Political Science

Authoritarianism is defined as a method of governance or leadership which emphasizes on the republics state authority.  As a political system, authoritarianism is controlled by rulers who are non-elected. In this connection, authoritarianism has the following features centralized and highly concentrated structures of power in which the maintenance and generation of a political power is done through repressive methods that seek to shut off any form of challenge and it utilizes mass organizations and political parties to bring the masses to an agreement with the government (Kenez, 1985).

The other feature is that it does not recognize the rule of law but it recognizes the rule of men, it follows the principle of rigged or stolen elections, unelected men and women are involved in making key political decisions in closed doors and it involves the unregulated and informal political power exercise. Self appointment of leadership is another feature of authoritarianism and in the case where the leader is elected people cannot play an active role in displacing the elected leader. In the same perspective, opposition to the authoritarianism is not tolerated and civil liberties are not guaranteed. Authoritarianism is also characterized by principle weakening and denial of freedom for creation of organizations, groups and political organizations which seem to question or compete for the power of the authoritarian leaders.

To curtail any form of competition from groups or organizations, authoritarianism seeks to control every element of the society. In order to ensure political stability, authoritarianism utilizes the principle of military support and society control, control of dissent and internal opposition and the use of different socialization means to create allegiances to the rulers.  With the above understanding of what the authoritarian rule entails, the subsequent sections will explore authoritarian cases in China and Vietnam, their similarities and differences as well as how the authoritarian rule in the two countries survived the pressure to democratize.

The history of authoritarian rule in China can be traced back to 4000 years. The Chinese society in the imperial era was inflexibly divided with the scholar and the emperor class being at the leading positions while the rest of the population was generally expected to follow any commands that originated from their leaders. It was believed that as long as the leaders and the emperors drove the country forward, the suffering of the people under the emperors authoritarian rule was insignificant.  Even though China led in the advancement of administration of the state than many other empires, it fell short of an accountable government and the rule of law. In this respect, there was no law which was superior to the ruler and therefore any decision made by the emperor was final and could not be challenged by any person or any law.

Lack of rule of law in China brought about extreme levels of tyranny resulting into extreme suffering of the people.  For example, Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi used his authoritarian rule to uproot hundreds of aristocratic groups and families, introduced extreme painful punishments and took the possession of property. Confucian scholar books were burned and over 400 of scholars were buried alive.  Rulers in China were just educated to have a moral responsibility sense towards the people because democracy or government accountability was not necessary. Procedural power checks were also not permitted in China.

Ordinary citizens or elites were not also permitted to constrain their rulers.  Common people were exposed to all manners and forms of injustices which were brought by corrupt bandits and local officials as well as landlords. Corrupt landlords and local officials colluded in confiscating land belonging to the peasant farmers and the low class people. The Mao Zedong era was also characterised by ruthlessness in dealing with people where millions of Chinese people were eliminated under his authoritarian rule (Themes in Chinese History link provided).

Having being ruled by the communist China up to 938 AD when it broke away, Vietnam is also another example of a country with a long history of authoritarian rule. The communists rulers who took over the control of the war ravaged country begun their authoritarian rule almost immediately with the banning of all the political parties. In addition, the military and the public servants personnel were forcefully send back to different camps in order to be educated on the need to pledge allegiance to the rulers. 

The collectivization of factories and farms was also embarked on by the government and hundreds of Vietnamese fled their country due to the extreme forms of brutality expedited by the government. In the course of fleeing from the country, millions of Vietnamese died in waters due to the crude nature of the boats they used to run away from the harsh political environment at home. The CVP or the Communist Party of Vietnam which took over the leadership of Vietnam since 1940 was majorly authoritarian.  It was characterised by enormous killing of socialists-state institutions, blockage and creation of a hostile international environment where minimal interference from other countries was permitted and the introduction of laws which prohibited freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly (Smith, 1929-1930).

Just like in China, the rule of law was not upheld in Vietnam. The countrys rulers used every element of their power to suppress any form of opposition and challenges which emanated from the dissatisfaction of certain quarters of people. As a matter of fact, the form of authoritarianism adopted by the rulers in Vietnam resembled to a great deal the form of authoritarianism practised in China partly because Vietnam had for a long time been ruled by China.

Similarities
It is quite evident that one of the similarities in the authoritarian rule applied in China and Vietnam is that it was strictly practised by the communists.  In Vietnam, the Communist Party of Vietnam which had been established immediately after Vietnam broke away from China but later abolished by the French colonialists was purely a communist party which imposed strict rules on its own people.  China was generally a communist state and every emperor who ruled the empire was to be purely a strong communist (John, 1989).

The second similarity in the authoritarian form of rule applied in the two countries is that it involved massive suffering of the majority of poor and low class people and the continued success and enjoyment of the ruling and the elite classes. The third similarity was that authoritarianism never recognized the rule of law but rather the rule of men where the emperors decree was final and could not be questioned or challenged by law or any opposing organization. Although the numerous similarities above were negative, authoritarianism in the two countries brought new levels of development and growth in the two countries.

Difference
The only difference that prevailed in the authoritarian form of leadership applied in Vietnam and China is that the magnitude of the application of this form of rule in China begun long before Vietnam broke away and hence it had been firmly entrenched in the countrys institutions.  In China, authoritarianism resulted into massive deaths of people as opposed to Vietnam (Daniel Lederman, Normal Loaza, Rodrigo Res Soares, 2001).

How they managed pressure to democratize
As stated above, one of the ways China and Vietnam managed the increasing pressure to democratize was through the beliefs that people held regarding the authoritarian leadership in their territories.  For example, in China the popular belief held by the people was that as long as the authoritarian leader or ruler drove the country forward the suffering of the people was insignificant. Hence, to a great extent the emperors marshalled support of the people they ruled.

The second way the two countries managed to survive the pressure to democratize was through banning and the use of harsh rules which prohibited any form of public gathering which would challenge the authoritarian leader. Any form of opposition was met with harsh penalties and punishments including death and thus only institutions and organizations which advanced and supported the rulers ideologies were encouraged to thrive.

In doing so, the ruled people never had the chance to experience or gather information pertaining to any other type of governance which would better their lives a part from the authoritarian leadership they were used to. The third way was through propaganda. The rulers used the propaganda method to warn their subjects that democratization was the thing of the west or the capitalists states who wanted to take away their property and hence people tried to shun away from the new ideologies that seemed to originate from the capitalists states. (Tormey, 1968).