Recep Tayyip Erdogan Quotes

Establishing a stable democracy is a two stage process. First you get rid of the old regime, then you build a durable democratic replacement. Because the first stage is dramatic, many people think the game is over when the dictator is gone. But the second stage is more difficult. There are many examples of broad coalitions coming together to oust dictators but relatively few of them stayed together and agreed on what a new regime should look like.

You can't keep a democracy going in a functional and constructive way if only 10 percent of the people you represent think your institution is functioning in an acceptable way. That's just not viable.

A fitting external security environment could also play an important role in promoting social consensus and institutionalization towards democratization.

These days there are not enough of such intermediary groups, between the state and the individual, with the result that political leaders are often unduly guided by opinion polls.

It is essential that policy instruments be developed that would firmly establish democratization on the basis of social consensus and enable transformation on stable grounds.

A democratic society cannot tolerate mob rule.

Democracy and freedom … are based on democratic institutions, the rule of law, and a civil society. None of these Arab states have any of these to any significant degree.

The Catalan institutions and political parties have to be consistent, because they have the democratic legitimacy of the ballot box and they can't pass certain responsibilities on to civil society.

The tragedy of the modern democracies is that they have not yet succeeded in realizing democracy.

The peaceful transfer of authority is rare in history yet common in our country.

The peaceful path out of totalitarianism has never been tested.

Africa must develop a genuine culture of alternation and opposition, without which democracy in any country, including the West, cannot exist.

Institutions purely democratic must, sooner or later, destroy liberty, or civilization, or both.

There is no provision for judicial review. It is a strangely undemocratic way to bring democracy to the rest of the world.

Unless the military of a fledgling democracy becomes Westernized, there democracy will not long last.

Is military occupation likely to be the midwife of democracy?

You do not turn a country with no democratic tradition into a democracy by just having an election. You must also have democratic institutions like the rule of law.

Roosevelt understood that democracy requires persuasion and consent

Because authoritarian regimes lack popular legitimacy, they often manipulate and deepen communal cleavages in order to divide potential opponents and generate support among favored groups. So when democratization occurs, the pent up distrust and animosity often explode.

The vitality of democracy in the 1960s, raised questions about the governability of democracy in the 1970s.

Democracy is messy, clearly, but it has one key factor, which is an orderly transfer of power.

So benevolent, enlightened, wise dictators are the most efficient form of government. The problem is what comes afterwards, right?

To take over a government through military force would create instability, and it would not last for long. I do not want to leave a legacy of having taken over the government through military means. It has never occurred to me to have a coup d'etat.

My position on democracy is really clear. Any attempt to overthrow the country is a betrayal to our unity and is treason.

The PRI can afford to push democratization; it can afford to be generous because it has a very good chance of winning in clean elections.