

Thus, due to a number of reasons, both internal (stagnation in the economy, the narrowness of the domestic market) and external (the development of integration processes in Europe and the world), the regime was forced to abandon the policy of autarky and a regulated economy and move to economic liberalization, which opened up more favorable conditions for Spanish business.

The cabinet formed in 1957, led by technocrats from Opus Dei, intensified policies aimed at liberalizing and modernizing the Spanish economy. The previously existing system of different peseta exchange rates in foreign trade was abolished and a single rate was introduced for all participants in import-export transactions; in order to encourage Spanish exports, the peseta was devalued; wages were frozen and the tax scale was changed towards increasing taxes. At the end of the 50s, Spain joined the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, 8 which in 1959 provided it with a loan of $500 million.

On July 21, 1959, the law on the New Economic Course was adopted, enshrining the Economic Stabilization Plan (in the media it was called the “Stabilization Plan”). According to this plan, strict anti-inflationary measures were taken, the budget was streamlined, government expenses were sharply reduced, a new tariff scale was introduced for export-import transactions, and a single exchange rate was established for the peseta in relation to the American dollar (60 pesetas per dollar). The essence of the Stabilization Plan was to dismantle corporate-paternalistic capitalism and consolidate the principles of a market economy in the Spanish economic space.

Since 1961, Spain experienced a noticeable economic recovery and then its growth. A number of other factors contributed to the economic boom in the country in the 60s and 70s. Among them is the attractiveness of Spain for foreign tourists. Thanks to its favorable climate, excellent sandy beaches, good customer service and cheap labor, Spain has become a favorite holiday destination for Western Europeans. The economic emigration of Spaniards to developed Western European countries was also a positive factor. From 1960 to 1975, more than 2 million Spaniards went abroad to work. Their regular remittances in hard currency to Spain contributed to the improvement of the state budget and the growth of gold and foreign exchange reserves.

Favorable economic conditions in Spain and in the world contributed to the influx of foreign capital into the country, which had a positive effect on macroeconomic indicators. Between 1961 and 1974, average annual GDP growth exceeded 7%. Of the developed countries of the world, only Japan was ahead of Spain in this indicator. Since 1975, Spain rightfully began to be called an “industrial power”. From 1959 to 1975, the share of agriculture in the GDP structure decreased from 23% to 9%, while the share of industry increased from 34% to 42%, and services from 43% to 49%. From 1960 to 1975, 7 million Spaniards moved from rural areas to cities. Since the mid-70s, the definitions of “backward”, “patriarchal”, “agricultural” in relation to Spain have become a thing of the past.

Foreign policy in 1939-1975.

The Second World War threatened Spain with the danger of being drawn into hostilities on the side of Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, which had recently provided the rebels with military-technical assistance in the fight against the Republic. F. Franco understood that for a bloodless and exhausted Spain, participation in a new war would be tantamount to a national catastrophe with consequences unpredictable for the regime. For this reason, the caudillo’s prudence and pragmatism “worked” - on September 4, 1939, he declared Spain a “neutral country.” Nevertheless, F. Franco demonstrated in every possible way his sympathy for the Axis powers. Spain exported food, minerals and ammunition to Germany and Italy. Formed from among Spanish volunteers, Blue Division 9 was sent to the Soviet-German front.

In June 1940, F. Franco declared Spain a “non-belligerent country,” which meant actual support for the Axis states in World War II, with the exception of the direct participation of the Spaniards in hostilities. In October, a meeting between F. Franco and A. Hitler took place on the border of Spain and France. The result of the meeting was a secret protocol. In accordance with this document, Spain undertook (without specifying specific dates) to begin military action against Great Britain. The fierce nature of the fighting on the Eastern Front and the threat of a food and energy blockade of Spain by the United States and England forced F. Franco to again declare (October 1943) Spain a “neutral country.”

Back in June 1940, Spain captured the international zone of Tangier 10, and in December 1942, when F. Franco believed that Nazi Germany had already reached the zenith of its successes, it announced the inclusion of Tangier in its possessions.

On the eve of the military defeat of Germany, F. Franco undertook a maneuver in order to preserve the fascist regime in Spain. A few months before the Crimean Conference (February 1945), he sent a letter to British Prime Minister W. Churchill, offering assistance to the Spanish army in the fight against Bolshevik expansion in Europe. The dictator also spoke out for the formation of the “Western Bloc”. The entire foreign policy of Francoist Spain was aimed at causing a split in the camp of the victorious powers and thus saving its regime.

After the end of World War II, Spain's diplomatic activity increased. She pursued the goal of avoiding the harmful consequences of the international isolation in which the country found itself. In 1945, at the Potsdam Conference, representatives of the USSR, USA and Great Britain reached an agreement blocking Spain's entry into the UN. As a result of the energetic activities of the Soviet and Polish delegations, the UN General Assembly at the end of 1946 adopted a decision recommending that all UN member countries recall their ambassadors from Spain. Foreign diplomats, with the exception of the ambassadors of Portugal, the Vatican and Argentina, left Spain.

Under these conditions, Spanish diplomacy concentrated its efforts on strengthening political, trade and economic ties with Arab and Latin American countries, 11 and on finding ways of rapprochement with the most conservative circles of the United States and Western European powers. After the start of the Cold War, Spain turned, in the eyes of the most anti-communist leaders of the West, into a convenient military-political springboard for anti-Soviet policies in Europe and the Mediterranean. The USA and Great Britain became the patrons of the Francoist regime. On October 31, 1950, these countries managed to pass a decision through the UN General Assembly to lift diplomatic sanctions against Spain. In December 1952, Spain became a member of UNESCO, and in 1953, Madrid and Washington entered into a bilateral Spanish-American agreement. In 1955, Spain was admitted to the UN.

Spanish foreign policy in the 60s-70s pursued the following goals: political, trade and economic rapprochement with the countries of the European Economic Community (EEC); development of partnerships with the United States; building ties with Latin American and Maghreb countries; return of the British enclave of Gibraltar to Spanish sovereignty.

In 1962, Spain sent a request to the EEC headquarters to begin formal negotiations with a view to joining this organization. The main obstacle to Spain's accession to the EEC was the existence of an anti-democratic regime in the country. In 1970, in Luxembourg, after many years of negotiations, a protocol was signed granting Spain preferential treatment in trade with EEC member countries.

In 1964, negotiations began between official representatives of Spain and Great Britain on the decolonization of Gibraltar. However, these negotiations were interrupted and resumed due to Madrid's inconsistent policy towards Gibraltar.

In 1968, Spain recognized the independence of its African colony of Equatorial Guinea and in the same year agreed to transfer its colonial possession of Ifni to Morocco 12 .

In 1970, the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation between Spain and the United States was signed, which was considered as a qualitatively new stage in the development of partnership relations between the two countries.

Fascist regime(Latin fascio – bundle, bundle, association) differs from totalitarianism in that it is implicated in nationalist ideology, which is elevated to the rank of state ideology. The main premise of fascist ideology is this: people are by no means equal before the law, their rights and responsibilities depend on their nationality. One nation is declared to be the leader in the state or even in the world community, and therefore worthy of better living conditions. The existence of other nations is allowed, but in auxiliary roles.

Fascism, being “concerned” with the fate of the world community, proposes a chosen nation as a leader not only in its own state. Chauvinistic (racist) circles first express only the desire to “ennoble” the whole world with this nation, and then often begin to put their plans into practice: they begin aggression against other countries. Militarization, the search for an external enemy, a tendency to start wars and, finally, military expansion significantly distinguish fascism from totalitarianism, which looks for enemies within the state and turns the full power of the punitive apparatus on them.

These are the main distinguishing features of fascism. In other respects, it is similar to totalitarianism, which is why many consider fascism to be a kind of totalitarianism. The similarity between these two types of political regime is also evident in genocide. However, in a totalitarian state it is carried out in relation to its own people, and in a fascist state it is carried out to a greater extent against non-indigenous nations or nations of other states.

10. Authoritarian regime

Under an authoritarian regime, power is not formed or controlled by the people. Despite the fact that there are representative bodies, in reality they do not play any role in the state, but exist only for decoration, to give the government a certain civility; elections are held, but formally. In reality, life in the country is directed by the will of the ruling elite, which does not limit itself by law, but lives by its own rules. A leader stands out within the ruling elite. His influence is very significant, but unlike the leader, he is not inclined to make decisions alone. A strong personality usually becomes a leader.

Decisions of the central government, which do not take into account the economic, national, geographical and other characteristics of certain groups of the population, are not carried out voluntarily, so it is necessary to use a considerable dose of coercion. That is why an authoritarian state relies on the police and military apparatus (Spain during the reign of Franco, Chile during the reign of Pinochet). The court in such a state is an auxiliary instrument. Extrajudicial methods of reprisal (mental hospitals, deportation abroad) are also widely used.

Opposition is not allowed under an authoritarian regime. Several parties can participate in political life, but they must follow the line developed by the ruling party, otherwise they will be dispersed.

The individual does not enjoy constitutional rights and freedoms, even if they are proclaimed on paper. She is also deprived of security guarantees in her relations with the authorities. The complete priority of state interests over personal interests is proclaimed.

Against the background of the absolute control of the authoritarian state in the political sphere, there is relative freedom in other spheres, especially in the spiritual. Thus, an authoritarian state, unlike a totalitarian one, no longer strives for an all-encompassing regulation of public life.

History shows that often an authoritarian state demonstrates a better ability to overcome difficulties (economic, social) compared to democratic states. This caused ambiguity in the assessment of such states. Moreover, many consider this regime to be the most acceptable for states implementing reforms and in the process of political modernization.

Detailed solution to paragraph § 10–11 on history for 9th grade students, authors Soroko-Tsyupa O.S., Soroko-Tsyupa A.O. 2016

• Gdz workbook on History for grade 9 can be found

1. Why did Italy become the first European country where the fascist party managed to come to power?

The majority of the country's population was disappointed with the conditions of the post-war world. In 1919-1920 There were strong unrest and riots. Like many unemployed, demobilized soldiers (2 million people) did not find a means of living. Workers seized factories, peasants rebelled against large landowners and seized land. Social discontent contributed to the spread of nationalism.

Legislative power was weakened during the war, parliament met rarely and actually entrusted the government with making legislative decisions.

The fascist party, created in March 1919, took advantage of the weakness of power. 30 thousand fascist thugs made a “march on Rome” from Naples, intending to seize control of the municipality, as had already happened in a number of other northern cities. The prime minister invited the king to sign a decree on a state of emergency, but King Victor Emmanuel refused and on October 29, 1922, he instructed Benito Mussolini, the leader of the parliamentary faction of the fascist party, which numbered only 35 deputies, to form a government.

2. By what methods did the fascist party in Italy establish its power in the country?

In the elections of 1924, Mussolini's party received a majority of votes. Using the apparatus of state power and paramilitary units, the fascists began direct terror against their political opponents.

In 1926, all political parties were dissolved, and civil and political freedoms were limited or eliminated. Rights and freedoms were interpreted as complete devotion to the regime and the Duce (leader). The state apparatus was merged with the fascist party. In 1926, a Special Tribunal was established to protect the state, a Labor Court was created to deal with conflicts between workers and entrepreneurs, and the police corps was expanded. Concentration camps appeared on the Lipari Islands.

3. What are the features of Italian fascism?

The Fascist Party permeated all government structures and most Italian organizations. Although the fascist party became a state body, in organizational terms it had its own officials, apparatus, its own police and its own treasury. Party members were subject to strict discipline.

An individual can only enjoy such freedom as is granted by the state.

4. Consider whether the corporate system in Italy can be considered as a new type of state and society. What are its main differences from a liberal democratic society?

Differences from liberal democracy: monopolization of the economy by the state.

5. How can you explain that the targets of Italy’s aggressive policy were primarily Ethiopia and Albania?

Ethiopia was of military strategic importance for dominance in Africa. And the capture of Albania gave Italy control of the entrance to the Adriatic Sea. Albania could also provide Italy with a foothold in the Balkans.

GERMANY IN THE 1930s: NAZISM AND TOTALITARIARY DICTATORSHIP

1. Which of the factors, in your opinion, was decisive for the Nazis coming to power in Germany: a) the depth of the economic crisis; b) mutual struggle in the camp of left forces; c) the discriminatory status of Germany after the First World War; d) instability of the political regime of the Weimar Republic?

B) the discriminatory status of Germany after the First World War.

2. Why did the German fascists call themselves “Nazis” and the party’s ideology “National Socialism”? Expand the content of this formula.

Preaching national socialism, the NSDAP claimed to express national interests, but presented them as exclusively the interests of the chosen Aryan race. The cult of power, racial superiority, anti-Semitism, anti-communism, expansion and propagation of the image of the enemy were an integral part of the ideology of Nazism.

3. Compare the ways in which fascist parties came to power in Germany and Italy. Think about what the similar and distinctive features of the formation of dictatorships in these countries were, what their kinship is.

General: came to power during a period of crisis in the country. In Germany they came to power through elections, in Italy - as a result of a coup. Hindenburg himself suggested that Hitler form a government. But already on the way to establishing a dictatorship, they boldly used provocations: the arson of the Reichstag in 1933, which was blamed on the communists. By removing the communists from the government, changes were made to the constitution, according to which the government could issue any laws without the approval of the Reichstag. Then political parties and trade unions were disbanded, and local self-government was liquidated.

In both states, reprisals were carried out against opponents of the regime, concentration camps appeared, laws changed in accordance with ideology.

4. What are the signs of the state structure of Germany in the 1930s? can characterize German society as totalitarian? In what specific laws did these characteristics receive the greatest expression?

Changes to the constitution in March 1933. The Law on the Unity of Party and State (December 1933) introduced the principle of leaderism (Führership) at all levels of government, ceased the existence of all elected institutions, demanded the public glorification of the Fuhrer and the Third Reich, the eradication of Jewish and Marxist influence . Concentration camps were created for opponents of the regime, communists, social democrats and “inferior” peoples. Censorship and surveillance were introduced, and denunciation was encouraged.

In August 1934, after the death of President Hindenburg, the centralization of power was completed - Hitler became Fuhrer for life and Reich Chancellor with unlimited dictatorial power.

5. Compare the methods and forms of government regulation in Germany, the USA and France.

State regulation has become universal in Germany. Transformations in economic policy in the first two years were mainly aimed at reducing unemployment, organizing public works, and various types of assistance.

Totalitarian state regulation was of a fundamentally different nature than in the United States during the years of crisis. The strategic goal of German economic policy was to ensure a quiet rear, “educate” public unanimity and mobilize resources to prepare the country for war. Militarization and preparation for war became the main feature of the recovery from the economic crisis in Germany.

The supreme body for managing the economy became the General Council of the German Economy (July 1933), in which the largest industrial companies and banks were represented. Germany implemented a degree of state regulation and centralization of the economy unprecedented in a capitalist society to militarize and prepare for war.

Along with private property, there was also state property created as a result of “Aryanization” (i.e., confiscation of the property of persons of Jewish origin and opponents of the regime). This is how the giant Hermann Goering concern arose.

In September 1933, all peasant organizations and cooperatives were united into a single organization, the Food Class. This made it possible to control small and medium-sized production. In agriculture, there were Fuhrers of various ranks from bottom to top. Without the permission of the local Fuhrer, the peasant could not sell the chicken, because sales were centralized and trade prices were regulated. The Law on Hereditary Households prohibited the division of land in order to “preserve the peasantry as the source of the blood of the German people.” Landowners-peasants constituted the main social support of the regime.

The Law on the Organization of National Labor (January 1934) introduced the principle of Führership in enterprises, eliminated the system of collective agreements and abolished the elected factory councils that existed under the constitution. To replace the dissolved trade unions, the German Labor Front was created (May 1933). The Nazi organization “Strength in Joy” played an important role in it, which dealt mainly with issues of leisure and recreation for workers - cultivating mass sports, organizing cheap amateur performances, excursions, and vacations.

In 1936, a 4-year economic development plan began to be implemented, the goal of which Hitler declared the completion of economic self-sufficiency (autarky) and preparation of the country for war.

In France, a unique policy of state regulation (dirigisme) and a liberal reformist policy manifested itself, which made it possible to create a developed sphere of social services in the country.

In the United States, government intervention in the economy was aimed at developing fair competition, social protection for the unemployed, regulating relations between employees and employers, supporting farming, and reorganizing the banking system.

6. What explains the special aggressiveness of German fascism and its focus on starting a war?

Aggression is associated with ideology. According to German fascism, there is a superior race - the Aryans, the dominant one. The remaining nations are imperfect and must either serve the Aryans or be destroyed. The Jewish population was subject to complete extermination. Hitler blamed them for all of Germany's problems. It was also necessary to expand the living space of the Aryans, which was possible with the help of war.

SPAIN: REVOLUTION, CIVIL WAR, FRANCISM

1. What predetermined the split in society in Spain after the revolution in the early 1930s?

It is already known that during the economic crisis, communist and nationalist parties gained popularity. The adoption of the constitution and republican system in Spain did not contribute to the consolidation of society, because the situation in the country only worsened.

2. Describe two socio-political camps in Spain. Think about whether the inevitability of their collision was ideologically determined.

The left camp was represented by heterogeneous parties, organizations and groups, among which there were supporters of two different versions of socialist ideas.

The Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE), the Communist Party of Spain (CPI), the Socialist Party of Catalonia and others, as well as a number of trade unions, considered it necessary to establish state socialism with the socialization of property, centralized government administration and distribution.

Another position of the left, an alternative to the authoritarian regime, was defended by the trade union - the National Confederation of Labor (NCT), which united hundreds of thousands of anarcho-syndicalist workers. They advocated self-management socialism and the transfer of enterprises to grassroots labor collectives. Liberals also partially found themselves in the left camp.

The right camp was also very heterogeneous. It represented the coalition of right-wing and conservatives (SEDA) and fascist organizations that united in 1934 to form the Spanish Phalanx.

The program and ideology of the Falangists, like all other fascist organizations in Europe, were characterized by nationalism, anti-Marxism and anti-democracy, the cult of violence and leaderism.

The inevitability of their clash was ideologically determined, because the parties’ ideas about the structure of society and the state were very different.

3. What are the features of the Popular Front in Spain? Why did the republican regime evolve into an authoritarian one? Was this caused by the conditions of the civil war or other introduced factors?

The core of the Popular Front is the left parties of socialists, communists, and republicans.

The civil war contributed to the evolution of the republican regime into an authoritarian one. The Communist Party, which relied on the help of the USSR, was gaining strength. With the participation of employees of Stalin's GPU and the NKVD, a system of surveillance, control and torture was created. The idea of ​​the Popular Front, supported by the VII Congress of the Comintern, in practice turned out to be the struggle of the Communist Party to push aside political rivals.

4. What influence did external factors have on the course of the civil war?

The rebels were supported by Germany and the Popular Front by the USSR. With the participation of employees of Stalin's GPU and the NKVD, a system of surveillance, control and torture was created. The idea of ​​the Popular Front, supported by the VII Congress of the Comintern, in practice turned out to be the struggle of the Communist Party to push aside political rivals.

A struggle began between political forces within Spain, which led to the establishment of a military-authoritarian dictatorship in the country.

5. What are the features of Spanish fascism? Find out the similarities and differences between Spanish fascism and the totalitarian regimes in Germany and Italy.

The regime was imposed on the country by military force with outside help from the fascist states - Germany and Italy. Therefore, having won the civil war, Franco could preserve the regime primarily through terror, open violence against society. There was no talk of national reconciliation. In turn, in Germany and Italy, fascism received widespread support among the population.

Franco relied on the Catholic Church in his policies. Also in Italy, Mussolini, having concluded an agreement with the Vatican, received its support.

The government structure was similar to the Italian corporate system.

General: strict censorship, persecution of enemies, presence of a punitive apparatus.

Totalitarian regime

A totalitarian regime is, as a rule, a product of the 20th century; these are fascist states, socialist states of the “cult of personality” periods. The term itself appeared in the late 20s, when some political scientists sought to separate the socialist state and were looking for a clear definition of socialist statehood. A totalitarian regime is an extreme form of an authoritarian regime. The totalitarian state acts as an all-encompassing, all-controlling and all-pervasive power.

A totalitarian regime is characterized, as a rule, by the presence of one official ideology, which is formed and set by a socio-political movement, political party, ruling elite, political leader, leader of the people, in most cases charismatic.

A totalitarian regime allows only one ruling party, and seeks to disperse, ban or destroy all others, even pre-existing parties. The ruling party is declared the leading force in society, its guidelines are considered sacred dogmas. Competing ideas about the social reorganization of society are declared anti-national, aimed at undermining the foundations of society and inciting social hostility. The ruling party seizes the reins of government: the party and state apparatuses are merging. As a result of this, the simultaneous holding of party and state positions becomes a widespread phenomenon, and where this does not happen, state officials carry out direct instructions from persons holding party positions. In addition, there is a demagogic orientation of all members of society towards the supposedly outstanding achievements of the ruling party. The monopoly on information makes this feasible.

In public administration, a totalitarian regime is characterized by extreme centralism. In practice, management looks like the execution of commands from above, in which initiative is not rewarded, but rather strictly punished. Local authorities and administrations become simple transmitters of commands. The characteristics of regions (economic, national, cultural, social, religious, etc.) are, as a rule, not taken into account.

The center of a totalitarian system is the leader. His figure becomes sacred for everyone. He is declared to be the wisest, infallible, fair, tirelessly thinking about the good of the people. Any critical attitude towards him is suppressed.

Against the background of this, the power of the executive bodies is strengthened, and the omnipotence of the nomenklatura arises, i.e., officials whose appointment is coordinated with the highest bodies of the ruling party or is carried out on their instructions. The nomenklatura-bureaucracy exercises power for the purpose of enrichment and conferring privileges in educational, medical and other social fields. Powers not provided for or limited by law are increasing, and the freedom of discretion of administrative bodies is growing. The “power fist” (army, police, security agencies, prosecutor’s office, etc.) especially stands out against the backdrop of the expanding executive bodies, i.e. punitive authorities.

Under totalitarianism, complete control is established over all spheres of social life. The state seeks to literally unite society with itself, to completely state it. In economic life, there is a process of nationalization in one form or another of ownership. In the political life of society, an individual, as a rule, is limited in rights and freedoms. And if formally political rights and freedoms are enshrined in law, then there is no mechanism for their implementation, as well as real opportunities for using them. Control also permeates the sphere of people's personal lives. Demagoguery and dogmatism become a way of ideological, political, and legal life. The totalitarian state opposes the economically and, accordingly, politically free person, and in every possible way limits the enterprise of the worker.

The totalitarian regime uses police investigation, encourages and widely uses denunciation, flavoring it with a “great” idea, for example, the fight against the enemies of the people. The search and imaginary machinations of enemies become a condition for the existence of a totalitarian regime. It is to the “enemies”, “saboteurs” that mistakes, economic troubles, and impoverishment of the population are attributed.

Militarization is also one of the main characteristics of a totalitarian regime. The idea of ​​military danger becomes necessary for the unity of society, for building it on the principle of a military camp. A totalitarian regime is aggressive in its essence and aggression helps to achieve several goals at once: to distract the people from their disastrous economic situation, to enrich the bureaucracy and the ruling elite, to solve geopolitical problems by military means.

Under totalitarianism, the state takes upon itself the care of every member of society. On the part of the population under a totalitarian regime, the ideology and practice of social dependency develops. Members of society believe that the state should provide support and protect them in all cases, especially in the field of healthcare, education, and housing. The psychology of egalitarianism is developing, and there is a significant lumpenization and degradation of society.

Totalitarian regimes existed in fascist states, in some African and other countries with presidents for life, under military regimes.

In any form of authoritarianism, state power is not formed or controlled by the people. Despite the fact that representative bodies exist, they really do not play any role in the life of society. Parliament rubber-stamps decisions made by the ruling elite, led by a leader or group of people (oligarchy).

In reality, life in the country is directed by the elite, which does not limit itself by law, especially in terms of privileges and benefits. In its midst there is an even narrower circle of people, a small group of senior officials exercising political leadership. When the leadership of a state is formed as a result of a military or coup d'etat, the authoritarian regime is called a clique. Within the ruling clique, a leader stands out. His influence is very significant. However, he is not inclined to make decisions alone. Advice, recommendations, taking into account opinions, discussing this or that issue with his team become necessary for him. The leader is usually a strong personality. And although public opinion does not deify the leader, does not call him a leader, it nevertheless focuses on this strong personality.

Often, authoritarian regimes in a relatively “soft” form are implemented to carry out reforms, strengthen the state, its integrity, unity, and oppose separatism and economic collapse. In an authoritarian state, management is usually carried out centrally.

Decisions of the central government, which often do not take into account the economic, national, geographical, everyday, religious and other characteristics of certain groups of the population, are not carried out voluntarily. If people deviate from the “main idea,” coercion is used. The use of violence becomes characteristic of an authoritarian regime. This is why an authoritarian state cannot exist without relying on the police and military apparatus. The court in such a state is an auxiliary tool, since extrajudicial methods of coercing people are widely used.

Opposition is not allowed under authoritarianism. Several parties can participate in political life, but all these parties must follow the line developed by the ruling party, otherwise they are banned and dispersed. Oppositionists, both organizations and citizens, are severely punished. The government uses legal and illegal methods of reprisal against dissidents. An individual in an authoritarian state cannot actually enjoy constitutional rights and freedoms, even if they are formally proclaimed, since there is no mechanism for their implementation or guarantees. She is also deprived of guarantees of her safety in her relations with the authorities, since the authorities do not hesitate to use coercion. The complete priority of the interests of the state over the individual is proclaimed, and the rights of the individual are ignored.

Currently, authoritarian regimes are by no means uncommon and are found in many countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Honduras, Paraguay, etc.). An authoritarian regime is opposed by a democratic regime, primarily the most modern form of the latter - a liberal-democratic regime.