The multiform eternal enemy of democracy: despotism
| Author | Anila Kashnjeti |
| Pages | 141-147 |
Vo
l. 4 N
o
. 2
Jul
y
, 201
8
ISS
N 2410-391
8
A
cces on
l
ine at www.ii
p
cc
l
.or
g
141
A
cademic Journal o
f
Business,
A
dministration, Law and Social Sciences
II
PCCL Publishin
g
, Graz-
A
ustria
The multiform eternal enem
y
of democrac
y
: despotis
m
PhD Anila Kashn
j
et
i
Ab
str
a
ct
Since the early antiquity individuals and people have gained the consciousness o
f
their
v
alue and strength against tyranny. People have an instinctive, violent, unrestricted hatred
towards the tyrant.
E
very revolution demolishes one tyranny, and it crushes the structure o
f
i
ts supporters, “soldiers”. Main objective of this manuscript is the analysis of despotism in a
c
omparative philosophical manner towards democracy.
Ke
y
words: Democracy, despotism, democracy, enemy.
I
ntr
odu
ct
ion
Ty
rann
y
is the eternal enem
y
o
f
democrac
y
, as long as it denies its main
p
rinci
p
les
of
f
reedom and inde
p
endence.
I
t can be genera ll
y
judged t
y
rant or des
p
ot that
aut
h
oritarian in
d
ivi
d
ua
l
w
h
o im
p
oses on t
h
ose w
h
o surroun
d
h
im,
h
is ar
b
itrar
y
wi
ll
,
t
h
at
d
oes not acce
p
t o
b
jections, extremes or re
pl
icas. T
h
e t
y
rant comman
d
s; ot
h
ers
are not allowed to do something else exce
p
t to obe
y
. The justi
fi
cation o
f
the order,
i
ts legitimization, lies onl
y
in the arbitrariness o
f
the des
p
ot. But Toc
q
ueville (1936)
o
bserves that it is not enough to act arbitraril
y
to be t
y
rannical, as o
en the order
c
an be used in a use
f
ul wa
y
in
f
avor o
f
the
p
eo
p
le and to
p
reserve their
f
reedom.
I
t is a
l
wa
y
s t
h
e ar
b
iter t
h
at
b
rings an
d
su
pp
orts t
h
e revo
l
utions. T
h
ere is not
h
ing
more arbitrar
y
than a
p
olitical revolution that acce
p
ts
f
reedom, inde
p
endence, and
eq
ualit
y
o
f
a
p
eo
p
le,
y
et there is nothing more righteous and sacred in the
f
ace o
f
God
and in the
f
ace o
f
men. But it is not necessar
y
to be deceived b
y
the words.
O
en,
u
nder the lies o
f
a “revolution” can hide the
fi
er
y
t
y
rann
y
and the blindest t
y
rann
y
.
Revolution and
f
reedom are two words that must stand a
p
art in histor
y
. For exam
p
le,
i
n France, the revolutionar
y
dictatorshi
p
, which has been the most hostile to
f
reedom
among all dictatorshi
p
s, van
q
uished as much as the
p
eo
p
le o
f
thought did; almost
e
ver
y
thing that existed
f
rom the
p
hiloso
p
hical school o
f
anti
q
uit
y
o
f
the eighteenth
c
entur
y
. The same would ha
pp
en to Montes
q
uieu, Voltaire, and Rousseau i
f
the
y
were alive. For their good
f
ortune the
y
had alread
y
died.... However, we must alwa
y
s
d
istinguish arbitrariness
f
rom t
y
rann
y
: “T
y
rann
y
can be
p
racticed through the law
i
tsel
f
, and then it is not arbitrar
y
at all; arbitrariness can be exercised in the interest o
f
c
itizens and then it is not t
y
rannical. T
y
rann
y
generall
y
serves arbitrariness but can
d
o without it”. T
y
rann
y
a
pp
ears more o
en in the laws that o
pp
ress the
p
eo
p
le, as
l
ong as the
y
are ex
p
ressions o
f
a will, which ma
y
be arbitrar
y
, den
y
ing res
p
ect
f
or the
f
undamental rights o
f
their humanit
y
:
p
olitical
f
reedom and inde
p
endence. Whoever
o
bstructs the will o
f
the
p
eo
p
le b
y
the law o
f
his will, and sneaks in some wa
y
to the
b
reathing o
f
a
p
eo
p
le, this is a t
y
rant.
H
owever, t
y
rann
y
alwa
y
s
fl
ourishes again b
y
its own grace and resur
f
aces with
d
i
erent looks; and its new
f
orms are more invisible and a
pp
ealing,
f
ascinates its
To continue reading
Request your trial