Encyclopedia of Opinion

Question: Is theocracy good?
Position‹2 of 3›: No, there many problems with theocracies
Argument1 of 3›: Theocracies are dictatorships

In a theocracy, rules are dictators and the ruling elite cannot be challenged because it is God’s word.

The argument

The problem identified here is not that religious rulers are worse people, but that a theocracy misplaces responsibility for what the government does. If the government are supposedly only acting on God's behalf, then anything they do wrong has to be God's fault and not their own fault. Authority claimed on that basis arrives with a defence already attached: an unpopular or damaging policy can be presented as an instruction received rather than a decision taken, and the officials who made it are not, on their own account, its authors. That is what makes the arrangement particularly dangerous. Accountability requires that particular people can be identified as responsible and made to answer for their choices. Where responsibility has been transferred to a source that cannot be questioned, summoned, or removed from office, it becomes difficult or impossible to hold the government to account. The ordinary mechanisms — argument, opposition, replacing the people in charge — all presuppose that those people are the ones who decided, and the theocratic claim denies exactly that. A government that cannot be held to account has no check upon it, which is what can turn theocracies into dictatorships or tyrannies. Nothing further is required for the transformation, because the absence of accountability is sufficient on its own: there is no point at which a ruler can be compelled to stop. How far the claim is pressed depends on the philosophy which declares why leaders are in power, but policies in such a system can be structured in a way that indicates God is the one declaring that a society follow new rules, instead of the people who came up with the idea in the first place. The rule then presents itself as revelation rather than as legislation — and a rule presented that way is not one that citizens are in any position to contest.

Premises

[P1]In a theocracy, rulers claim to act on God's behalf, so their decisions are attributed to divine will rather than their own judgment. [P2] When authority is framed as divine, citizens cannot meaningfully challenge or hold leaders accountable for wrongdoing. [P3] Unaccountable rule that insulates leaders from criticism is the defining feature of dictatorship or tyranny. [C] Therefore, theocracies tend to become dictatorships, which is a serious problem with them.

Counter-arguments

A lack of information is common in countries that have a strong religious background, not just theocracies. For instance, the silence of the Catholic church when priests were abusing children or the calls to terrorism (or to fund terrorist activities) that are done in the name of God.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] This is not unique to theocracies.