AH Challenge: Militaristic Democracy

AFAIK a state with a military that is well-developed and involved in the government often turns into a dictatorship. Is it possible for a country, with a POD post-1900, to be democratic and yet still have a strong militaristic, possibly even fascist, bent? What would such a state look like and how would it act and get along with its neighbors?
 
AFAIK a state with a military that is well-developed and involved in the government often turns into a dictatorship. Is it possible for a country, with a POD post-1900, to be democratic and yet still have a strong militaristic, possibly even fascist, bent? What would such a state look like and how would it act and get along with its neighbors?

The German Empire?
 
Kemalist Turkey?

During the 20's and 30's it was really a sham democracy, but I would say modern Turkey fits the bill pretty well: hugely important military, conscription, democratic institutions with some pretty important (rather fascistic) caveats.


I'm surprised that nobody has said Israel.
 
Democracies like Britain and France were highly militaristic in the age of Imperialism. What's changed is wars got a lot more costly. Back then a war with a backward civilization could be won by a few regiments suffering at most a few dozen casualties. Imperial powers fought these wars nearly every year for more than a century. They almost always won, except when fighting sophisticated colonials of European descent.

Then it got very hard to fight wars. The rest of the world became more technologically savvy. Imperial powers turned on each other and supplied their rival's colonial enemies. Eventually voters decided the constant state of war did more damage than good. Other, gentler means of exploitation were preferred instead.

If you want more militaristic democracies, you just need to revolutionize warfare so that advanced nations once again enjoy unchallenged military superiority which would allow victory at minimal risk and cost. This military advantage would have to be something undeveloped countries cant easily cope with for a long period of time. Human nature will take its course.
 
Last edited:
I imagine that if the prevailing political culture of a democratic state was more willing to shell out blood and treasure for victory on the battlefield we could easily get a militaristic democracy.
 
Isn't a society like this discussed in the novel Starship Troopers? Where only those who've served in the Army are allowed to vote and take Governmental jobs? Technically more of an Oligarchy than a Democracy true...
 
What about Israel? I don't know about fascist, but they certainly aren't afraid to turn to military means to address a problem.
 
AFAIK a state with a military that is well-developed and involved in the government often turns into a dictatorship. Is it possible for a country, with a POD post-1900, to be democratic and yet still have a strong militaristic, possibly even fascist, bent? What would such a state look like and how would it act and get along with its neighbors?

Put a country in a position where they need to be able to fight effectively against multiple larger opponents to stay alive, repeatedly, and you'll get both a strong military and serious military influence in the government. If you've got a democratically-elected government, watch for military figures and jingoists to figure prominently.

Israel comes to mind. I'm not putting it down, and I'm not praising it. But I think it fits. IDF hardly reigns supreme there, but it's influential.
 
why do you think democracy and fashism are incompatable, to have a official democracy you basicaly have to get the people beliving their political rights are satisfied by voting once ewery 4-5 years, to have a functionall fashism you need the ilusion that "were all in this together" and theres a lot of outside and inside treats, like terrorism or comunism, and so a strong goverment and powerfull army is needed
so basically you need a big propaganda mashine and good if not total media coverage
and, indispensable for fashism, a paranoid and ignorant midle class that will always wote for you if you wave the flag right and say you dont like imigrants, especially if the economy is going a bit shaky and they need someone to blame.
is republican america or berlusconi italy or even putin russia much diferent from that?
just think of lega nord
 
The problem with the idea would be that the military is inherently undemocratic. It works by the simple principle that orders from above are to be obeyed unquestioningly; people don't vote on things.

Or did you simply mean a generally militarised society, but still with a fully democratic civil government?
 
Isn't a society like this discussed in the novel Starship Troopers? Where only those who've served in the Army are allowed to vote and take Governmental jobs? Technically more of an Oligarchy than a Democracy true...


In Starship Troopers more than just soldiers could vote, you just had to give service to the state (There was an political debate going on at the time in the book of giving the Merchant Marines the vote). Also: Anybody could hold government office.
 
Current USA seems to fit the bill for a Militaristic Republic ( democracy is something to be discussed; my opinion is that, like EU, it falls on one criterium at least )
 
It fails on the mindset; in a militaristic country, military service should be an honour, not a distasteful job left to the guys McDonald's won't hire.
 
Top