Talk:Dictatorship

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Alexander Lukashenko in a meeting with Bashar al-Assad in December 2003 (2) (twice-cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:02, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

The distinctions between dictatorships, autocracies, and oligarchies seem to be blurred

"Autocracy" is defined as (underlines added for emphasis) "a form of government in which absolute power is held by one person, known as an autocrat. It includes absolute monarchy and all forms of dictatorship, while it is contrasted with democracy and other forms of free government." However, this article includes one-party states and military regimes as dictatorships.

In one-party states and military regimes, power can be shared (more or less evenly) among the party/military leaders, or it can be concentrated in the hands of one of those leaders. The former case fits the criteria of an oligarchy ("a form of government in which power rests with a small number of people"), while the latter fits the criteria of an autocracy (as previously defined). Furthermore, Wikipedia considers the oligarchic version of a military regime to be a distinct enough concept to warrant its own article: military junta.

If autocracy includes "all forms of dictatorship", then that means (unless my logic is flawed) that all forms of dictatorship are autocratic. If all forms of dictatorship are autocratic, then the oligarchic versions of one-party and military regimes should be excluded from this article.

By including autocratic and oligarchic regimes, this article blurs the distinction between them, and partially contradicts the (lead of the) article on autocracy. In my mind, by including both autocracies and oligarchies, this article's de facto definition of "dictatorship" seems to be practically synonymous with "authoritarianism", which has its own article.

In summary, I believe this article, and at least some of the others, need to make a better distinction between these similar but distinct concepts. ZFT (talk) 03:33, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Previously, I was under the assumption that the "proper" definition of "dictatorship" was government by a single absolute ruler. Having reviewed the definitions of "dictator" and "dictatorship" on The Free Dictionary, I'm now of the understanding that the term "dictator" need not be restricted to restricted to autocratic leaders. ZFT (talk) 05:02, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Distinction, or lack thereof, between "dictatorship" and "authoritarianism"

The way this article defines "dictatorship" includes both autocratic and oligarchic forms of government, which are, from what I understand, the two overarching categories into which authoritarian regimes may be grouped (based on how they are structured). Therefore there seems to be a very large degree of overlap between the given definitions of "authoritarianism" and "dictatorship", suggesting that these articles should either be rewritten to make the distinction clearer, or that they should be merged. ZFT (talk) 20:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

Essentially, yes, there is a lot of overlap. That's something we have to work with for social science-y definitions like this. One of the main points would be the authoritarian/totalitarian distinction that's sometimes used in the literature. Stalin and Suharto were both dictators, but Stalin was totalitarian while Suharto was authoritarian. I can't attest to whether this is a universally recognized distinction or not, but it's one example of differentiation that's commonly used. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:23, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

I removed the text in question, not only is that definition quite fringe (i don't hear of a group of leaders being called a dictatorship often), it was not sourced. Hope that helps :) Plasticwonder (talk) 01:05, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, it does help; though the body of the article also should be cleaned up, as it uses the former, loose definition. ZFT (talk) 03:42, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Could you give examples? I will fix whatever you mention. Plasticwonder (talk) 03:48, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

"Military dictatorships are controlled by military officers, one-party dictatorships are controlled by the leadership of a political party, and personalist dictatorships are controlled by a single individual." ZFT (talk) 22:01, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

You want these as additions? Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 23:09, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

No, that's an example of using the previous definition of "dictatorship" (which included oligarchies). I'm not sure how to reword it myself. ZFT (talk) 23:26, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

The new definition makes the distinction between personalist and non-personalist dictatorships more vague. What are the differences between a military or one-party dictatorship, a personalist military or one-party dictatorship, and an oligarchical military or one-party regime? ZFT (talk) 21:55, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps we should giving non-academic definition... just say "The differences depend on whether the state is ruled by the armed forces, a political party apparatus, or a single dominant individual'. (Already sourcing the article). We cannot assume that everyone has basic knowledge of these things. Moxy🍁 23:40, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

I like that proposal. Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 00:41, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're trying to say by "We cannot assume that everyone has basic knowledge of these things.". The point of an encyclopedia is to give (at least) basic knowledge of a variety of subjects (or in the case of Wikipedia, all notable subjects). What I am saying is that there is currently too much overlap, variation, and vagueness in the definitions (of the different forms of authoritarian regimes), possibly calling for some mergers or rewrites. Isn't it Wikipedia's general policy to merge synonymous, near-synonymous, or otherwise very closely associated topics? ZFT (talk) 01:08, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Merging is a philosophy content editors don't really agree with Wikipedia:Does deletion help?. Moxy🍁 01:22, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

And in this scenario, merging is impractical. I personally do not think the definitions are vague here, but I am always happy to hear dissenting opinions. Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 01:26, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Agree the academic community separates these for a reason. But like the overview article hybrid regimes obviously something is missing if these types of questions keep coming up. What's the best way to "dumb this down"? Moxy🍁 01:32, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree with you, however this depends on what needs to be dumbed down. If it is the distinction of certain types of dictatorships, I honestly don't see how this article fails to do that, as it is intuitive:

• Military dictatorships are ruled by military officials
• Party dictatorships are ruled by party politicians, etc.

If it is the the distinction between "autocracy" and "dictatorship", then I think that is a matter of terminology. I propose that we would have to make clear (and more importantly, source) that both terms are popular in political discourse, and are mostly used interchangeably, the difference being autocracy referring to the amount of people who run the government. I believe that is the only sensible and realistic thing we can do at this juncture.

Open to any more ideas though. Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 04:16, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I thought you said that "dictatorship" should only apply to a government ruled by one person, and exclude those ruled by a small group? Specifically, you said "not only is [the definition that includes oligarchies] quite fringe (i don't hear of a group of leaders being called a dictatorship often), it was not sourced." By now saying that military dictatorships and party dictatorships are those ruled, respectively, by military officials and party leaders (plural, as opposed to singular), and also saying "...the difference being autocracy referring to the amount of people who run the government", one could interpret that as endorsing the looser definition. Or maybe I'm just overthinking things. ZFT (talk) 07:49, 4 July 2026 (UTC)