Illiberal Institutions

Non-Free System All of us are under the jurisdiction of laws, government, religion, education, family, and work market. All of these institutions tend to seek the formation of society. They do not say that society consists of individuals gathered, but they say that individuals are products of society. This is a conservative concept that is inconsistent with liberal ideology. It is beyond the scope of this article to investigate all institutions in our lives and pay attention to their characteristics.

The first one is a non democratic model incorporating social order. Law and order are not inherently democratic, state law and order system may not be free, and in reality it may be valid in this design as well. Many tyranny and authoritarian societies are good at maintaining order - some even have a focus on populist rights. Joseph Stalin is a monster, but he knows how to sort his men. The feudal society also placed control over the masses, despite occasional farmer riots. The same can be said for many rightist authoritarian regimes. To ensure the original order and temptation to skip the "righteous" part of the legislation essential to democracy is the core part of the problem we face today, which we will discuss later.

A non-free or mixed regime is one that seems to be democratic, but includes a system that is regarded as legitimate or effective, not respected by people. In a new form of democracy using democratic institutions to make non-liberal governments transition from non-democratic control to democratic control (or vice versa) or to make their control permanent It is unknown whether there is.

The rise of "non-liberal democracy" in Europe is one of the most harmful trends of our time. These institutions are usually focused on leaders who concentrate their power by overwhelming institutional checks and balances (in some cases by eliminating them). Vladimir Putin of Russia, Recep Tip Erdarn of Turkey, and Victor Oban of Hungary represent the three most obvious manifestations of this phenomenon. But what is truly remarkable - is also dangerous - how these regimes can support people's support

The phenomenon that the Islamist seeking and possessing power forces forces us to rethink the relationship between liberalism and democracy. For various reasons, non-liberal democracy under Islamic rule is different from that of Venezuela and Russia. In the latter case, non - liberal democracy is not essentially tied to the ideology of Hugo Chavez and Vladimir Putin. Their non-liberalism is a by-product of a more basic and naked desire to mainly integrate power. But as far as the Islamists are concerned, their non liberalism is the product of their Islamism, especially in social fields. For Islamists, non liberal democracy is not an unfortunate fact in life, but can be trusted and craved. It may be difficult for them to decide what it is, but the Islamic party has a unique intellectual and ideological "project". That is why they are Islamists.