Republic under an authoritarianism regime is not a true republic. Instead, it is only a republic for a few select groups of people and not for another group.
Authoritarian is more of a dictatorial type of leadership. Power is bestowed on one person who controls all the polices and decisions with very little input from the subjects being led.
dfx
what the quote is saying is that although they created a republic it is up to the people to keep it intact.
A republic is a government where the people have elected or nominated a president. The people as well as the president have power together.
it means your counrty has been separated
"Regim" is likely a typographical error or misspelling of "regime," which refers to a system or planned way of doing things, especially in the context of governance or management. It can denote a government in power, particularly one that is authoritarian or undemocratic. In broader contexts, "regime" can also refer to a set of rules or guidelines governing a specific area, such as a dietary regimen or exercise regime.
Stern would be the most similar to authoritarian.
Requiring strict obedience to an authority, such as a dictator .
If by the North Vietnamese you mean during the Vietnam war their goal was to unite all of Vietnam under a communist regime. Which was successful.
It meant nothing to the Ancient Regime. Absolute Monarchs ruled by Divine Right and with the full blessing of the Catholic Church. Under that set of rules and guidance there could be no Rights of Man and the Citizen.
To be part of a republic means to live under a republican form of government in which a select group of leaders govern rather than one powerful monarch.
To be part of a republic means to live under a republican form of government in which a select group of leaders govern rather than one powerful monarch.
The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.The Roman republic was a form of government and the Roman emperor was a man. If you mean the difference between the Roman republic and the Roman empire, there was no difference except in the form of government. Rome was already an empire under the republican form of government. When a single person took over leadership of that government, it became the principate or what is erroneously called the "empire". In both types of government, vast amounts of territory were ruled by a single authority, the senate under the republic and the "emperor" under the principate. Both the republic and the principate met the criteria for an empire.
Basically, it means that the US operates under a strict rule of law that applies to all actors, including the state and the government.
the organization that is the governing authority of a political unit
A Communist apparatus ruling a country.
Authoritarian is more of a dictatorial type of leadership. Power is bestowed on one person who controls all the polices and decisions with very little input from the subjects being led.