| Part of the Politics series |
| Basic forms of government |
|---|
| List of countries by system of government |
 Politics portal |
| Part of the Politics series |
| Democracy |
|---|
|
Politics portal |
Guided democracy, also called managed democracy,[1] is a formally democratic government that functions as a de facto authoritarian government or, in some cases, as an autocratic government. Such hybrid regimes are legitimized by elections, but do not change the state's policies, motives, and goals.[2] The concept is also related to semi-democracy, also known as anocracy.
In a guided democracy, the government controls elections such that the people can exercise democratic rights without truly changing public policy. While they follow basic democratic principles, there can be major deviations towards authoritarianism. Under managed democracy, the state's continuous use of propaganda techniques prevents the electorate from having a significant impact on policy.[3]
After World War II, the term was used in Indonesia for the approach to government under the Sukarno administration from 1959 to 1966. It is today widely employed in Russia, where it was introduced into common practice by Kremlin theorists, in particular Gleb Pavlovsky.[4]
The Sanacja regime that governed interwar Poland from 1926 to 1939 is considered an example of guided democracy.[5][6] The regime retained much of the structures and institutions of Polish parliamentary democracy, even though Józef Piłsudski exercised such large influence on the government that he "assumed some of the postures of a dictator".[5][6] The opposition sat in the parliament and local governments, and political parties were allowed to function legally.[6] Polish historian Andrzej Chojnowski notes that elections under Piłsudski's regime were still organised along the principles of parliamentary democracy,[6] and the Sanacja regime was genuinely popular as the opposition parties were blamed for failing to prevent the Great Depression.[7] While the actions of the opposition were hampered, repressions were rare and only two parties were banned: Camp of Great Poland and National Radical Camp.[6][8]
Singapore is also frequently mentioned in the context of guided democracy, with the governing People's Action Party (PAP) often cited as an example. Proponents of this view point to the PAP's dominant position in parliament, which they argue limits effective political competition. Additionally, they raise concerns about restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly, which they see as hindering the ability of opposition voices to gain traction. However, supporters of the PAP counter that its sustained electoral success reflects broad public approval for its governance, emphasizing the party's focus on economic development, social stability, and national unity. They further argue that Singapore's specific circumstances, including its diverse ethnic makeup and historical vulnerability, necessitate a strong and stable government, which the PAP's model is said to provide. The debate surrounding Singapore's political system highlights the complexities of defining and evaluating "guided democracy" in the context of individual countries.