" Second, i't be easier if you could use technical terms instead of 'in disguise of Liberal Democrats', 'mild authoritarian rules', i don't know what to decipher out of them; what kind of regime are you talkin about when you say 'mild authoritative rules??' " Look just as there are functioning democracies and dysfunctional democracies, the governmnets in non-democarcies (not undemocratic) nations vary too. You can have Turkmeinistan's autoritarian ruler, and you can have liberal-autocrat of Pakistan. You can have a dictator as Idi Amin or you can have a mild-authritarian ruler like Lee. You cannot just put all the non-democacies in one group. You have to analyze the governmnets there.. and that's when all those prefixes come in. " provide me with literature here (cause no where have i read greece is a democracy because of economic development. i will explain in another post why it is a democracy). " Please refer to Balkan Ghosts by Rudyard Kipling.. oops, Robert Kaplan. I'll love to read your version too. Although Greece was democarcy, there was a wide spread corruption and the economic benifit was not reaching to the masses equally. (I admit my wrong chocie of word.. developmnet should have been replaced with economic benifits for the masses). Also you saw the rise of hypernationalism..now Greece has finally put an end to those, it is embarking on the liberal democratic path and that's what I meant. TUrkey is a military democracy. Refer to any book on Turkey or the Turkish Constitution. Its founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was from a military background, so he trusted the military more than the civilian governmnet. So even today, the Turkish military can intervene in politics and replace the civilian govt. if it feels the governmnet is threatening the national unity of Turkey. Its everywhere. Any book on latest political development there should give you an idae of Turkish Politics.