There are quite a few forms of power. They have different effectiveness in solving certain problems, as well as many concepts. One of the most unusual is theocracy. What is this? What is she like? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this form of power compared to others?
What is theocracy?
This term is used to denote a form of government in which all political power is concentrated in the hands of representatives of the clergy, and it is of paramount importance. Thus, in the country there is no separation of secular and religious power. Classical theocracy provides that the head of the church also leads the state, that is, religion and politics are very closely related, and often one follows from the other. The ruler is a kind of governor of God on Earth. Examples include the pharaohs of ancient Egypt, the emperors of the Incas, the caliphs in the first Arab states.
From this one can already judge what constitutes theocracy as a form of power. This, of course, is not all information, and it will be possible to fully formulate your vision of this management organization only after reading the entire article.
Theocratic concepts in the past
For the first time the word "theocracy" is found in the composition "Against Alion" by Josephus Flavius, which was written in 94 AD. It describes the socio-political system of the ancient Jews. Over time, the meaning of the term, as well as its semantic content, has changed, and more than once. Different historians and philosophers can find its various interpretations. So, the ideal Christian theocracy is described by St. Augustine in his treatise "On the City of God." So, with him, she acts as a specific development goal. This form of government was supposed to bring peace and grace to all corners of the globe known to people of those times.
Muslim sources cannot boast of such achievements. The most complete is the concept that was promoted by the Sunni lawyer Abu l'Hassan al-Mawardi. In his work, the point of view is considered that the caliph is a divine creation. He protects the Islamic faith and administers fair justice over the whole world. The goal of any Islamic state, which is called a caliphate, is to subjugate and convert all "infidels" into Muslims. At the same time, a unified and indivisible caliph power should be established above them. From the point of view of this concept, he combines the secular power of the emir and the spiritual great imam. And it was believed that this form of power is the best in view of the "literal" divine intervention.
The new time introduced its own corrections and proposed different visions of the unification of political and religious power. So, if we consider the Russian realities, then the journalist and philosopher of the 19th century Vladimir Solovyov distinguished himself. He promoted the idea of uniting the Russian monarchy with the Catholic Church in order to create a universal free theocracy on this foundation. More rational, if such a definition is generally acceptable in relation to religion, the philosopher and publicist Nikolai Berdyaev looked at it. He believed that under political theocracy it was necessary to consider anarchism. From an economic point of view, such a system is socialism. And from the point of view of mysticism, theocracy is the autocracy of God, who rules over his children. Berdyaev she was considered solely from the perspective of Christianity. And society itself should have consisted of priests.
There were certain views abroad. There, Joseph de Mestra was able to systematize the concept of a merger of political and religious power in his works. He was an ardent opponent of the accomplished French Revolution, so he developed the idea of building a state using the church hierarchy, headed by the pope, as an example. Religion and politics, from the point of view of the Frenchman, should be very closely connected, since one cannot function without the other (which was quite successfully refuted at one time by the Soviet Union, and now the People's Republic of China).
How real is it?
The utopianism of creating a theocratic state - in view of the impossibility of equating the secular and divine - is very well considered in Theocracy, written by contemporary Russian lawyer Salygin. He analyzed a significant number of ideas about this form of power and provided his own vision of it as a system of religious and political relations. He is not the only one in his thought - the impossibility of building a full-fledged theocratic state in the modern world supports a significant number of people. To a large extent, this is due to society’s rejection of the minuses of this form of government.
Examples of theocratic states
What religious countries can be found in the modern world? Those where the “spiritual” aspects take precedence are Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Iran and Bahrain. It should be noted that they do not consider themselves as such. But, given the significant prevalence of Shariah religious courts and active legal proceedings in these authorities, they are such in fact, since they have all the signs of theocracy. The latest examples of such an organization of state affairs in the classical sense were the Taliban state in Afghanistan and the modern Islamic state, which was entrenched in Syria and Iraq. In the latter, by the way, theocracy is the support and foundation on which everything is built. Take away the idea - and the state will crumble, because its composition is very heterogeneous.
Does theocracy have a chance in the future?
No matter how strange it may sound, but this is possible. This remark applies to Islamic theocracy. So, all the other large-scale types of religions either oppressed (as in China), or weakened, and there is no longer any need to talk about their world dominion (such a situation with Christianity). At the same time, the number of representatives of Islam has grown significantly recently due to a population explosion among the masses who practice this religion. And more and more often, the opinion is voiced that over time, such a scenario may become a reality for most countries of the world. Considering that theocracy of the state now exists on the whole Earth in only one variant - the ISIS quasi-state, it cannot be said that they are very far from the truth.
pros
It should be noted that in a theocratic state all people are united by a single ideology. On this list of pluses can be considered complete.
Minuses
Here you can say a little more. To begin with, religion offers a rather rigid model of the world, which really does not want to change even in the face of facts. Also, guided by theocratic states that exist at the moment, we can say that they do not really favor science. But thanks to her, we have everything that we have. Therefore, we can rightfully declare that the theocratic form of government is accompanied by a significant slowdown in progress, or, quite possibly, we will even have to talk about the regression of human society. In addition, the persecution of all dissidents is possible (we recall, for example, the Spanish Inquisition).
Conclusion
As you see, theocracy is a rather specific form of power. But, from the point of view of modern society, there is no need to talk about its effectiveness.And for the development of science and our society, theocracy is a very solid stick in the wheel.
