Political science homework

POL 190 Notes on Regimes: Non-Democracies 1

POL 190 Non-Democratic Regimes Overview/Summary

• Basic Features of Non-Democratic Regimes • Variants/Types of Non-Democratic Regimes and their Ideologies

I. What are ‘Authoritarian’ or Non-Democratic regimes? Why should we study them?

• Also called dictatorships, authoritarian, or autocratic regimes. Oldest forms of government • Basic defining feature: rule by one person (monarch, dictator), or by a small group (elite,

party leaders, military leaders) Why study non-democratic regimes?

• Still some remaining in the world today: powerful, wealthy • A danger to democracy as a form of government • Knowledge of their how they operate is useful for understanding prospects for conflict, and for

change II. How do Non-democratic regimes differ from democratic ones? • Greater reliance on coercion/use of force to maintain order, punish dissent • The selection of leadership is not open to popular choice • Human rights abused and freedoms are generally curtailed • Policy made without public knowledge or input, or approval • Popular participation is limited, discouraged or punished (except when it is channeled into

“approved” activities that validate the government and rulers) III. What are the main variants of non-democratic regimes? What are their defining qualities? Scholars have identified 6 basic types: they vary in terms of:

• The level of coercion or force used to control society • The number of players/leaders in the governing elite

Hybrid regimes or ‘quasi democracies’: e.g. ‘one-party dominant regimes’. Embrace the label ‘democratic’, but systematic efforts to invalidate the practice/outcome of democracy

• May have constitutions, rights, free press; but the same party always wins in rigged elections and obstacles exist to competition/opposition/dissent (e.g. Singapore, Malaysia, Mexico until 2000, Venezuela under Chavez? Russia under Putin?)

Theocracy

• Religious doctrine, clergy defines regime; may tolerate some limited dissent/choice Totalitarian regimes: 2 variants, both led by ‘mass parties’ that argue that elite rule and ‘total control’ is necessary for the transformation of society

• Communist regimes: “total” state control of everyday life, identities; relies heavily on an ‘extreme left’ ideology based on economic/historical claims: total state ownership of the economy

• Fascist regimes: “total” state control of everyday life, identities; relies heavily on an ‘extreme right’ ideology based on racism, cultural ‘purity’ and exclusion, nationalism

Modernizing Authoritarian Regimes: Military Dictatorships

• Military officer/s control the state: may or may not justify themselves. Ruling ideology: nationalism, modernizing authoritarianism

Absolute Monarchies

• Rule by single family, ruling via claim to hereditary authority (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Gulf states, Brunei). Ruling ideology: tradition; infallibility of ruling family; special connection/role of monarch

POL 190 Notes on Regimes: Non-Democracies 2

Personalistic Dictatorships

• A single individual rules the regime for personal/family gain. Usually non-ideological. May use the military for support, or may rely on family members or create a party of followers; main feature is the development of non-ideological personality cult and ‘patrimonial rule’ e.g. Zaire under Mobutu; Zimbabwe under Mugabe; Haiti under the Duvaliers; Nicaragua under the Somozas

IV. Are there General Similarities among Non-Democratic Regimes? Concentrated Power by Leaders

Virtually all non-democratic regimes recognize one supreme leader (although that individual may lead a larger governing group)

Formal institutions exist and may limit the power of supreme leader vis-à-vis other leaders, but there are few restrictions on the leading group’s power over society

Leaders may ‘institutionalize’ politics in order to stabilize competition, conflict All non-democratic regimes have problems of succession (selection of leaders)

Important Role for the Military

A key player in all authoritarian regimes: they rely on repression; military provides it. BUT not all regimes with a role for the military is a military regime

Monitoring/Spy networks — military and other government groups monitor and gather intelligence on who is opposed to the regime

Existence of a Legislatures and a Judiciary: A Legitimizing but not governing role Legislatures and judicial institutions may exist in non-democracies But are restricted in what they can say and do

Goal: attempt by elites/leaders to gain legitimacy Most likely when regime more institutionalized: legislatures may be allowed to operate, but there

are limitations on what they can do Authoritarian regimes often allow some rule of law. This is enforced most regularly for nonpolitical

cases (criminal law): partially ensuring personal safety might lead to greater legitimacy. The judiciary often becomes corrupt

Role of the Bureaucracy All states require a bureaucracy: Question in non-democracies: How capable and independent is the bureaucracy?

• Usually strong, but not very independent of political elite/leaders • Personalistic regimes extensively undercut the bureaucracy: result is corruption • In Military regimes, leaders may ‘manage’ a civilian-led bureaucracy • Bureaucrats tend to become more corrupt as their autonomy wanes

Elections, Parties, Civil Society organizations Many non-democracies create institutions that superficially resemble elections, parties, and interest groups, BUT

• There are significant differences from democratic parties/elections: representatives may be powerless or pre-selected to support the regime.

• Elections may be restricted or heavily corrupt • The goal of the regime: bolster legitimacy and provide ‘safe’ participation outlets

Importance of Patron-Client relationships Non-democracies are characterized by a extensive corruption via ‘patron-client’ ties: networks that link the ruling elites/leaders to groups and individuals in society. Rulers divide people into those with (and without) access to jobs, connections, resources, etc.

POL 190 Notes on Regimes: Non-Democracies 3

Access to resources, power, influence can only come through a ‘patron’. Creates conditions for ‘divide and rule’, but it also makes the stability of the regime dependent on the supply of resources.

Patron-client relations are more powerful when there are weak formal institutions (e.g., legislatures, parties, interest groups)

Patron-client ties discourage the organization of ‘civil society’ groups based on collective interests. This undermines the possibility of rebellion or any organized effort to change the system