Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Lecture 23: Authoritarian Politics

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Lecture 23: Authoritarian Politics"— Presentation transcript:

1 Lecture 23: Authoritarian Politics
SOSC 152

2 Introduction: Authoritarian Politics
A. 1) TYPES of Regimes: 2) Transitions from Authoritarianism B. Institutional CHARACTERISTICS C. Role of IDEOLOGY D. International Characteristics E. Role of PARTICIPATION

3 A1. TYPES of Authoritarian Regime
More DIFFICULT to differentiate among these regimes more than democratic and socialist. 1. African ONE‑PARTY systems Developed from NATIONALIST MOVEMENT Effort to mobilize and unite multi-ethnic groups around single national identity. Post‑revolution, HIGHLY PERSONALIZED REGIMES, single dictator as party or movement leader. INSTABILITY invites military takeover as military and party only two modern institutions.

4 A1. TYPES of Authoritarian Regime (cont’d)
2. PRAETORIAN MILITARY DICTATORSHIP often established due to fear of Marxist challenge. Middle class gives up power to military to protect their interests. Example of Chile - where Pinochet overthrew elected Marxist President Allende. In Central America (Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras), powerful military as PROTECTOR OF "'HACIENDA"" or plantation economy, must suppress Indian plantation workers, eventually dominates society and polity. Prateorianism also justified by PARTICIPATION CRISIS, where modernization and demand for political participation greater than institutions can manage, need for military takeover.

5 A1. TYPES of Authoritarian Regime (cont’d)
3. BUREAUCRATIC AUTHORITARIANISM RESULT OF MODERNIZATION, creating powerful alliance between foreign capital, technologically advanced military, and modern technocratic elite. Challenges argument that MODERNIZATION = DEMOCRACY BRAZIL and ARGENTINA in 1960s and 1970s seen as best examples, not backward states but not industrialized democratic ones. SEE FIGURE in next slide

East Asian Modernization

7 A1. TYPES of Authoritarian Regime (cont’d)
4. CORPORATIST Based on agreement between middle class, military, central state administration and unions to work together to avoid conflict and competition. Monopolies given to specific functional constituencies which send negotiators to the table to bargain on behalf of social interests. Spain under Franco, Portugal under Salazar, non-democratic until 1975 Often applied more broadly without military Hong Kong as a variant of this system.

8 A1. TYPES of Authoritarian Regime (cont’d)
5. MILITARY RADICAL MILITARY ELITES who adopt leftist policies to resolve social inequalities and preempt role of Marxist parties. LIMITED LINKS to any social class, powerful autonomous state, but also weakened due to lack of social base. Nasser's Egypt, Peru under Alvarez, Nicaragua under Sandinista’s, maybe Castro's Cuba (1959‑1975).

9 A1. TYPES of Authoritarian Regime (cont’d)
6. Theocracy Highly motivated by Islamic Fundamentalist Ideology, takeover by religious elites in response to failure of Westernization and/or socialism. Power base may also be merchants, radical students. Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan What happened to secular state? challenge to Weber

10 A1. TYPES of Authoritarian Regime (cont’d)
7. East Asian MILITARY MODERNIZERS DEVELOPMENTALIST REGIME, with military elites keeping bureaucrats honest, as both try to promote economic development. STRONG REPRESSION of working class to increase capital accumulation. (high rates of savings) World bank "ENLIGHTENED" BUREAUCRATS responsible for ‘PICKING WINNING SECTORS” for investment. Import‑substitution industrialization combined with export‑led growth. - ISI South Korea, Taiwan. People also applied it to Indonesia and Thailand, but too corrupt.

11 A2 Transitional Systems and Paths from Authoritarianism
1975 – “Third Wave of Democracy” Some societies shift between MILITARY DICTATORSHIP and DEMOCRACY with low level of institutionalization of democratic processes; But HOW to make final transition to relatively stable democracy? LIBERALIZATION of political system, redefining and extending of rights protecting citizens from states, decreases citizens’ calculations of risks of political action. Lowers cost of political action and increases possibility of collective action. Strategies of citizens CHANGE in light of liberalization.

12 A2 Transitional Systems and Paths from Authoritarianism (cont’d)
SPLIT within the ruling elite between “HARD” and “SOFT” liners offers chance for civilian leaders to press military to "SURRENDER POWER” and avoid bloodshed and overthrow. Need to promise NO REVENGE AGAINST MILITARY for crimes committed against citizens. Critical ability of military and civilians to negotiate a “PACT”. This literature draws mostly on LATIN AMERICA, less on East Asia. In South Korea Kwangju uprising, democratic forces broke the "pact" and charged military leaders with corruption. (revenge for Kwangju massacre) In Taiwan, February 28, 1947 mass executions never prosecuted.

NON‑MARXIST PARTY~ military, and bureaucracy Often seen as HIGHLY DEINSTITUTIONALIZED, with power shifts among institutions. Single Leaders may shift support among institutions to keep themselves in power, “POLITICS OF SURVIVAL” but keeps regime weak. Major role is to AVOID CONFLICT. Key issue for STRENGTH OF STATE, (strong versus weak) is ability of centre to control local elites and get them to implement policies. But lack of deep revolution, class purge, “REVOLUTIONARY BREAKTHROUGH” and penetration of society, so regime likely to be WEAK STATE. Military tends to be most POWERFUL INSTITUTION.

14 C. Role of IDEOLOGY Tend to be NON‑IDEOLOGICAL REGIMES (not true for theocracy) NATIONALISM may be important force for resisting external pressures. Military radicals driven by SOCIAL JUSTICE, while developmentalist military driven by NATIONALISM, desire to catch up. LACK OF IDEOLOGY allows systems to shift quickly, but also means little fixed policy directions Weakens state power

Originally may emerge from anti-colonial struggle (African one‑party system) Need to shift from import-substitution industrialization (ISI) to export-led growth (ELG), difficult due to POWER OF DOMESTIC INTERESTS who resist foreign investment which would threaten inefficient factories built up over years of ISI and anti‑import policies. Exports need undervalued currency which harms imports of consumer goods favoured by middle and ruling class. Strong government/state to make shift Since mid‑1970s (1975), enormous global pressure for shift to democracy, HUNTINGTON’S “WAVE OF DEMOCRACY” efforts of US and multilateral institutions under “Washington Concensus” to improve governnance

Regimes want to “DEPOLITICIZE” SOCIETY and “DEMOBILIZE” SOCIETY, Slow down social mobilization due to modernization. LIMITED ROLE FOR MIDDLE CLASS which gives up political freedom for economic security. But middle class may be IMPORTANT allies of state power, not challengers. Some social classes, such as landlords, seen as target of radical military. Little real class support makes the state weak as well.

Download ppt "Lecture 23: Authoritarian Politics"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google