Class notes
DAT WEEK 3
- Course
- Institution
Lecture notes of 7 pages for the course Democracies, autocracies and transitions at UvA (Notes for week 3)
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
rahmahossam166
Content preview
Week 3 readingsHybrid regimes
Reading 1: ‘Elections Without Democracy: The Rise of Competitive
Authoritarianism’ - Steven Levitsky, Lucan A. Way
- Recent academic writings have produced different labels for “hybrid regimes’ =
semidemocracy, virtual democracy, electoral democracy, pseudemocracy, illiberal
democracy, semi-authoritarianism, soft authoritarianism, electoral authoritarianism and
Freedom House’s Partly Free.
- However, this suffers from two important weaknesses
1. Democratising bias = They often treat mixed regimes as partial or
"diminished" forms of democracy or as undergoing prolonged transitions. This
bias fails to acknowledge the reality that these regimes may not be moving
towards democracy but rather represent a specific type of regime in themselves.
2. The terms "semidemocratic," "semi-authoritarian," and "Partly Free" are often
used as residual categories to describe hybrid regimes. However, these terms
tend to overlook important differences among regime types. For example, in the
early 1990s, El Salvador, Latvia, and Ukraine were all categorised as hybrid
regimes and received a combined political rights and civil liberties score of six or
"Partly Free" from Freedom House BUT these regimes differed in fundamental
ways.
- In Latvia, the absence of citizenship rights for people of Russian descent
was the main undemocratic feature.
- In El Salvador, substantial human rights violations and the absence of
civilian control over the military were the main undemocratic features.
- Ukraine had universal citizenship rights and a civilian-controlled military,
but civil liberties were frequently violated and incumbents routinely
abused or manipulated democratic procedures.
- Therefore, although these cases could be categorised as "hybrid,"
"semidemocratic," or "partly free," it is important to recognize the crucial
differences among them = Different mixes of authoritarian and democratic
features have distinct historical roots, and they may have different
implications for economic performance, human rights, and the prospects
for democracy.
DEFINING COMPETITIVE AUTHORITARIANISM
- This refers to a type of "hybrid" regime where formal democratic institutions are seen as
the main source of political authority. However, incumbents in these regimes frequently
violate democratic rules to such an extent that the regime fails to meet minimum
standards for democracy = Executives and legislatures are chosen through elections
, that are free and fair, the right to vote, political rights and civil liberties, including freedom
of the press, freedom of association, and freedom to criticise the government without
reprisal, are broadly protected and elected authorities possess real authority to govern
- Examples of competitive authoritarian regimes include Croatia under Franjo Tudjman,
Serbia under Slobodan Miloševiæ, and Russia under Vladimir Putin. (these would be
better described as a diminished form of authoritarianism).
- CA must be distinguished from unstable, ineffective or flawed types of regimes that meet
basic standards of democracy, this includes what Guillermo O’Donnell has called
‘delegative democracies’
- Delegative democracies are characterised by low levels of horizontal
accountability and powerful, plebiscitarian ( a type of vote to change the
constitution or government of a country), and occasionally abusive executives.
- These regimes meet minimum standards for democracy but lack checks and
balances.
- Examples of delegative democracies include Argentina and Brazil in the early
1990s. However, Peru after Fujimori's 1992 presidential self-coup is not
considered a delegative democracy.
- These regimes are characterised by a combination of democratic and authoritarian
features, with incumbents often abusing state resources, manipulating electoral results,
and suppressing opposition = so like bribery, co-option, etc.
- Even though their democratic institutions are flawed, both authoritarian incumbents and
their opponents must take them seriously.
- Competitive authoritarianism is different from ‘façade’ electoral regimes
- Façade electoral regimes refer to regimes in which electoral institutions exist but
do not yield meaningful contestation for power. These regimes may have
elections, but they lack genuine competition and opposition forces are unable to
challenge the ruling party effectively.
- Examples of such regimes include Egypt, Singapore, and Uzbekistan in the
1990s.
- In these regimes, democratic rules serve to legitimise the existing autocratic
leadership rather than provide a genuine avenue for democratic contestation.
FOUR ARENAS OF DEMOCRATIC CONTESTATION
1. Electoral Arena: In competitive authoritarian regimes, the electoral arena is the most
important arena of contestation. However, elections in these regimes are either
non-existent or not seriously contested. Opposition parties are often banned or
disqualified, and independent observers are prevented from verifying results (creates
widespread opportunities for vote stealing).
- For example, the Kazakh president Nazarbayev was reelected in 1999 with 80%
of the vote and in Uzbekistan, President Karimov was reelected in 2000 with 92%
of the vote. (As a rule of thumb, regimes in which presidents are reelected with
more than 70 percent of the vote can generally be considered noncompetitive.)
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller rahmahossam166. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $3.75. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
67474 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now