PS 1400 Unit 2 Terms Practice

Comparative Politics Unit 2 Terms

• Authoritarianism (general definitions)

The control over the government by a small set group of people 

A political system in which a small group of individuals exercises power; no rights to choose leaders. Limit other public rights and freedoms.

• Selectorate Theory (winning coalition, selectorate, public vs private goods)

Selectorate: the people who play a role in selecting the leader in office (ex: in America, the selectorate are U.S. citizens who are above 18 and eligible for voting)

Winning coalition: the members of the more favored political party that need to be satisfied to stay loyal to the leader

The subset of the selectorate whose support is needed for a leader to stay in power

Public goods: goods that everyone has access to

Private goods: goods that only the winning coalition receives

Selectorate theory: in order to ensure loyalty from the winning coalition, a leader must provide goods to the winning coalition to keep them satisfied so that they do not go vote for someone else

• Categorical varieties of non-democracy (personalistic, party, military, monarchy, as well as other the text identifies)

Personalistic regime: when an authoritarian regime is controlled / led by one leader, has no autonomous institutions

Party-based regime: a single party controls and governs the authoritarian regime, power is also held in institutions

Military regime: the military leaders / officers control and govern the regime, hold military power and drive policy decisions

Monarchy: Royal descent confers policy making power, access to political office, and control of the military. Power is passed down through generations of the royal family

• Messy middle regimes

Also called electoral autocracy, where the concept of elections from democracy is retained in an authoritarian regime, however, leaders or candidates will often “tilt the playing field” and try to gain unfair advantages in order to win an election.

• Electoral autocracies vs. Illiberal democracies as two types of hybrid regimes

Electoral Autocracy: “I’ll do as I please to win an election” - taking unfair advantages or tilting the playing field, doing no matter what to win an election. Type of hybrid regime

Illiberal Democracy: “I’ll win an election and then do as I please” - winning an election fairly (like a democracy) but then slowly doing things out of order after gaining position in office. Type of hybrid regime

• How the uncertainty of elections is managed in autocracies (campaign advantages, electoral laws, barriers to candidate entry, etc)

Campaign advantages: Factors that give one candidate an edge over others in elections, such as funding, media coverage, and established networks.

Electoral laws: rules to how votes are counted and how electoral processes are conducted, impacting representation in democracies

Barriers to candidate entry: obstacles that prevent opposition candidates from running in elections, including strict registration requirements, legal challenges, and intimidation tactics

• Modernization theory reversed

Modernization theory suggests that as countries become wealthier, they become more democratic. The reverse, in many cases, is also true. Poorer countries tend to be more authoritarian, or further away from democratic.

• A general theory of autocratic survival

Need to establish a legitimizing basis to ensure loyalty in an authoritarian regime, also may need to resort to repression or at least suggest that you will go to those means, even if you don’t actually do that frequently. Also need co-optation, giving people benefits and goods in exchange for their loyalty, a stake in the survival

• 1. Ordinary citizens whose non-compliance can take form of rebellion, protests

• 2. Oppositional elites who organize resistance

• 3. Splits in ruling elite → the individuals in charge of the particular party are all of a sudden tenuous cooperation with each other can split apart and destabilize the regime, causing it to collapse

• Three Pillars of survival theory (know the distinct pillars and illustrate each)

Stated above. Not sure if these terms are vastly different → Legitimation, Co-Optation, and Repression

• the “legitimizing idea” - “explain to me why you deserve your power!”

An authoritarian leader needs to prove they are legitimate (why they deserve their power) in order for citizens to stay loyal to them and not question their authority

• The strategic logic of personality cults

Personality cults involve leaders showing themselves off in a heroic or idealized way to gain obedience and legitimacy from citizens, even the most ridiculous personality cults can serve a strategic purpose 

• Repression - what it is, why it works

Repression is acts or threats of violence, and it works because it gets citizens to be loyal and allows for authoritarian leaders to get away with taking power from institutions because citizens do not want to disobey. This helps get rid of protests and rebellion

• The costs of repression

Costly because people can rebel, elites can come together and overthrow the government

• Shifts in the mechanics of repression in the 21st century

Repression is becoming less common like with straight up violence. Instead they find other ways to keep their power, like suppressing opposition and tilting the playing field in elections, also co-optation

• Co-optation – defined

Giving a stake in the survival of an authoritarian regime. The leader must ensure loyalty from citizens by giving them goods or benefits. If they were to vote for someone else or overthrow, they would lose those benefits that are essential tot them. An example is good schooling or their apartment

• Co-opting regime insiders with institutions, commitment problems

Commitment problems is an issue because as you have more citizens, you cannot give away too many resources to people, that would be a major loss

Co-opting regime insiders is effective …. forgot what it does

• Co-opting opposition elites and citizens with elections

Co-opting opposition elites and citizens with elections helps suppress opposition in elections and ensures loyalty from citizens, allowing for the survival of an autocratic regime

• military coup d’etat as source of most autocracies post WWII

Post WWII, especially in the Cold War, military coup d’etats were effective to increase authoritarianism, but over time, they declined especially after WWI and WWII. Leaders started to resort to gaining advantages in elections, suppressing opposition, co-optation, etc

• recent patterns in frequency of coups

Recently have declined 

• how democracies die in the 21st century - “death by a thousand cuts” metaphor

Democracies erode gradually, they backslide at first by getting away from democratic norms, and eventually they autocratize

• democratic backsliding vs. autocratization

Democratic backsliding: gradual erosion of democratic norms, but still a democracy, just weakened / strained

Autocratization: extreme democratic backsliding to an extent where a regime is no longer democratic and reverted back to authoritarian

• general and specific elements of autocratization, including Haggard and Kaufman’s model

Polarization, incrementalism, weakened institutions

• explanations of coup’s decline, and autocratization’s increase (Cold War, risk, etc)

Military coups were present in the Cold War and were effective in increasing authoritarianism. I don’t know why they were risky. Post WWI and WWII, after Huntington’s reverse waves of democracy in the 1970’s, presence of military coups declined

• compatibility of populism with autocratization

Populism: conflict between the regular people and the elites

Compatible with autocratization because the elites will try to make the government corrupt and weaken the strength of institutions, and claim they are the only ones who can resist corruption. Autocratization increases as democracy fades

• the globalization of autocratization

Autocratization become common in other countries especially during Samuel Huntington’s reverse waves of democracy post WWI and WWII in the 1970s

• what these trends imply about the consolidation of democracy

These trends imply that authoritarian persistence, selectorate theory, legitimacy, and weak institutions hinder democratic consolidation. Factors like elite survival and control of resources slow the transition to stable democracies.

• China as a “party autocracy”

No elections held, so no elections to lose. Clever mix of co-optation, repression, and highly adaptable institutions

• China vs. Mexico under the PRI regarding “camouflaged” nature

China made no attempt to camouflage its single-party authoritarian regime, whereas Mexico under the PRI camouflaged its authoritarian regime through democratic institutions and elections

• Party-state / duplication / parallel organization

In China, the Communist Party and state institutions overlap, with the same people holding roles in both. Power flows from the top down

• Methods of ‘institutionalization’ in the CCP

Norm-bound succession (leaders serve two consecutive terms), meritocracy (bureaucrats are promoted based on performance), separation of party and business (CCP does not directly manage business enterprise), selective repression

• How party-regimes collapse, emphasis on co-optation and performance legitimacy

Party-regimes collapse from:

Authoritarian leaders will co-opt opposition elites and citizens in elections to gain loyalty and undermine any genuine oppression, making it seem like a genuine, competitive election is occurring to be seen as a legitimate holder of power. They also collapse because of the strategic logic of personality cults that some authoritarian leaders will employ. For example, many will try to be seen as heroic or idealized by gaining some sort of flattery so that citizens see the leader as legitimate, and they can get away with taking away power from institutions. Executive aggrandizement is also highly to blame for party-regimes collapsing.

• Transformation of repression and co-optation in China

While repression used to be highly effective, now it is used less and less. In China, rather than repressing, leaders such as Xi Jinping for instance have tilted the playing field in elections and taken power from institutions. Leaders like him also co-opted opposition elites and citizens in elections to get rid of any opposition and remain in power, but seen legitimately because of elections still occurring. By camouflaging authoritarianism with democratic norms such as elections and institutions, citizens have a limited amount of say in the government while leaders take a lot of control. These tilts or unfair advantages have taken over repression

• China’s economic trends (over the last several decades, and the last several years)

Post-Mao China has sustained as a personalist autocracy with political stability and high levels of economic grwoth

• Xi Jingping’s impact on norm succession, institutionalization

Got rid of norm bound succession where a leader can be in office for two consecutive terms so he is likely to be in office for the rest of his life. Also took power from institutions. 

• China as a personalist autocracy

Xi Jinping transitioned China from a single party regime to a personalist autocracy by taking power away from institutions, co-opting elites, still holding elections to retain legitimacy, and repressing when needed (but not commonly, sometimes just offering the threat of it). Also fact check this lol

• Head of state vs. Head of Government

Symbol of nation vs. running the government

• Formal, partisan, and informal powers 

Formal powers are institutionalized by law, while partisan and informal powers are derived from party affiliation and personal connections

Formal: Powers possessed as a function of their constitutional or legal position

Partisan: Powers held by virtue of the executive’s leverage or power over members of a political party

Informal: Powers not “official” but based on custom, convention, or other sources of influence

• Presidential systems: key traits, advantages and disadvantages

Forms of executive power defined by separate elections, and separate survival of executive and legislative branches. Difficult for single person to dominate, but then electoral authority is fragmented

• "Separate" survival and elections

The survival of different leaders that people elect are independent of each other. For example, in a US election you can vote for leaders from different regimes, and they can survive independently of each other despite being from different parties. You could have a Republican President but have a Democratic member in the House of Representatives, for instance, and you can vote for people from different parties. 

• The "European Model" of democracy

Emphasizes parliamentary systems, multi-party systems, and a focus on rights and freedoms.

• “government” in a parliamentary system

Formed by the party or coalition with a majority in the legislature

• Parliamentary systems: key traits, advantages and disadvantages

Parliamentary systems combine executive and legislative powers, ensuring majority rule but possibly leading to instability

• Indirect election

Citizens appoint representatives to vote or select leaders in an election

• Cabinets and ministerial portfolios

Groups of people in the parliament responsible for a discipline, such as finance, healthcare, education, etc.

Groups of ministers appointed to manage different areas of government

• Prime ministers question time

Once a week question time where people will ask questions about how the prime minister is running the government in a parliament

• Vote of confidence

A government receives majority support from parliament; a formal expression of support

• Snap election

Election occurring before regular expiration

• Shadow cabinets

Member of the cabinet that doesn't actually have the position and is just supposed to monitor the actual person in that position

An informal group of opposition party members of parliament who have a responsibility for understanding everything that is going on in a particular ministry

• Single party majority government (features and consequences)

Government is run based on what the party wants, leaders must go along with what the majority wants

• Party discipline

Ensuring that members of political party vote and act in alignment with the party’s policies and decisions

• Coalitions (features and consequences)

Temporary but formal agreement between parties to pool their votes together and form a government

• Models of coalition formation (minimum winning, minimum connected, etc)

Formed with the minimum number of parties needed to achieve a majority or with the most ideologically compatible partners.

• Grand Coalitions

Two largest centrist parties combine together to be stronger, especially when neither of these seem to be more dominant, they can handle threats better as a cohesive unit

• Semi-presidential systems

System combining a president with a prime minister, balancing executive power

The practice of authoritarian leaders promoting a strong, often worshipful image of themselves to maintain control → strategic logic of personality cults