Civilian Government and Military Government

Constitutional and military rule

All the process of civilian government selection is democratic. However, the military government is authorized by the military. We have no democratic way of choosing military rule. Civic rule gives citizens the opportunity to elect their leaders, not the military government, in which anyone can take over. Military and civilian governments after the coup are producing a different policy from that expressed by the civilian government without a coup.

So what's the big deal between civilian and military rule?

The military government within the military is a totallyitarian one. His top leadership unquestionably follows the orders of the presidents and the German government, unless they receive illegal orders. Like his civilian counterparts, however, there is still some similarity to a democratic party, as they are inclined to make choices in committees when necessary, because no Führer can do or know everything.

On the other hand, a military government, which is the government of a state, is more inflexible when it comes to obeying orders. She is an "absolute" authoritarian totality without the consent of the commission. Commands are unquestionably to be obeyed, even if they are illegal. In the course of time, military-led regimes have finally fail because there are no control mechanisms to prevent them from becoming depressed.

In the end, many aspiring civilian government commanders were toppled because there was nothing to verify their authorities. That makes it the best form of government in a state. That makes the US and other democratic countries more powerful and peculiar than other states.

Civilian leaders lead democracies and the military is more than a general to them. One part of the vow to US military recruitment clearly states that one must first comply with the presidenc. Every US government has its own national guard, the National Guard, loyal to this state.

Yet, however, the President has the energy to nationalise those forces to become under his or her control if that state uses his forces to instigate rebellion against the Federal Government. In 1963 or so, Governor George Wallace of Alabama tried to do just that by hindering African college enrollment at an Alabama college.

"US President Kennedy quickly nationalized the Wallace Guards, sent German forces and took Wallace away, who blocked access to the school. There is a complicated relation between the Federation and the Länder, but the system still works. It was during the years of the conflict that the greatest test of democratic rule took place, when the Southern states chose to separate from the state.

Auch interessant

Mehr zum Thema