Autarky; Autocracy (a political system ruled by a single individual) Hyponyms (each of the following is a kind of “one-man rule”): The rule of man[a] (where “man” is now used without sex[6]) is a type of personal rule in an irresponsible society where rules change from one ruler to another. It is a society in which a person, regime or group of people governs arbitrarily. [6] [7] While human domination can be explained as the absence of the rule of law, this theoretical understanding leads to a paradox. Realism dictates that man and law are not separate and that the rules of the two are not opposed. On the contrary, the law depends profoundly on a state composed of people. [8] [9] The assertion that political authority should be in the hands of one person has emerged in various forms. The spread of democracy in the modern world should not make us forget that the idea of one power has occupied a dominant place in the history of Western political thought. Indeed, the modern preference for popular government is an exception to a political paradigm that was generally undemocratic. While this hostility was a common feature of the defense of monarchy—that is, the rule of one person endowed with the sanctity and insignia of “kingship,” it was shared to some extent by those who promoted non-monarchical notions of government by the “One.” In particular, proponents of the one-person rule share a common belief in the need for a leader to convey a sense of unity in the state and give direction to its activities. They also assume that it is possible to identify a person who possesses the unique and relevant qualities necessary to achieve these goals.
This chapter deals with ancient, modern, and modern governmental representations of the “One,” some of which represent the defense of the monarchy. It will also examine modern, non-monarchical representations of one-person rule. Some of these theories view the leader as the only truly important political actor in the state, others focus on the need for a supreme leader within systems in which other actors also play important political roles. At the heart of the functioning of the rule of law. was a conceptual framework of the “rule of law” and the “rule of man” as concepts of opposition, a paradoxical framework that suggests in India and China that law is somehow separating itself from the realm of everyday power. Nevertheless, the law depended profoundly on the state (composed of men) and the functioning of state power. [27] British trade unionist George Howell used the phrase “one man, one vote” in political pamphlets in 1880. [1] During the period of decolonization and struggles for national sovereignty in the 20th century from the late 1940s onwards, this term became widely used in developing countries, where the majority population sought to acquire political power relative to its numbers.
[ref. needed] The slogan was used in particular by the anti-apartheid movement in the 1980s, which sought to end the domination of the white minority in South Africa. [2] [3] [4] absolutism; Authoritarianism; Caesarism; Despotism; Dictatorship; Monocracy; the one-man rule; Shogunate; Stalinism; Totalitarianism; Tyranny For more information on the one-person, one-voice rule, check out this article from the University of Florida Law Review, this article from the University of Michigan Law Review, and The Atlantic. Man domination is associated with many negative concepts such as tyranny, dictatorship and despotism and their variants, which took the form of the Thirty Tyrants, the Jacobin dictatorship (reign of terror) during the French Revolution, Caesarism, Bonapartism and spiritual gift (also known as charismatic power or charisma), [13] and regimes such as Joseph Stalin and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. and Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. [14] Bad government is seen as inherent in personal rule. [15] Despite theoretical associations about what constitutes bad or good government, political realism dictates that rules are set regardless of whether the rulers are dictatorial or democratic, one or more. [15] The Constitution contains the result of the Great Compromise that established representation in the U.S. Senate. Each state was represented in the Senate with two equal representatives, regardless of population.
The Founding Fathers considered this principle so important that they included a clause in the Constitution prohibiting any state from withdrawing equal representation from the Senate without its permission; see article V of the United States Constitution. For this reason, “one person, one vote” in the U.S. Senate has never been implemented in terms of state representation.