Identity, procedures and performance: how authoritarian regimes legitimize their rule
| Autor: | Christian von Soest, Julia Grauvogel |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2017 |
| Předmět: |
021110 strategic
defence & security studies Sociology and Political Science media_common.quotation_subject 05 social sciences Authoritarianism 0211 other engineering and technologies Identity (social science) 02 engineering and technology 0506 political science Extant taxon Personalism Legitimation Political economy Political science Law Political Science and International Relations 050602 political science & public administration Ideology Welfare Legitimacy media_common |
| Zdroj: | Contemporary Politics. 23:287-305 |
| ISSN: | 1469-3631 1356-9775 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/13569775.2017.1304319 |
| Popis: | Constructing convincing legitimacy claims is important for securing the stability of authoritarian regimes. However, extant research has struggled to systematically analyse how authoritarians substantiate their right to rule. We analyse a novel data set on authoritarian regimes’ claims to legitimacy that is based on leading country experts’ assessments of 98 states for the period 1991–2010. This analysis provides key new insights into the inner workings and legitimation strategies of current non-democratic regimes. Closed authoritarian regimes predominately rely on identity-based legitimacy claims (foundational myth, ideology and personalism). In contrast, elections fundamentally change how authoritarian rulers relate to society. In their legitimacy claims, electoral authoritarian regimes focus on their ‘adequate’ procedures, thereby mimicking democracies. All regimes also stress their purported success in proving material welfare and security to their citizens. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
| Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje | K zobrazení výsledku je třeba se přihlásit. |