FACTOID # 128: Tax makes up half of the of Gross Domestic Product in Denmark and Sweden. In Japan and the United States, it makes up less than 30%.
 
 Home   Encyclopedia   Statistics   Countries A-Z   Flags   Maps   Education   Forum   FAQ   About 
 
WHAT'S NEW
RELATED ARTICLES
People who viewed "Oligocracy" also viewed:
RECENT ARTICLES
More Recent Articles »
 

Encyclopedia > Oligocracy

Oligarchy is a form of government where most political power effectively rests with a small segment of society (typically the most powerful, whether by wealth, military strength, ruthlessness, or political influence). The word oligarchy is from the Greek for "few" and "rule". Some political theorists have argued that all societies are inevitably oligarchies no matter the supposed political system.

This article is part of the
series on Politics
Politics
Political philosophy
Systems:
aristocracy, autocracy,
democracy, despotism,
monarchy, oligarchy,
plutocracy, theocracy
and tyranny.

Oligarchies are often controlled by a few powerful families whose children are raised and mentored to become inheritors of the power of the oligarchy, often at some sort of expense to those governed. In contrast to aristocracy ("government by the 'best'"), this power may not always be exercised openly, the oligarchs preferring to remain "the power behind the throne", exerting control through economic means. Although Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich, for which the exact term is plutocracy, oligarchy is not always a rule by wealth, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged cadre. It has also been suggested that most communist states fit the definition of oligarchy.


A society may become an oligarchy by default as an outgrowth of the shifting alliances of warring tribal chieftans, although any form of government may transform into an oligarchy at some point in its evolution. The most likely mechanism for this transformation is a gradual accumulation of otherwise unchecked economic power. Oligarchies may also evolve into more classically authoritarian forms of government, sometimes as the result of one family gaining ascendancy over the others. Many of the European monarchies established during the late Middle Ages began in this way.


Oligarchies may also become instruments of transformation, insisting that monarchs or dictators share power, thereby opening the door to power-sharing by other elements of society. One example of this process occurred when English nobles banded together in 1215 to force a reluctant King John of England to sign the Magna Carta, a tacit recognition both of King John's waning political power and of the existence of an incipient oligarchy. As English society continued to grow and develop, the Magna Carta was repeatedly revised (1216,1217, and 1225), guaranteeing greater rights to greater numbers of people, thus setting the stage for British constitutional monarchy.


An unique example of an oligarchy is the ancient greek city-state Sparta. It was not a normal oligarchy but a democratic timocratic monarchical oligarchy. This meant that the power was in the hands of five men. They were called Ephores and were elected annually by the 28 members of the Council of Elders. All Ephores were over the age of 60 and had completed their military career. The Ephores controlled all daily life in Sparta. Besides that the Ephores had one very powerful role, which could be carried out only with divine approval, shown in an oracle or an omen. The Ephores had the power to force the Kings' abdication.


Under the five Ephores there were two Kings, that is what we call a dual monarchy. Those two Kings came from the two noble families of Sparta. They gave laws the equivalent of Royal Assent. Under these Kings were the Council of the Elders. These 28 native Spartan men were all over 60 and retired from the military service. The council passed laws and elected the five Ephores. This part is a timocracy because their rights were determined by their nationality and ranks.


Beneath them all you had the rest of the free Spartan men. They voted for the Council of Elders.


A modern example of oligarchy could be seen in South Africa during the 20th century. Here, the basic characteristics of oligarchy are particularly easy to observe, since the South African form of oligarchy was based on racism. After the Boer War, a tacit agreement was reached between English- and Afrikaans-speaking whites. Together, they made up about twenty percent of the population, but this small percentage had access to virtually all the educational and trade opportunities, and they proceeded to deny this to the black majority even further than before. Although this process had been going on since the mid-18th century, after 1948 it became official government policy and became known worldwide as apartheid. This lasted until the arrival of democracy in South Africa in 1994, punctuated by the transition to a democratically-elected government dominated by the black majority.


A form of this word has entered Latin American Spanish and Portuguese from the French. Its use has been modified there to include governmental and military officials, both those who are effective and those who for whom a job was made, besides the rich.


See also


  Results from FactBites:
 
Pres. & Parl.: CONCLUSION (696 words)
Industrialism: the bureaucracies available to presidentialist regimes are unable to cope with a wide range of highly technical and contentious issues generated by the world industrial system -- if they were to establish a mandarin bureaucracy that could, indeed, cope with these problems, they would quickly fall under the domination of public officials.
Nationalism: the centripetalizing electoral and party systems needed to sustain a presidentialist oligocracy are so unresponsive to the needs of diverse ethnic minorities that they actually provoke ethnonationalist dreams of self-determination.
Oligocracy becomes increasingly dysfunctional and liable to violent confrontations as demands for secession or autonomy grow.
"MALODY" OF MODERNITY (5498 words)
In the present day world as a whole, therefore, the great majority of people remain subjects in oligocracies and, of course, in quite a few new states -- the successor states of the modern empires -- authoritarian rule means that virtually all residents are subjects, not citizens.
The subjects of any oligocracy can choose between two contrasting positions: the first calls for liberalization of the constitutional barriers to citizenship so that subjects can become partners in the representative institutions of the state; the second calls for liberation so that subjects can establish their own sovereignty and representative institutions.
To the degree that their leaders could mobilize followers by appeals to shared grievances and a sense of historical identity, new ethnonational movements were provoked by imperialism and, since liberation, by arbitrary rule in the successor states.
  More results at FactBites »

 

COMMENTARY     


Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
Your name
Your location
Your comments
Please enter the 5-letter protection code


Lesson Plans | Student Area | Student FAQ | Reviews | Press Releases |  Feeds | Contact
The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL.
Images may be subject to relevant owners' copyright.
All other elements are (c) copyright NationMaster.com 2003-5. All Rights Reserved.
Usage implies agreement with terms.