Theocracy

Many Muslim countries are governed by the principles of Islamic law, but only Iran is actually ruled by the Islamic clergy, and is therefore the only true theocracy. Afghanistan, when it was ruled by the Taliban, was also a theocracy, but now it is what might be described as a struggling democracy.

islam

Political theories are broadly classified into two categories - classical and modern. The classical theories are normative in character while the modern theories are empirical. One may further subdivide the modern theories into modern and contemporary.

Imam Khomeini.

refer to question below:

Ancient Israel, according to the Bible, had Kings who were constrained by Prophets and Priests who divined the will of God. In this way there was both a monarchy (the line of kings) and a theocracy (the prophets and priests).

Theocracy is neither an autocracy nor a democracy; it is a form of government in which religious leaders or institutions hold political power and governance is based on religious law. While an autocracy has a single ruler with absolute power and a democracy features government by the people through elected representatives, theocracy specifically intertwines governance with religious authority. Thus, it operates on principles distinct from both autocratic and democratic systems.

They controlled the status of the persons soul. Do what I say or you will be smited by god and go to hell when you die.

No, Israel is a democracy.

It is called Oriental Despotism. Earlier Marxism believed it to be a pre-feudal stage of development where powerful despots controlled mass populations and exploited tribute from them by directly interfering in their lives.

Monarchy is rule by a king, prince, emir, sultan, or other hereditary power-holder. Theocracy is rule by a religious leader or a person who is believed to be a god-in-the-flesh. In many societies, monarchies have been theocracies since the king was believed to be a physical god, such as in ancient Egypt or as recently as World War II Japan. However, you can have monarchies that are either secular states or states where there is an official religion, but this religion does not have ruling power. You can also have theocracies where the rulership comes to power via internal appointment or quasi-democratic election as opposed to heredity, so these would be non-monarchic theocracies.

It depends on how you define successful.

The government is certainly functional; theocracy has consistently shown that it works in the sense that the government retains power and does not collapse. It retains power by repressing and jailing its rivals.

If you define successful as: improving the standard of living, appealing to the majority of Iranians, securing human rights, bringing technological development to the country, etc., the current theocracy is a failure.

The US government is not a socialist government.

A socialist state is a state that is constitutionally dedicated to constructing a socialist economy, and is utilizing its resources toward that end.

Socialism is defined as a system where the means of production are either co-operatively owned or publicly-owned, and the economy is geared toward producing for use rather than for private profit.

The US government is not interested in building socialism or transcending capitalism, and would be incapable of doing such a task on its own even if it wanted to.

Religious leaders have enough experience with community services which could serve as their primary knowledge about people's needs. Admitting that it wouldn't compare to other politician's credibility, if we really think about it.. countries thriving in corruption doesn't necessarily need intellectual leaders.. but leaders with a strong moral character; built with dedication and honesty.

A religious leader is a man for other people.

It might work if he is also a political leader for the people.

Not like many politicians.. who are only for themselves.

One party systems

According to the law, the Majlis (Parliament) passes laws, the President signs them, and the Ayatollahs certify their complicity with Shari'a Law (Islamic Holy Law).

In reality, the Ayatollahs are more or less dictators and the Majlis and President follow their commands.

According to the Economist magazine:

117 Jordan 3.93 Authoritarian regimes

118 Mauritania 3.91 Authoritarian regimes

119 Egypt 3.89 Authoritarian regimes

120 Morocco 3.88 Authoritarian regimes

121 Rwanda 3.71 Authoritarian regimes

122 Burkina Faso 3.60 Authoritarian regimes

123 Comoros 3.58 Authoritarian regimes

124 Nigeria 3.53 Authoritarian regimes

125 Cuba 3.52 Authoritarian regimes

126 Cameroon 3.46 Authoritarian regimes

127 Kazakhstan 3.45 Authoritarian regimes

128 Niger 3.41 Authoritarian regimes

129 Kuwait 3.39 Authoritarian regimes

130 Bahrain 3.38 Authoritarian regimes

131 Angola 3.35 Authoritarian regimes

132 Belarus 3.34 Authoritarian regimes

133 Algeria 3.32 Authoritarian regimes

134 Côte d'Ivoire 3.27 Authoritarian regimes

135 Azerbaijan 3.19 Authoritarian regimes

136 China 3.04 Authoritarian regimes

137 Swaziland 3.04 Authoritarian regimes

138 Afghanistan 3.02 Authoritarian regimes

139 Gabon 3.00 Authoritarian regimes

140 Oman 2.98 Authoritarian regimes

141 Tunisia 2.96 Authoritarian regimes

142 Yemen 2.95 Authoritarian regimes

143 Congo 2.94 Authoritarian regimes

144 Qatar 2.92 Authoritarian regimes

145 Iran 2.83 Authoritarian regimes

146 Sudan 2.81 Authoritarian regimes

147 United Arab Emirates 2.60 Authoritarian regimes

148 Zimbabwe 2.53 Authoritarian regimes

149 Vietnam 2.53 Authoritarian regimes

150 Tajikistan 2.45 Authoritarian regimes

151 Togo 2.43 Authoritarian regimes

152 Djibouti 2.37 Authoritarian regimes

153 Eritrea 2.31 Authoritarian regimes

154 Republic of the Congo 2.28 Authoritarian regimes

155 Equatorial Guinea 2.19 Authoritarian regimes

156 Syria 2.18 Authoritarian regimes

157 Laos 2.10 Authoritarian regimes

158 Guinea 2.09 Authoritarian regimes

159 Libya 2.00 Authoritarian regimes

160 Guinea-Bissau 1.99 Authoritarian regimes

161 Saudi Arabia 1.90 Authoritarian regimes

162 Central African Republic 1.86 Authoritarian regimes

163 Myanmar 1.77 Authoritarian regimes

164 Uzbekistan 1.74 Authoritarian regimes

165 Turkmenistan 1.72 Authoritarian regimes

166 Chad 1.52 Authoritarian regimes

167 North Korea 0.86 Authoritarian regimes

Nothing. Pharaohs were theocratic rulers and did not submit to the will of the people, which is required in democracies.

Socialism

A theocratic society is a society that is governed by religious rules. For example, many middle eastern countries could be considered theocracies.

I need help with this question it would really help me if you just type in a long paragraph and i find the answers on ask please help.

no its not

Theocracy is a form of government in which a deity is seen as as the supreme civil ruler, with religious institutional representatives replacing or dominating civil government. Government representatives are likely to be selected because of their piety and theological knowledge rather than their economic or social skills. Thus, they either may lack the skills to make secular decisions for the common good, or may choose suboptimal policy by giving priority in their decision making to religious concerns. A theocracy means a state religion is acknowledged. As a result, minority religions will inevitably be discriminated against. Of course, some of these criticisms may be equally valid for feudalism or dictatorships, but the modern standard of measure is representative democracy. Overall, theocracy, as a form of government for a nation of people, is inferior to democracy.