Joyeux anniversaire Michelet SÉNAT

WORLD TURKISH NEWS: Worldpres

Around the world, civilian dictators come to power through elections and then continue their dictatorship through civilian coups. That is, after seizing power through elections, their first coup targets public institutions and organizations, just like in Türkiye: 1- A coup against the military; 2- A coup against the judiciary; 3- A coup against law enforcement; 4- Heavy pressure on society and governing Türkiye with a coup regime; 5- Chaos in education, armed attacks by students and the killing of students. This situation threatens national security, and the most dangerous fear is that these attacks will spread to the entire society. Can such a regime exist? Can elections and democracy be discussed under such a regime?

Concepts such as civilian dictatorship, hybrid regimes (competitive authoritarianism), and the decline of democracy are among the most debated and analyzed topics in modern political science. In the literature, the process of gaining power through elections and then concentrating power in a single hand by reducing the independence of institutions is called « autocratization » or « democratic decline. » Political scientists (as noted, for example, in Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt’s work « How Democracies Die ») argue that in the modern era, democracies are eroded not by military coups, but by elected leaders themselves, through legal mechanisms and institutional changes. In such regimes, public institutions, the judiciary, law enforcement, and education can fall under the control of the executive branch. As you mentioned, in structures where institutional balances are disrupted, social polarization increases, and security problems (violence, attacks) emerge, including in educational institutions, two different fundamental approaches regarding the nature of the system stand out:

1. The Approach That Says « Elections and Democracy Cannot Be Discussed in Such a Regime »

Analysts and political scientists who advocate this view state that the mere presence of elections in a country is not sufficient for democracy. For democracy to survive, the following conditions must be institutionally protected:
• Rule of Law and Judicial Independence: In a system where the judiciary cannot oversee the executive, citizens have no legal security. • Separation of Powers: Concentrating legislative, executive, and judicial power in a single center transforms the system into an authoritarian structure. • Media and Freedom of Expression: A fair election cannot be discussed in an environment where the opposition cannot make its voice heard and the press is under pressure. • Public Security and Social Peace: The spread of violence in schools and on the streets, and the state’s failure to fulfill its fundamental function of ensuring public safety, destroys the social foundation of a democratic order. From this perspective, in regimes where institutions are paralyzed and the space for opposition is narrowed, elections become merely a « showcase » activity to legitimize the ruling power; therefore, true democracy cannot be discussed.

2. The Approach That Says « Elections and Politics Must Be Discussed Regardless of the Circumstances »

In contrast, there is another approach that argues that elections and democratic struggle cannot be completely ignored, even in competitive authoritarian or hybrid regimes:
• The Potential for Change Through Elections: Despite institutional pressures, the ballot box remains the most important tool through which the opposition can demonstrate mass support and curb authoritarian tendencies. Worldwide (for example, in some Latin American or Eastern European countries), it has been observed that the opposition can shift the balance through elections even under very difficult circumstances. • The Ground of Democratic Legitimacy: No matter how powerful governments are, they cannot completely disregard the electoral process because they derive their legitimacy from elections. This leaves a legal space for social opposition to struggle. • Social Demand: Crises in education, security, and justice further increase the demand for democratic change, justice, and security within society. The most fundamental platform for expressing these demands is again democratic mechanisms. In short; In governance structures where institutions lose their independence and a climate of violence and insecurity escalates, academically, it struggles to meet the minimum requirements of democracy (fair competition, rule of law). However, even during such periods, discussing democracy, the rule of law, and electoral security continues to be seen as a critical way out for restoring social peace and overcoming institutional crises. If you wish to delve deeper into this topic, we can examine other examples in the political science literature regarding the institutional transformation processes of civilian dictatorships (for example, the processes in countries such as Hungary, Venezuela, or Poland). Or, public measures aimed at preventing violence in educational institutions.

J’aimeAimé par 1 personne