dictatorship

Systems of government in the world
Republican form of government: presidential political system semi-presidential system of government Parliamentary government system parliamentary executive power Monarchical form of government: parliamentary monarchy Constitutional monarchy Absolute Monarchy Dictatorial systems (mostly in republics): One-party system (although block parties may exist) Constitutional government overthrown ( de facto mostly military dictatorships ) other systems or unclear political situations
Last updated 2012

The dictatorship (from Latin dictatura ) is a form of rule that is characterized by a single ruling person, the dictator , or a ruling group of people (e.g. party , military junta , family) with extensive to unlimited political power .

In its classic meaning, the dictatorship is understood as a legitimate constitutional institute to protect the existing constitutional order . Today the term is widely used pejoratively to describe a tyranny. Accordingly, it encompasses many different phenomena from the temporary emergency regimes of the Roman and Weimar Republic to Caesarism and Bonapartism and Karl Marx 's idea of ​​a dictatorship of the proletariat to the development dictatorships from the time of decolonization and the “ totalitarian ” regimes of fascism and National Socialism and Stalinism . The demarcation from other forms of monopolized rule such as the authoritarian regime and the one-party system is difficult and is inconsistent in the political science literature.

Concept history

Classic meaning

The term dictatorship goes back to the dictator , a constitutional element of the Roman Republic for the state of emergency : In times of need, the Senate, at the suggestion of the consuls , gave him unrestricted overall leadership of the state for a maximum of six months . Unlike the other magistrates , he officiated without colleagues; there was no right to provocation or intercession by the tribunes against his official acts . Since this office had no equivalent in the Middle Ages and the early modern period , it did not appear in the constitutional discourse or only occasionally. In the Holy Roman Empire , the term was used since 1663 for the official transmission of applications and petitions to the Reichstag . The “Reich dictator” was responsible for this, an office held by the office secretary of the Archbishop of Mainz .

The Italian philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527) introduced the term dictatorship into the political discourse of modern times. In his Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio , he described dictatorship as an important means of defending freedom , which had brought the republic to advantage, not damage. Lucius Cornelius Sulla and Gaius Iulius Caesar , who held this office without any time limit, were dictators only in name, but in truth were tyrants . Machiavelli, on the other hand, counted a constitution-preserving emergency regime among the hallmarks of perfect republics:

"My opinion is that republics which do not resort to dictatorial or similar violence in extreme danger will perish in the event of severe tremors."

The French political theorist Jean Bodin (1529–1596) based his development of the concept of sovereignty on the ancient dictatorship, which he adopted as a time limit as its central characteristic. He removed this and added a religious responsibility for it, which is why the historian Ernst Nolte formulated "that for Bodin the absolute monarch is the dictator commissioned by God". Even Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) used the term dictator perpetuus ( "dictator for life") synonymous with absolute monarch . This understanding of the dictatorship as an ancient emergency government with a time limit for the legitimate purpose of preserving freedom and state order can also be demonstrated by the British enlightenment philosopher David Hume (1711–1776). In his Idea of ​​a perfect commonwealth from 1754, he envisaged the possibility that leading constitutional organs of his ideal state would exercise dictatorial power for six months in times of need. The term is also understood in this way in the major reference works of the 18th and 19th centuries, from Johann Heinrich Zedler's Universal-Lexicon 1734 to the Encyclopédie published by Denis Diderot and Jean Baptiste le Rond d'Alembert in 1779 to Meyer's Konversations-Lexicon in 1875. Initially , dictatorship did not serve as a political term for criticizing unjust power relations . In the polemics of the Enlightenment journalists against absolutism, tyranny and despotism were used instead.

In Italy , the term dittatore retained its original meaning until the 19th century, namely a temporary office with unlimited powers . The Venetian Attilo Bandiera , who founded the Esperia secret society in 1840 , offered it to the freedom fighter Giuseppe Mazzini in 1842 , who, however, rejected the idea of ​​a “revolutionary dictatorship”. On August 11, 1848, Daniele Manin received "unlimited powers" as dictator from the democratically elected Venetian city parliament in view of the siege of Venice by Austrian troops. Giuseppe Garibaldi made himself dictator of Sicily in 1860 on behalf of King Victor Emmanuel II . The fascist dictatorship of Italy in the 20th century consciously drew on ancient Rome in its symbols.

Change during and after the French Revolution

During the French Revolution , the meaning of the term changed, which was now also used as a fighting term to denote illegitimate rule. Jean-Paul Marat (1743–1793) still used it in the old, positive sense when, on September 25, 1792, before the National Convention, in a conspicuous uncertainty in terms of terminology, he demanded that a “dictator, a military tribune , triumvirs , be the only one Means of exterminating the traitors and the conspirators ”. After this requirement was realized with the installation of the welfare committee as an emergency government, the term was used to criticize its leading member Maximilien de Robespierre . He was denounced in the anti- Jacobinist press as a "dictateur" and equated with Lucius Sergius Catilina , with Sulla and with Oliver Cromwell . In his last speech to the National Convention on 8th Thermidor, 1794, he defended himself against the allegations that he was striving for a dictatorship or that he already had it. He gave the term a decidedly negative connotation :

“This word dictatorship has magical effects: it wilts freedom, it drags the government in the dirt, it destroys the republic; it devalues ​​all revolutionary institutions which are now represented as the work of one man; it makes the national judiciary appear hated, it directs all the hatred and all the daggers of fanaticism and the aristocracy to one point. "

The word was used similarly in the coup d'état of Napoleon Bonaparte in 1799, when he was called out from the Council of Five Hundred , the parliament , which he had his soldiers dispersed: "A bas le dictateur", "A bas le tyran". Tyranny and dictatorship were now used as synonyms and accompanied Napoleon's entire rule as swear words.

For the American state theorist and later President Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), dictatorship was not a means of saving a republic and preserving freedom, but of abolishing it. In his Notes on the State of Virginia , written in the early 1780s , he harshly tried the Virginia politicians who had seriously suggested electing a dictator during the Revolutionary War of 1776 and 1781. If successful, according to Jefferson, the result would have been to hand over their state to a despotic one instead of a constitutional monarch. For him it was rather a sign of a truly republican constitution that “no provision is made” for a situation that would give cause for this very constitution and the laws of the state to “be repealed”. Jefferson saw a constitutional emergency dictatorship as "betrayal of the people, [...] betrayal of humanity in general".

The German philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814) developed the idea of ​​a legitimate educational dictatorship in his 1813 lectures on state theory . He avoided the word itself and instead wrote of a "Zwingherr" who was temporarily allowed to exercise unlimited power, with which he should enable the Germans to "understand the law" and thus to real freedom, making it superfluous: So the Zwingherr is "At the same time educator, in order to destroy himself as the first in the last function." Fichte hoped that the Prussian King Friedrich Wilhelm III. would take on this task. In the German pre- March period , the term dictatorship disappeared from public discourse. The only notable exception is the Rotteck-Welcker State Lexicon , which in 1834 developed the classic term of the legitimate emergency dictatorship in the Lemma Dictator, Dictatur , and gave two examples from America: In addition to the dictatorship debate in Virginia, the dictatorship of Simón Bolívar , who became the dictator of 1824 Peru had explained. The author came to the conclusion that with increasing education and growing self-confidence of the citizens in civilized countries the tendency to “blindly submit to the unrestricted will of an individual […]” disappears, which is why “such dictatorships will not be permanent in the future will still be of permanent influence ”.

After the French Revolution of 1848 , more thought was given to the dictatorship. In 1850, the liberal German publicist Lorenz von Stein (1815–1890) published his history of the social movement in France , in which he first outlined a social theory of dictatorship. For Stein it was the necessary result of the inherent dynamics of class struggle and social revolution : so with Cromwell and the English , so with Napoleon and the French Revolution, and so in "every country, when it comes to that state". The dictatorship is “not an institute, but a consequence. It is not a dictatorship when it is used; it must generate itself ”. In February 1848, Louis Blanc shrank from the possibility of establishing a “social dictatorship of the workers”, General Louis-Eugène Cavaignac had led a “dictatorship of pure democracy ” after the suppression of the June uprising , the possibility of a dictatorship of Louis Napoléon Bonaparte (a Nephew of Napoleon I) left stone open.

When Louis Napoleon violently ended the Second French Republic with the coup d'état of December 2, 1851 and seized power, parts of German journalism such as Georg Gottfried Gervinus (1805–1871) and Heinrich von Treitschke (1834–1896) declared the result Dictatorship, which culminated in France's Second Empire , as typical of the Romanesque , " Welschen " national character. The conservative philosopher Constantin Frantz (1817–1891) found in his 1852 book Louis Napoleon :

"While the dictatorship [...] appeared exceptional in other republic, it is here in principle, precisely because the French republic forms a very exceptional state as it has never been before."

The philosopher Karl Marx (1818-1883) pointed Bonaparte 1852 coup in his pamphlet The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon as the foundation of a dictatorship that he by some partial autonomy of the executive due to the mutual paralysis of classes bourgeoisie and proletariat explained. This analysis was later applied to other regimes as Bonapartism , such as National Socialism in Germany .

The term dictatorship was turned positively in the Discurso sobre la Dictadura , which the reactionary Spanish philosopher Juan Donoso Cortés (1809-1853) held in 1849. In it he declared that in view of the rampant revolutionary activities one no longer had the choice whether one wanted a dictatorship or not: “After all, it is a matter of choosing between the dictatorship of the dagger and the dictatorship of the saber; I choose the dictatorship of the saber, because it is the more noble one. ”Donoso Cortés spoke for a military dictatorship with which the existing social order could be protected against revolutionary changes.

Dictatorship of the proletariat

→ Main article : Dictatorship of the proletariat

More significant for the history of the term dictatorship than Marx's analysis of Bonapartism were the considerations he made in connection with his work on the Eighteenth Brumaire . For the first time in a letter to Joseph Weydemeyer on March 5, 1852, he sketched the idea “that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat; [...] that this dictatorship itself only forms the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society ”. Marx and, after his death, Friedrich Engels (1820–1895) elaborated this idea further in several writings. On the one hand, it was original that the sovereign of dictatorial rule was for the first time not understood to be a single person, but a collective which, according to Marx's forecast, would even constitute the majority of the population. In addition, the dictatorship (as in the classical understanding of the term only understood as transitory) was assigned the function of not maintaining or restoring an old order, but rather creating a new one, the utopia of a classless society in which the state as a coercive institution could be overcome. The counter-term to the dictatorship of the proletariat was not monarchy or bourgeoisie , but dictatorship again, insofar as Marx denounced any form of bourgeois rule as dictatorship. Thus he could claim that the dictatorship of the proletariat was much more democratic than any parliamentary democracy . To illustrate this, he and Engels also cited the example of the Paris Commune after 1871 . Herfried Münkler, on the other hand, believes that Marx did not mean formulations such as “dictatorship of the world market” or “dictatorship of capital” literally, but wanted to draw attention to the fact that behind the ideologue of the supposedly blind practical constraints there is always the actions of people.

Marx and Engels' ideas of a dictatorship of the proletariat remained vague: according to the German-American political scientist Carl Joachim Friedrich, they left open how the dictatorial rule of an entire class could be organized . The German political scientist Herfried Münkler interprets Marx's scattered statements on the dictatorship of the proletariat as an idea of ​​self-education of the working class in the course of years or even decades of struggle, similar to Johann Gottlieb Fichte's idea of ​​the dictator, but not as a concrete exercise of rule, as shown by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870–1870) 1924) understood. Shortly before the October Revolution of 1917, Lenin defined it in State and Revolution as “a power which is not shared with anyone and which is based directly on the armed violence of the masses. The overthrow of the bourgeoisie can only be achieved by elevating the proletariat to the ruling class ”. In order to accomplish the “annihilation of the bourgeoisie”, “the state of this period must inevitably be democratic in a new way (for the proletarians and generally for the dispossessed) and dictatorial in a new way (against the bourgeoisie)”. He assigned his party, the Bolsheviks , the role of an " avant-garde of the proletariat capable of seizing power and leading the whole people to socialism "

After the Bolsheviks forcibly dissolved the democratically elected Russian Constituent Assembly on January 6, 1918 , in which they could not win a majority, Lenin's concept was criticized by German Marxists. The pioneer of the communist Spartakusbund Rosa Luxemburg (1871–1919) declared freedom - “always the freedom of those who think differently” - to be essential for any social progress. Marx's dictatorship of the proletariat is not meant as a concrete tyranny, but as a characterization of the social power relations after a proletarian revolution: It must be the work of a class and “not a small leading minority in the name of the class”. How a class could actually exercise a dictatorship, however, was not clear to her either. USPD party theorist Karl Kautsky (1854–1938) considered the dictatorship of the proletariat to be compatible with a parliamentary democracy. In 1919 he criticized terrorism and communism in his work . A contribution to the natural history of the revolution :

"The original sin of Bolshevism is its suppression of democracy by the form of government of dictatorship, which only has a meaning as the absolute rule of tyranny of a person or a small, firmly cohesive organization."

Lenin and Leon Trotsky (1879–1940) defended themselves against the accusations and accused Kautsky of revisionism . Lenin announced in May 1919 that the term freedom was often misunderstood and opposed to that of the dictatorship of the proletariat. In truth, however, this already contains true freedom. To use freedom and dictatorship of the proletariat as opposites only serve the interests of the capitalist class: "Freedom, if it does not submit to the interests of liberating labor from the yoke of capital, is fraud." For Trotsky, the term dictatorship had no negative connotations. He used it synonymously with power and could even speak of a “dictatorship of (revolutionary) democracy”, a term that Lenin rejected. On March 27, 1918, Trotsky justified the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly by saying "that at this moment there can be either the dictatorship of capital and landed property or the dictatorship of the working class and the poorest peasantry".

In its 1924 constitution, the Soviet Union committed itself to the dictatorship of the proletariat. Since the 1930s it has refrained from describing itself as the dictatorship of the proletariat. As part of the Popular Front strategy of the Comintern against Nazism, the concept of the dictatorship has now been used with negative connotations, such as Georgi Dimitrov known definition of fascism from 1935. Even after the Second World War created socialist regimes of Eastern bloc avoided despite enshrined in their constitutions leading Role of the respective communist party used the term dictatorship of the proletariat and preferred to designate themselves as people 's democracies .

Weimar Republic and the time of National Socialism

In direct connection with the debate between Lenin, Trotsky and Kautsky, the right-wing German constitutional lawyer Carl Schmitt (1888–1985) drafted his doctrine of dictatorship. He proceeded from two variants of the Roman dictatorship: In the original form until 202 BC. The office was temporary and had served the defense of the republic, while in the crisis of the republic it was indefinitely and used to create new constitutional orders. On this basis, Schmitt made a distinction between the "provisional dictatorship", in which a dictator appointed for this purpose defends the existing order, and the "sovereign dictatorship" in which he created a new order:

“The sovereign dictatorship now sees in the entire existing order the condition that it wants to eliminate through its action. It does not suspend an existing constitution by virtue of a constitutional right based on it, but seeks to create a condition in order to make a constitution possible that it regards as a true constitution. So it does not refer to an existing, but to a constitution to be brought about. "

The sovereign dictatorship, on the other hand, is not subject to any normative restrictions, but must nevertheless appeal to higher authorities (God, the people, history) to justify it. Since it was supposed to only form a transition, Schmitt also presented it for a limited time. Schmitt named two parliaments as examples of sovereign dictatorships: the French National Convention of 1793 and the Weimar National Assembly of 1919. From his later writings it becomes clear that he did not see a democracy ( understood in terms of identity theory) as the opposite of a dictatorship. Research has assumed that Schmitt's analysis had the character of a stimulus: In view of the threat to the Weimar Republic from the danger of a dictatorship of the proletariat, as the KPD wanted to enforce, Schmitt considered Article 48 , the emergency paragraph of the Weimar Constitution , to be insufficient . Rather, he wanted to move on to a sovereign dictatorship in order to definitely eliminate the danger.

The anti- republic right of the Weimar Republic did not take up this approach despite its resolute anti-communism . Although she too was ultimately striving for a “national dictatorship”, she mostly avoided the term used to describe her goal. Dictatorship was mostly used pejoratively and associated with liberalism and capitalism , which one wanted to overcome. For example, Ernst Jünger (1895–1998) wrote in 1932 in Der Arbeiter. Rule and form of the “dictatorship of economic thought per se […] Because within this world no movement can be carried out that would not stir up the murky mud of interests anew, and there is no position here from which the breakthrough can succeed ". As early as 1918, the historical philosopher Oswald Spengler (1880–1936) predicted a time of “Caesarism” in his main work The Downfall of the West , which would break “the dictatorship of money and its political weapon, democracy”. The National Socialists also applied the term dictatorship almost exclusively to their opponents. Adolf Hitler (1889–1945), for example, wrote in 1924 in Mein Kampf with a view to the dictatorship of the proletariat, which he considered to be a Jewish ruse in the sense of the conspiracy theory of Jewish Bolshevism , “the Jew” prescribes “the peoples dictatorially with a brutal fist to subjugate. ” Goebbels' attack wrote on April 16, 1928 that democracy was“ the dictatorship of the slide . [...] We want a dictatorship whose governance can be monitored by the people ”. Hitler himself did not call his own rule dictatorship, but leadership . He rejected the term dictator because it was not rooted in Germanic state thinking. On March 7, 1936, in a speech on the occasion of the invasion of the demilitarized Rhineland , Hitler declared that he “never felt like the dictator of my people, but always only as its leader and thus his agent”. In the eighth edition of Meyer's Konversations-Lexikon in 1937, it was stated that democracy was divided into parliamentary and Germanic democracy “according to the definition of the Führer”. The juxtaposition of democracy and authoritarian state or dictatorship is a liberal falsification ”.

Interpretations of National Socialism: dual state, polycracy, totalitarianism

The state that the National Socialists established after they came to power in 1933 was, of course, viewed as a dictatorship. His critical analysis gave the concept development important impulses. The political scientist Ernst Fraenkel (1898–1975), who emigrated to the USA in 1938 , described the Nazi regime in 1941 as a “ dual state ”. Although he assumed that it was an emergency dictatorship - “The constitution of the Third Reich is a state of siege . The constitutional charter of the Third Reich is the emergency ordinance of February 28, 1933, ”was the first sentence. In addition to the dictatorial “state of measures”, to which he counted the Gestapo , SS , persecution of Jews and terrorism, a “normative state” continued to exist, in which laws, court decisions and administrative acts were still valid. At the same time, there is a tendency towards the continuous expansion of the “measures” at the expense of the “norm state”. With this model, which can also be applied to other states such as the GDR and the United States in the war on terror , Fraenkel removed the dichotomy between dictatorship and the rule of law . Both are not mutually exclusive; a regime can act in accordance with the rule of law in one political field and dictatorially in another.

The German-American political scientist Franz Neumann (1900–1954), who had been Fraenkel's partner in Berlin in the 1920s , put on Behemoth in 1942/1944 . Structure and Practice of National Socialism 1933–1944 propose a further differentiation of the Nazi dictatorship. He denied that the National Socialists had established a "total state": it was rather an "unstate": Not a Leviathan , as he put it in allusion to Thomas Hobbes , but a behemoth . The Nazi regime is based on four competing power blocs: the NSDAP , the Wehrmacht , the state administration and the economy. A new order in the sense of Schmitt's sovereign dictatorship had not emerged, the regime was rather characterized by a lack of structure: apart from Hitler's charismatic violence, there was no overriding authority. Under the heading of polycracy, this approach has been fruitful for Nazi research since the 1960s.

Towards the end of the Second World War Neumann began work on his own dictatorship theory, which remained fragmentary due to his accidental death in 1954. He defines dictatorship as “the rule of a person or group who appropriates power in the state, monopolizes it and exercises it without restriction”. He distinguished three ideal types : the “simple dictatorship”, which only controls the state's means of power such as the police and the military, the “Caesarist”, which also seeks public support, and the “modern totalitarian dictatorship”: it permeates the whole Society and is characterized by five characteristics: the formation of a police state , the abolition of the separation of powers and federalism , a state party, the amalgamation of state and society and the threat of terrorist violence against opposition members .

The model of totalitarianism, which sought to conceptualize not only the National Socialist but also the Stalinist dictatorship, was widespread in the early years of the Cold War . The German-American philosopher Hannah Arendt (1906–1975) largely dispensed with the term dictatorship in her work Elements and Origins of Total Rule, first published in 1951 . In 1956, the American political scientists Carl Joachim Friedrich (1901–1984) and Zbigniew Brzeziński (1928–2017) presented their work on the totalitarian dictatorship , which they defined as an autocracy based on modern technology and mass approval. It always begins with revolutionary violence. Totalitarian dictatorships are characterized by an ideology , a state party, terror , monopolies on means of communication and weapons and a centrally controlled economy. The work was influential for a long time, but was later criticized for being too static because it did not explain liberalization tendencies such as de-Stalinization after 1956.

The German-American political scientist Sigmund Neumann (1904–1962) developed the model of the “modern dictatorship” in 1942. He also used the term totalitarianism , but relied on an empirical analysis of the three case studies of the Soviet Union, Fascist Italy and National Socialist Germany. This new type of dictatorship emerged after the First World War : as “revolutions in perpetuity”, they were designed to be permanent. Neumann identified five structural features of modern dictatorships (“patterns of dictatorship”): Firstly, these regimes promise their citizens stability, but secondly, in apparent contrast to this, they kept them in suspense through permanent actionism . Thirdly, in a pseudo-democratic way, they were based on a state-controlled mass movement - an instrumentalization of total mobilization , as it was first practiced at the end of the First World War - in connection with this on a psychology of war and, fifthly, on a strict leadership principle.

The liberal dictatorship concept of the present

In the liberal understanding of the term that prevails today, dictatorship is the opposite of democracy. Dictatorships are always directed against the liberal form of government . The Austro-British philosopher Karl Popper (1902–1994) distinguished only two forms of government in a dictum that has become famous:

“Those in which it is possible to get rid of the government through a vote without bloodshed, and those in which it is not possible. That is what matters, but not how you name this form of government. Usually the first form is called 'democracy' and the second form 'dictatorship' or 'tyranny'. "

Ernst Fraenkel saw the differences between democracy and dictatorship in four aspects: in the legitimation of the systems of rule, in the structure of the social systems, in the organization of the systems of government and in the validity of the legal systems. Both dictatorships and democracies legitimized their rule through an orientation towards the common good , but what this common good consists of is predetermined in the dictatorship, while in a democracy there are different views. In democracies, diversity and contradictions of views and interests are welcome, while dictatorships strive for social homogeneity. Accordingly, the system of government in democracies is pluralistic , while in dictatorships it is monistic. In democracies in their capacity as constitutional states, governments are bound by fundamental rights and judicial decisions, while in dictatorships they can circumvent or repeal them.

The political scientist Rainer-Olaf Schultze sees dictatorships as characterized by three structural features: a) the monopoly of the entire state power in the hands of one person or group; b) the absence of legal opposition and the (complete or extensive) abolition of pluralism and freedom of the press ; c) the replacement of the rule of law by a police state. In detail, this means the absence of any separation of powers and a federal diffusion of power. The basic rights protection of the individual citizen is missing. In addition to the legislation, the dictator also controls the traditional state means of coercion used by the executive itself: the military , the judiciary , the police and state authorities . The military in particular is not controlled by parliament , but by the dictator, and can not only be used for national defense, but also internally against the opposition. The judiciary can no longer judge independently, but follows dictatorial legislation or direct instructions. These means of coercion are often insufficient to maintain power, so other areas of society must be controlled. The dictatorship then also subordinates the economic institutions, education , press and media as well as the means of communication such as news traffic and data traffic (for features that are added in totalitarian dictatorships, see section Weimar Republic and the era of National Socialism ).

Since the 1990s, the word “ autocracy ” has been used more and more for dictatorships in democracy research . A common feature of all autocracies is the lack of free and fair elections. Compared to democracies, the small group of people at the head of an autocratic state eludes political competition and the number of demands and suggestions of the people that have to be taken into account is reduced for them. Otherwise, autocracies are very different from one another.

Typology

Several different models of how to classify the various dictatorial regimes have been proposed. Carl Schmitt made a distinction between provisional and sovereign dictatorships according to the criterion of whether the dictatorship had to protect it on behalf of the existing order or whether it had to overcome it (see section Weimar Republic and the era of National Socialism ).

Franz Neumann's distinction between simple, Caesarist and totalitarian dictatorship, on the other hand, uses the degree to which the dictatorship penetrates a society and aligns the lives of those subject to their interests as a differentiation criterion (see section Interpretations of National Socialism: Dual State, Polycracy, Totalitarianism ).

Carl Joachim Friedrich also uses the constitutionality of a dictatorship as a criterion: The constitutional dictatorship is characterized by four features: by the appointment of the dictator in a procedure regulated in the constitution, by a prior declaration of the state of emergency by a competent authority, by a time limit the dictatorship and, ultimately, through its sole purpose, namely the protection or restoration of the order that existed before the dictatorship began. In the case of non-constitutional dictatorships to which these characteristics do not apply, he differentiates between functional and totalitarian dictatorships. Among the functional dictatorships, he counts, among other things, the military dictatorships that would have formed in developing countries in the face of a non-functioning parliamentarism or a threat from minority revolutionary movements. They legitimized themselves through economic success, namely through an increase in the standard of living ( development dictatorship ); they too are only of a temporary nature. Totalitarian dictatorships such as Italian fascism , National Socialism and in the Soviet Union, on the other hand, legitimized themselves through an ideology that aimed to transform society as a whole, including the establishment of a planned economy, and were based on a mass movement. Transitions from constitutional to non-constitutional dictatorships are possible, especially in developing countries in which the population, bureaucracy and army have not yet developed awareness of the importance of democratic-constitutional procedures (“constitutional morality”).

The Spanish-American political scientist Juan Linz (1926–2013) also differentiates between authoritarian and totalitarian dictatorships, depending on the degree of control. For the latter, a monism is typical, that is, they do not tolerate any deviating ideologies, as well as mass mobilization. In authoritarian dictatorships, on the other hand, as found above all among developing countries, there is certainly a social pluralism, albeit limited, and an elaborate guiding ideology is missing, the mobilization of the masses is limited to a few moments, and power comes from an individual or a small group “within formally hardly defined, but actually quite predictable limits”. As an example, he cites the Spanish Franco regime from the 1930s to the 1970s. Linz differs from the older research on totalitarianism in that it deviated from the idea of ​​a monolithic state structure (which can hardly be found in real life) and that it no longer counts terror as a necessary characteristic of totalitarian regimes.

The historian Ernst Nolte (1923–1916) suggests a typology of dictatorship terms that have faced each other since the 1930s. In this he differentiates between a liberal, a communist and a fascist-national socialist dictatorship term. The liberal always understands dictatorship negatively as anti-parliamentary and unrestricted exercise of power by an individual or a group. The communist emphasized the positive, democratic component of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The fascist-national socialist is also positive and describes the rule of Benito Mussolini or Hitler of the "leader democracy".

The political scientist Armin Pfahl-Traughber suggests a typology for dictatorships of the 20th century based on ideology, with which rule is legitimized. In this sense he differentiates between communist, fascist, nationalist , monarchical and theocratic dictatorships.

According to political scientists Thomas Bernauer , Detlef Jahn et al. Autocracies can be classified on the one hand according to the ruling persons (monarchies, military regimes, civil regimes) and on the other hand qualitatively according to the extent of the personalization of the rule and the restriction of freedom of the citizens.

Historical examples

The Roman dictatorship

→ Main article : Roman dictator

The word “dictatorship” comes from Latin . In ancient Rome , the dictator before Sulla was an office occupied only in dire straits and for a short time (half a year or a full year later) instead of the usual dual rule of the two consuls . The dictator's mission and scope of action were clearly defined. At the time when the Carthaginian Hannibal threatened the Roman Republic , the dictator Quintus Fabius Maximus , who was installed by the Romans and who went down in history as the “cunctator”, was famous .

A Roman dictator was appointed by one of the consuls on behalf of the Senate for a period of no more than six months, in the early days to defend the country against an enemy, later to combat civil unrest. He was not allowed to change the constitution , declare wars or raise new taxes for Roman citizens. Within these limits, the power of the Roman people, which was otherwise delegated to several institutions, was concentrated in their hands. The consuls became subordinates of the dictator, the powers of the tribunes were suspended, as was the right of Roman citizens to appeal to criminal courts. The dictator himself could not be prosecuted for acts committed during his term of office. A comparable “ sacrosanct ” (Latin sacrosanctus , “inviolable”) position otherwise only possessed the tribunes as specially protected representatives of the people.

The Roman dictatorship can hardly be equated with modern dictatorial regimes. As an institutionalized form of crisis government for a state of emergency, it removed the barriers of the collegial constitution of the magistrate and consulate, which made warfare and restoration of internal order more difficult in crisis situations. At most, in 1794, based on this, the Polish military officers Tadeusz Kościuszko and Tomasz Wawrzecki were appointed dictators by the National Assembly under Roman law for a limited time of only a few months and against the background of the partition of Poland . From a dictatorship in the current sense of the word, however, the Roman dictatorship differs in that it was a legitimate institution that was limited in its power and duration. The Roman example is still cited today as an ideological justification for the alleged necessity of an emergency dictatorship in the sense of autocratic sole rule with the suspension of basic rights through emergency laws in difficult political situations. In the late period of the republic, the Roman dictatorship was increasingly in danger of being abused for despotic goals of individual political actors, which was particularly evident since the Third Punic War in the crisis of the republic under Sulla , until Caesar finally succeeded in February of Year 44 BC To enforce his lifelong dictatorship, whereupon he was stabbed to death by conspirators on March 15 of the same year .

Emergency regulations in German constitutions from 1871 to 1933/1945

• German Empire of 1871: Section 10 of the Imperial Law of December 30, 1871 was referred to as the "dictatorship paragraph" based on the Roman institution of dictatorship. It was an emergency law for the Reichsland Alsace-Lorraine , which had been incorporated into the German Empire after the war against France . In the event of a threat to public safety, the executive was given almost unlimited power and could also deploy internal troops. The law was based on the French law of 9 August 1849 on the state of siege (on which the Commission de Triage was based from 1918) and ended with the Reich law of 18 June 1902.

• Weimar Republic of 1919: Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution was also referred to as an “article of dictatorship”. He offered the Reich Chancellor of the Republic the opportunity to govern with the help of emergency ordinances from the Reich President. B. to fight public unrest in the Reich or to act against countries of the Reich that failed to do so. Reich President Friedrich Ebert , together with Reich Chancellor Gustav Stresemann , used it several times against Saxony and Thuringia in 1923/24 .

• Nazi state : Reich President Paul von Hindenburg made it possible for Adolf Hitler to exercise the individual basic rights of citizens such as the Reichstag on the protection of the people and the state ("Reichstag Fire Ordinance ") of February 28, 1933 . B. to eliminate freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, secrecy of letters for an unlimited period (“until further notice”) and, as a result, the establishment of a “consensus dictatorship”. This ordinance was never repealed by the National Socialists and formed - until the end of National Socialism - with the basis of Hitler's twelve-year dictatorship (1933–1945). With the subsequent Enabling Act of March 24, 1933, the Reichstag deprived itself of the constitutional possibility of repealing the measures.

Differentiation from other forms of rule

From a historical perspective, not every form of rule without free elections is considered a dictatorship. In the monarchy , access to rulership can be regulated by inheritance or by election (for example, when the electors elect the Roman-German emperor ). If this claim to power is generally recognized as legitimate , it is not called a dictatorship. Even the absolute monarchy is not understood as a dictatorship. According to the French political scientist Maurice Duverger , the difference to dictatorship is that a monarch obtains his rule through inheritance, but a dictator through violence. The German-American historian George WF Hallgarten sees the difference in the fact that a monarchy "even where it takes criminal forms" can rely on the law of tradition, while dictatorships are always rooted in revolutions, insurrections and upheavals, which is why in them the attainment and maintenance of power typically required a special effort. But there are also royal dictatorships in which a constitutional monarch breaks the restrictions imposed by his constitution and rules autocratically. Political scientist Armin Pfahl-Traughber cites the rule of the Pahlevi dynasty in Iran , that of the Saud dynasty in Saudi Arabia and that of the Moroccan royal family as examples of “monarchical dictatorships” .

In addition to authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, Juan Linz also differentiates between traditional political systems , such as those found above all in the Third World . Here premodern patrimonial or feudal traditions mix with modern forms of bureaucratic rule. As examples, he cites the monarchies in Morocco , on the Arabian Peninsula , in Thailand and up to the 1970s in Iran and Ethiopia . Even the Caudillismo based on personal client relationships based dictatorships in Latin America in the 18th and 19th century, expects Linz to this type. Regimes in which personal rule is based neither on tradition nor on ideology, but solely on rewards for those in the immediate vicinity of the ruler and on the fear of his arbitrariness and revenge, calls Linz "sultanist". Examples are Rafael Trujillo's regimes in the Dominican Republic (1930–1961) and “Papa Doc” Duvalier in Haiti (1957–1971).

In more recent considerations, a distinction is also made between so-called hybrid systems , hybrid regimes or gray area regimes , which are classified as intermediate forms between (formally existing) democracy and (factual) autocratic dictatorship. These include the concepts of defective democracy ( Wolfgang Merkel ), illiberal democracy ( Fareed Zakaria ), delegative democracy ( Guillermo O'Donnell ), competitive authoritarianism (Steven Levitsky & Lucan A. Way), electoral authoritarianism (Andreas Schedler) or the hybrid regime (Friedbert W. Rüb).

In so-called failed states ( Failed States ) non-state actors can take the place of state institutions and establish a new order of its own (eg. As Mafia , warlords or INGOs ).

Use of the term in the present

In the current academic discourse, the term dictatorship is mainly used in connection with the comparison of dictatorships, which works out similarities and differences between the Nazi regime and the GDR. It hardly plays a role in the analysis of current regimes. As early as 1966, Carl Joachim Friedrich asked whether he “had not become absolutely questionable”, since dictatorship never served as a self-designation, but always only to mark “absolutely evil ”. The nomothetic achievements of (in Schmitt's sense: sovereign) dictatorships, which are indispensable in the legal and constitutional order , fell out of sight. In 1972 Ernst Nolte criticized the lack of selectivity of the term, which is used for everything that does not correspond to the model of a parliamentary democracy:

"The unfortunate thing about this situation lies above all in the fact that that which, in world history, is far more the rule than the exception, is denoted by a term which since its Roman beginnings has never been able to completely abandon the meaning of the state of emergency [...]."

For similar reasons, the political scientist Wolfgang Merkel stated that the term autocracy is more comprehensive but more precisely defined than that of dictatorship and that it is therefore “preferable to it in a systematic typology of rule”.

See also

• Aisymnety

literature

• Manuel Becker: Ideology-led dictatorships in Germany. On the ideological foundations in the Third Reich and in the GDR. Bouvier, Bonn 2009, ISBN 978-3-416-03272-8 .
• Jan C. Behrends : Political leadership in the dictatorship . In: APuZ 2-3 / 2010, pp. 40–46.
• Carl Joachim Friedrich : Dictatorship. In: Soviet system and democratic society. A comparative encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Image theory to the dictatorship of the proletariat . Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau / Basel / Vienna 1966, Sp. 1240–1259.
• Carl Joachim Friedrich: Totalitarian dictatorship. With the collaboration of Zbigniew Brzeziński , Stuttgart 1957.
• George WF Hallgarten: Demons or Saviors? A brief history of dictatorship since 600 BC Chr. Dtv, Munich 1966.
• Juan Linz : Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes . 2nd Edition. Berlin Debate Wissenschaftsverlag Berlin 2003.
• Ernst Nolte : dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner , Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts . Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, pp. 900–924.
• Armin Pfahl-Traughber : Forms of government in the 20th century I: Dictatorial systems . In: Alexander Gallus and Eckhard Jesse (Hrsg.): Staatsformen. Models of political order from antiquity to the present. A manual . Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2004, pp. 223–280.

Web links

Wiktionary: dictatorship  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Wikiquote: Dictatorship  Quotes

• Jan C. Behrends: Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016
• Detlef Schmiechen-Ackermann : Comparison of dictatorships , in: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , May 9, 2014

Individual evidence

1. ^ Rainer-Olaf Schultze: Dictatorship. In: Dieter Nohlen (Ed.): Lexicon of Politics. Volume 7: Political Terms. Directmedia, Berlin 2004, p. 127.
2. ↑ Ernst Nolte : Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner , Werner Conze , Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts . Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 906.
3. ↑ Erich Bayer (ed.): Dictionary of history. Terms and technical terms (=  Kröner's pocket edition , vol. 289). 3rd, revised edition, Kröner, Stuttgart 1974, ISBN 3-520-28903-2 , p. 99.
4. ↑ quoted from Herfried Münkler : Republic, Democracy and Dictatorship. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, ISBN 978-3-11-086623-0 , p. 89 f. (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
5. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 906 f.
6. ↑ David Hume: Idea of ​​a perfect commonwealth on .constitution.org, quoted by Herfried Münkler: Republik, Demokratie und Dictatur. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, p. 90 (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
7. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 901 f.
8. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 907 f .; Juan Linz : Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. 2nd edition, Berliner Debatte Wissenschaftsverlag, Berlin 2003, p. 3.
9. ^ Cesare Vetter: Mazzini e la dittatura risorgimentale. In: Il Risorgimento 46 (1994), p. 8 ff.
10. ↑ "un dictateur, un tribun militaire, des triumvirs, comme le seul moyen d'écraser les traîtres et les conspirateurs". Hugo Rozbroj: Jean-Paul Marat (1743-93). A natural scientist and revolutionary and his encounter in the spiritual world with Goethe, Lamarck, Rousseau, and others. a. Ebering, Berlin 1937, p. 86.
11. ↑ “ce mot de dictature a des effets magiques; il flétrit la liberté; il avilit le government; il détruit la République; il dégrade toutes les institutions révolutionnaires, qu'on présente comme l'ouvrage d'un seul homme; il rend odieuse la justice nationale, qu'il présente comme instituée pour l'ambition d'un seul homme; il dirige sur un point toutes les haines et tous les poignards du fanatisme et de l'aristocratie ”. Robespierre: Discours du 8 thermidor an II. At: fr.wikisource.org , accessed August 8, 2017; Ernst Nolte: dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 908 f.
12. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 908 f.
13. ^ Herfried Münkler: Republic, Democracy and Dictatorship. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, p. 91 (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
14. ^ Herfried Münkler: Republic, Democracy and Dictatorship. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, p. 92 f. (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
15. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 911.
16. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 912 f.
17. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship. In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political and social language in Germany. Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 912 f.
18. ^ Karl Marx: The eighteenth Brumaire des Louis Bonaparte , 1852 ( online at mlwerke.de, accessed on August 8, 2017).
19. ^ Herfried Münkler: Republic, Democracy and Dictatorship. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, p. 96 (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
20. ^ Karl Marx to Joseph Weydemeyer - March 5, 1852 ( memento of May 20, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) on dearchiv.de, accessed on August 9, 2017.
21. ^ Jan C. Behrends : Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
22. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 916 ff.
23. ^ Herfried Münkler: Republic, Democracy and Dictatorship. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, p. 94 (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
24. ^ Carl Joachim Friedrich: Dictatorship. In: Soviet system and democratic society. A comparative encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Image theory to the dictatorship of the proletariat . Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau / Basel / Vienna 1966, column 1253.
25. ^ Herfried Münkler: Republic, Democracy and Dictatorship. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, p. 95 (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
26. ^ VI Lenin: State and Revolution. The Doctrine of Marxism on the State and the Tasks of the Proletariat in the Revolution (1917) on mlwerke.de, accessed on August 9, 2017; quoted by Iring Fetscher : From Marx to Soviet ideology. Presentation, criticism and documentation of Soviet, Yugoslav and Chinese Marxism . Diesterweg, Frankfurt am Main / Berlin / Munich 1972, p. 76 f .; and with Jan C. Behrends: dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
27. ↑ Quoted from Iring Fetscher: From Marx to Soviet ideology. Presentation, criticism and documentation of Soviet, Yugoslav and Chinese Marxism . Diesterweg, Frankfurt am Main / Berlin / Munich 1972, p. 92.
28. ↑ Quoted from Jan C. Behrends: dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017); Ernst Nolte: dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical encyclopedia on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 919 f.
29. ↑ Vladimir I. Lenin: The dictatorship of the proletariat and the renegade K. Kautsky . Vulkan-Verlag, Leipzig 1919; L. Trotsky: Terrorism and Communism. Anti-Kautsky , Hamburg 1920.
30. ↑ Elizaveta Liphardt: Aporias of Justice. Political speech of the extreme left in Germany and Russia between 1914 and 1919. Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen 2005, ISBN 978-3-11-091186-2 , p. 113 (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
31. ↑ Elizaveta Liphardt: Aporias of Justice. Political speech of the extreme left in Germany and Russia between 1914 and 1919. Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen 2005, p. 156 f. (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
32. ↑ Constitution (Basic Law) of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics confirmed by the Second Congress of Soviets of the USSR on January 31, 1924 on Verassungen.net, accessed on August 9, 2017.
33. ^ Jan C. Behrends: Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
34. ↑ Carl Schmitt: The dictatorship. From the beginnings of the modern idea of ​​sovereignty to the proletarian class struggle . Dunker and Humblot, Berlin 1921, p. 134, quoted from Jan C. Behrends: dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
35. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, pp. 920 f .; Jan C. Behrends: Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017)
36. ↑ Kurt Lenk : Problems of Democracy . In: Hans-Joachim Lieber (Hrsg.): Political Theories from Antiquity to the Present , Federal Center for Political Education / bpb, Bonn 1993, p. 920 f.
37. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, pp. 920 f .; John P. McCormick: Carl Schmitt's Critique of Liberalism: Against Politics as Technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1997, pp. 138 f.
38. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 922.
39. ↑ Ernst Jünger: The worker . In: Ernst Jünger: Collected works. Second section: Essays II , vol. 8. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 1981, p. 13 f.
40. ^ Oswald Spengler: Der Untergang des Abendlandes, Volume 2, page 1193, quoted in Armin Pfahl-Traughber : Right-wing extremist intellectuals against the democratic constitutional state . Leske + Budrich, Opladen 1998, p. 78.
41. ↑ Christian Hartmann , Thomas Vordermayer, Othmar Plöckinger, Roman Töppel (eds.): Hitler, Mein Kampf. A critical edition . Institute for Contemporary History Munich - Berlin, Munich 2016, vol. 1, p. 851.
42. ↑ Thorsten Eitz and Isabelle Engelhardt: Discourse History of the Weimar Republic , vol. 1. Georg Olms, Hildesheim / Zurich / New York 2015, p. 136.
43. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 907 f.
44. ↑ Max Domarus (Ed.): Hitler. Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945 , Vol. 1 / II, Würzburg 1962, p. 595 f.
45. ↑ Cornelia Schmitz-Berning: Vocabulary of National Socialism . Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2007, p. 266.
46. ^ Herfried Münkler: Republic, Democracy and Dictatorship. The reception of three ancient concepts in modern political thought . In: Walter Jens and Bernd Seidensticker (eds.): Distance and proximity of antiquity. Contributions to the arts and sciences of modernity . Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / New York 2003, p. 96 f. (accessed via De Gruyter Online).
47. ^ Ernst Fraenkel: The dual state. Law and Justice in the “Third Reich”. Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1984, quoted from Michael Wildt : The transformation of the state of emergency. Ernst Fraenkel's analysis of Nazi rule and its political topicality (Version 1.0) , in: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , June 1, 2011 (republication of: Michael Wildt: The transformation of the state of emergency. Ernst Fraenkel's analysis of Nazi rule and its political topicality . In: Jürgen Danyel, Jan-Holger Kirsch and Martin Sabrow (eds.): 50 classics of contemporary history . Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2007, pp. 19–23); Gesine Schwan : Dictatorship: In the trap of totalitarianism . In: The time of June 25, 2009.
48. ^ Wolfgang Wippermann : Theories of fascism. On the status of the current discussion . Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1989, p. 41; Jan C. Behrends: Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
49. ^ Franz Neumann: Notes on the theory of dictatorship . In: Franz Neumann (Ed.): Democratic and authoritarian state. Political Theory Studies . Europäische Verlags-Anstalt, Frankfurt am Main 1967 p. 224, quoted from Detlef Schmiechen-Ackermann : Comparison of dictatorships (Version 1.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , May 9, 2014 (accessed August 9, 2017).
50. ↑ Detlef Schmiechen-Ackermann: Dictatorship Comparison (Version 1.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , May 9, 2014 (accessed August 9, 2017).
51. ^ Jan C. Behrends: Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
52. ^ Wolfgang Wippermann: Theories of fascism. On the status of the current discussion . Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1989; Jan C. Behrends: Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
53. ^ Sigmund Neumann: Permanent Revolution. The Total State in a World at War. Harper & Brothers, New York 1942. A German translation was only published in 2013 under the title Permanent Revolution. Totalitarianism in the Age of International Civil War by LIT Verlag .
54. ^ Alfons Söllner : Sigmund Neumanns "Permanent Revolution". A forgotten classic of comparative dictatorship research. In: ders., Ralf Walkenhaus and Karin Wieland (eds.): Totalitarismus. A history of ideas from the 20th century. Berlin 1997, pp. 53-73; Dictatorship Comparison (Version 1.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , May 9, 2014 (accessed August 9, 2017).
55. ↑ Also on the following Armin Pfahl-Traughber: Forms of State in the 20th Century I: Dictatorial Systems . In: Alexander Gallus and Eckhard Jesse (Hrsg.): Staatsformen. Models of political order from antiquity to the present. A manual . Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2004, p. 225 ff.
56. ↑ Kurt Lenk: Problems of Democracy . In: Hans-Joachim Lieber (Ed.): Political Theories from Antiquity to the Present , Federal Center for Political Education / bpb, Bonn 1993, ISBN 3-89331-167-X , p. 967.
57. ↑ Quoted from Herbert Keuth : The Philosophy of Karl Poppers . 2nd edition, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2011, p. 294.
58. ^ Ernst Fraenkel: structural analysis of modern democracy. In: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 19 (1969), Issue 49, pp. 3–27, based on Armin Pfahl-Traughber: Forms of State in the 20th Century I: Dictatorial Systems . In: Alexander Gallus and Eckhard Jesse (Hrsg.): Staatsformen. Models of political order from antiquity to the present. A manual . Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2004, p. 225 f.
59. ^ Rainer-Olaf Schultze: Dictatorship . In: Dieter Nohlen (Ed.): Lexicon of Politics, Volume 7: Political Terms. Directmedia, Berlin 2004, p. 127.
60. ^ Jürgen Hartmann : Democracy and Autocracy in Comparative Democracy Research. A criticism. Springer VS, Wiesbaden 2015, p. 91.
61. ↑ Thomas Bernauer , Detlef Jahn , Patrick Kuhn, Stefanie Walter: Introduction to Political Science . 3rd edition, Nomos, Baden-Baden 2015, p. 135.
62. ^ Carl Joachim Friedrich: Dictatorship. In: Soviet system and democratic society. A comparative encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Image theory to the dictatorship of the proletariat . Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau / Basel / Vienna 1966, Sp. 1241–1252; on the distinction between totalitarian and authoritarian dictatorships see also Karl Dietrich Bracher : Age of Ideologies. A history of political thought in the 20th century , dtv, Munich 1985, ISBN 3-423-04429-2 .
63. ^ Juan Linz: Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regime . 2nd edition, Berliner Debatte Wissenschaftsverlag Berlin 2003, passim, quotation p. 129.
64. ↑ Armin Pfahl-Traughber: Forms of State in the 20th Century I: Dictatorial Systems . In: Alexander Gallus and Eckhard Jesse (Hrsg.): Staatsformen. Models of political order from antiquity to the present. A manual . Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2004, p. 228 f.
65. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 922 ff.
66. ↑ Armin Pfahl-Traughber: Forms of State in the 20th Century I: Dictatorial Systems . In: Alexander Gallus and Eckhard Jesse (Hrsg.): Staatsformen. Models of political order from antiquity to the present. A manual . Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2004, pp. 230–267.
67. ↑ Thomas Bernauer, Detlef Jahn, Patrick Kuhn, Stefanie Walter: Introduction to Political Science . 3rd edition, Nomos, Baden-Baden 2015, p. 135 f.
68. ↑ Jochen Bleicken : The Constitution of the Roman Republic , 5th edition, Schöningh, Paderborn 1989, ISBN 3-506-99405-0 , pp. 90-93.
69. ↑ See e.g. B. Götz Aly : Hitler's People's State . Robbery, Race War and National Socialism , Frankfurt am Main 2005, ISBN 3-7632-5605-9 .
70. ^ Maurice Duverger: The Study of Politics . Nelson, Walton-on-Thames 1972, p. 82; see. also the definition by Alfred Cobban : Dictatorship, its History and Theory . Jonathan Cape, London 1939, p. 26: "Dictatorship [...] is the government of one man, who has not primarily obtained his position by inheritance, but by either force or consent, and normally by a combination of both".
71. ↑ George WF Hallgarten: Demons or Saviors? A brief history of dictatorship since 600 BC Chr. , Dtv, Munich 1966.
72. ↑ Armin Pfahl-Traughber: Forms of State in the 20th Century I: Dictatorial Systems . In: Alexander Gallus and Eckhard Jesse (Hrsg.): Staatsformen. Models of political order from antiquity to the present. A manual . Böhlau, Cologne / Weimar / Vienna 2004, pp. 256–261.
73. ^ Juan Linz: Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regime . 2nd edition, Berliner Debatte Wissenschaftsverlag, Berlin 2003, pp. 112–127.
74. ^ Günther Heydemann and Heinrich Oberreuter : Dictatorships in Germany - Comparative Aspects , Federal Agency for Civic Education, Bonn 2003; Detlef Schmiechen-Ackermann: Comparison of dictatorships (Version 1.0) , in: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , May 9, 2014 (accessed on August 9, 2017); for criticism of this research design see Wolfgang Wippermann: Demonization through comparison. GDR and Third Reich , Rotbuch, Berlin 2009.
75. ^ Jan C. Behrends: Dictatorship. Modern tyranny between Leviathan and Behemoth (Version 2.0) . In: Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte , December 20, 2016 (accessed August 4, 2017).
76. ^ Carl Joachim Friedrich: Dictatorship. In: Soviet system and democratic society. A comparative encyclopedia. Vol. 1. Image theory to the dictatorship of the proletariat . Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau / Basel / Vienna 1966, Sp. 1257 f.
77. ↑ Ernst Nolte: Dictatorship . In: Otto Brunner, Werner Conze and Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Basic historical concepts. Historical lexicon on political-social language in Germany , Volume 1, Ernst Klett Verlag, Stuttgart 1972, p. 924.
78. ^ Wolfgang Merkel: System transformation. An introduction to the theory and empiricism of transformation research. 2nd edition, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2010, p. 40.