Political system

Last updated

In political science, a political system means the form of political organization that can be observed, recognised or otherwise declared by a society or state. [1]

Contents

It defines the process for making official government decisions. It usually comprizes the governmental legal and economic system, social and cultural system, and other state and government specific systems. However, this is a very simplified view of a much more complex system of categories involving the questions of who should have authority and what the government influence on its people and economy should be.

Along with a basic sociological and socio-anthropological classification, political systems can be classified on a social-cultural axis relative to the liberal values prevalent in the Western world, where the spectrum is represented as a continuum between political systems recognized as democracies, totalitarian regimes and, sitting between these two, authoritarian regimes, with a variety of hybrid regimes; [2] [3] and monarchies may be also included as a standalone entity or as a hybrid system of the main three. [4] [5]

Definition

According to David Easton, "A political system can be designated as the interactions through which values are authoritatively allocated for a society". [6] Political system refers broadly to the process by which laws are made and public resources allocated in a society, and to the relationships among those involved in making these decisions. [7]

Basic classification

Social anthropologists generally recognize several kinds of political systems, often differentiating between ones that they consider uncentralized and ones they consider centralized. [8]

Western socio-cultural paradigmatic-centric analysis

The sociological interest in political systems is figuring out who holds power within the relationship between the government and its people and how the government’s power is used. According to Yale professor Juan José Linz, there are three main types of political systems today: democracies, totalitarian regimes and, sitting between these two, authoritarian regimes (with hybrid regimes). [3] [10] Another modern classification system includes monarchies as a standalone entity or as a hybrid system of the main three. [4] Scholars generally refer to a dictatorship as either a form of authoritarianism or totalitarianism. [11] [12] [3] [13]

Democracy

Democracy (from Ancient Greek: δημοκρατία, romanized: dēmokratía, dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule') [14] is a system of government in which state power is vested in the people or the general population of a state. [15] [16] [17] Under a minimalist definition of democracy, rulers are elected through competitive elections while more expansive definitions link democracy to guarantees of civil liberties and human rights in addition to competitive elections. [18] [19] [17]

Authoritarianism

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo , and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law. [20] [21] Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government. [21] Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military. [22] [23] States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states. [24] [25] [26]

Totalitarian

Totalitarianism is a political system and a form of government that prohibits opposition political parties, disregards and outlaws the political claims of individual and group opposition to the state, and controls the public sphere and the private sphere of society. In the field of political science, totalitarianism is the extreme form of authoritarianism, wherein all socio-political power is held by a dictator, who also controls the national politics and the peoples of the nation with continual propaganda campaigns that are broadcast by state-controlled and by friendly private mass communications media. [27]

Monarchy

A monarchy is a form of government in which a person, the monarch, reigns as head of state for life or until abdication. The extend of the authority of the monarch may vary from restricted and largely symbolic (constitutional monarchy), to fully autocratic (absolute monarchy), and may have representational, executive, legislative, and judicial functions. [28]

The succession of monarchs has mostly been hereditary, often building dynasties. However, monarchies can also be elective and self-proclaimed. [29] Aristocrats, though not inherent to monarchies, often function as the pool of persons from which the monarch is chosen, and to fill the constituting institutions (e.g. diet and court), giving many monarchies oligarchic elements.

The political legitimacy of the inherited, elected or proclaimed monarchy has most often been based on claims of representation of people and land through some form of relation (e.g. kinship) and divine right or other achieved status.

Hybrid

A hybrid regime [lower-alpha 1] is a type of political system often created as a result of an incomplete democratic transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one (or vice versa). [lower-alpha 2] Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination of autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections. [lower-alpha 2] Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro-states. [47] [37] [48] Although these regimes experience civil unrest, they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time. [lower-alpha 2] There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War. [49] [50]

The term hybrid regime arises from a polymorphic view of political regimes that opposes the dichotomy of autocracy or democracy. [51] Modern scholarly analysis of hybrid regimes focuses attention on the decorative nature of democratic institutions (elections do not lead to a change of power, different media broadcast the government point of view and the opposition in parliament votes the same way as the ruling party, among others), [52] from which it is concluded that democratic backsliding, a transition to authoritarianism is the most prevalent basis of hybrid regimes. [lower-alpha 2] [53] Some scholars also contend that hybrid regimes may imitate a full dictatorship. [54] [55]

Marxist/Dialectical materialistic analysis

19th-century German-born philosopher Karl Marx analysed that the political systems of "all" state-societies are the dictatorship of one social class, vying for its interests against that of another one; with which class oppressing which other class being, in essence, determined by the developmental level of that society, and its repercussions implicated thereof, as the society progresses through the passage of time. In capitalist societies, this characterises as the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie or capitalist class, in which the economic and political system is designed to work in their interests collectively as a class, over those of the proletariat or working class .

Marx devised this theory by adapting his forerunner-contemporary Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's notion of dialectics into the framework of materialism.

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Scholars use a variety of terms to encompass the "grey zones" between full autocracies and full democracies. [30] Such terms include: competitive authoritarianism, semi-authoritarianism, hybrid authoritarianism, electoral authoritarianism, liberal autocracy, delegative democracy, illiberal democracy, guided democracy, semi-democracy, deficient democracy, defective democracy, and hybrid democracy. [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38]
  2. 1 2 3 4 "Some scholars argue that deficient democracies and deficient autocracies can be seen as examples of hybrid regimes, whereas others argue that hybrid regimes combine characteristics of both democratic and autocratic regimes." [32] Scholars also debate if these regimes are in transition or are inherently a stable political system. [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dictatorship</span> Form of government

A dictatorship is an autocratic form of government which is characterized by a leader, or a group of leaders, who hold governmental powers with few to no limitations. Politics in a dictatorship are controlled by a dictator, and they are facilitated through an inner circle of elites that includes advisers, generals, and other high-ranking officials. The dictator maintains control by influencing and appeasing the inner circle and repressing any opposition, which may include rival political parties, armed resistance, or disloyal members of the dictator's inner circle. Dictatorships can be formed by a military coup that overthrows the previous government through force or they can be formed by a self-coup in which elected leaders make their rule permanent. Dictatorships are authoritarian or totalitarian, and they can be classified as military dictatorships, one-party dictatorships, personalist dictatorships, or absolute monarchies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government</span> System or group governing an organized community

A government is the system or group of people governing an organized community, generally a state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of Indonesia</span>

The politics of Indonesia take place in the framework of a presidential representative democratic republic whereby the President of Indonesia is both head of state and head of government and of a multi-party system. Executive power is exercised by the government. Legislative power is vested in both the government and the bicameral People's Consultative Assembly. The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature.

Autocracy is a system of government in which absolute power is held by the ruler, known as an autocrat. It includes some forms of monarchy and all forms of dictatorship, while it is contrasted with democracy and feudalism. Various definitions of autocracy exist. They may restrict autocracy to cases where power is held by a single individual, or they may define autocracy in a way that includes a group of rulers who wield absolute power. The autocrat has total control over the exercise of civil liberties within the autocracy, choosing under what circumstances they may be exercised, if at all. Governments may also blend elements of autocracy and democracy, forming an anocracy. The concept of autocracy has been recognized in political philosophy since ancient times.

In politics, a regime is the form of government or the set of rules, cultural, or social norms, that regulate the operation of a government or institution and its interactions with society. The two broad categories of regimes are democratic and autocratic. Autocratic regimes can be further divided into types such as dictatorial, totalitarian, absolutist, monarchic, and oligarchic. A key similarity across all regimes is the presence of rulers and formal or informal institutions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratization</span> Society becoming more democratic

Democratization, or democratisation, is the structural government transition from an authoritarian government to a more democratic political regime, including substantive political changes moving in a democratic direction.

The term "illiberal democracy" describes a governing system that hides its "nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures". There is a lack of consensus among experts about the exact definition of illiberal democracy or whether it even exists.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democracy in China</span>

Ideological debate over democracy in China has existed in Chinese politics since the 19th century. Chinese scholars, thinkers, and policy-makers have debated about democracy, an idea which was first imported by Western colonial powers but which some argue also has connections to classic Chinese thinking. Starting in the mid-eighteenth century, many Chinese argued about how to deal with Western culture. Though Chinese Confucians were initially opposed to Western modes of thinking, it became clear that aspects of the West were appealing. Industrialization gave the West an economic and military advantage. The Qing dynasty's defeats in the Opium Wars compelled a segment of Chinese politicians and intellectuals to rethink their notion of cultural and political superiority.

Democratic consolidation is the process by which a new democracy matures, in a way that it becomes unlikely to revert to authoritarianism without an external shock, and is regarded as the only available system of government within a country. A country can be described as consolidated when the current democratic system becomes “the only game in town”, meaning no one in the country is trying to act outside of the set institutions. This is the case when no significant political group seriously attempts to overthrow the democratic regime, the democratic system is regarded as the most appropriate way to govern by the vast majority of the public, and all political actors are accustomed to the fact that conflicts are resolved through established political and constitutional rules.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Liberal democracy</span> Form of government

Liberal democracy, western-style democracy, or substantive democracy is a form of government that combines the organization of a democracy with ideas of liberal political philosophy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratic transition</span> Specific phase in a political system

A democratic transition describes a phase in a country's political system as a result of an ongoing change from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one. The process is known as democratisation, political changes moving in a democratic direction. Democratization waves have been linked to sudden shifts in the distribution of power among the great powers, which created openings and incentives to introduce sweeping domestic reforms. Although transitional regimes experience more civil unrest, they may be considered stable in a transitional phase for decades at a time. Since the end of the Cold War transitional regimes have become the most common form of government. Scholarly analysis of the decorative nature of democratic institutions concludes that the opposite democratic backsliding (autocratization), a transition to authoritarianism is the most prevalent basis of modern hybrid regimes.

Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law. Political scientists have created many typologies describing variations of authoritarian forms of government. Authoritarian regimes may be either autocratic or oligarchic and may be based upon the rule of a party or the military. States that have a blurred boundary between democracy and authoritarianism have some times been characterized as "hybrid democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "competitive authoritarian" states.

Criticism of democracy, or debate on democracy and the different aspects of how to implement democracy best have been widely discussed. There are both internal critics and external ones who reject the values promoted by constitutional democracy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Coup d'état</span> Deposition of a government

A coup d'état, or simply a coup, is typically an illegal and overt attempt by a military organization or other government elites to unseat an incumbent leadership. A self-coup is when a leader, having come to power through legal means, tries to stay in power through illegal means.

Anocracy, or semi-democracy, is a form of government that is loosely defined as part democracy and part dictatorship, or as a "regime that mixes democratic with autocratic features". Another definition classifies anocracy as "a regime that permits some means of participation through opposition group behavior but that has incomplete development of mechanisms to redress grievances." The term "semi-democratic" is reserved for stable regimes that combine democratic and authoritarian elements. Scholars distinguish anocracies from autocracies and democracies in their capability to maintain authority, political dynamics, and policy agendas. Anocratic regimes have democratic institutions that allow for nominal amounts of competition. Such regimes are particularly susceptible to outbreaks of armed conflict and unexpected or adverse changes in leadership.

A hybrid regime is a type of political system often created as a result of an incomplete democratic transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one. Hybrid regimes are categorized as having a combination of autocratic features with democratic ones and can simultaneously hold political repressions and regular elections. Hybrid regimes are commonly found in developing countries with abundant natural resources such as petro-states. Although these regimes experience civil unrest, they may be relatively stable and tenacious for decades at a time. There has been a rise in hybrid regimes since the end of the Cold War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Democratic backsliding</span> National decline in democracy

Democratic backsliding is a process of regime change toward autocracy in which the exercise of political power becomes more arbitrary and repressive. The process typically restricts the space for public contest and political participation in the process of government selection. Democratic decline involves the weakening of democratic institutions, such as the peaceful transition of power or free and fair elections, or the violation of individual rights that underpin democracies, especially freedom of expression. Democratic backsliding is the opposite of democratization.

Democracy in Venezuela refers to the system of governance that has prevailed in Venezuela since direct election at the presidential level and later in the 1990s at the regional level. Democracy as a system of government in the country has had a history interrupted by coups d'état, some in the name of democracy itself. From 1958 onward, Venezuela was considered to be a relatively stable democracy within a continent that was facing a wave of military dictatorship, consuming almost all Latin American countries in the 1970s. By 1977, Venezuela was the only one of three democracies in Latin America, along with Colombia and Costa Rica. With the election of Hugo Chávez in the 1998 presidential election, the country started experiencing democratic backsliding. In 2008, Venezuela was ranked the least democratic nation in South America in The Economist Democracy Index, and by 2022 it ranked 147th out of 167 countries, with a rating of an authoritarian regime.

Democracy indices are quantitative and comparative assessments of the state of democracy for different countries according to various definitions of democracy.

References

  1. ↑ "Political system | Types, Components, Functions, & Facts | Britannica".
  2. ↑ Dobratz, B.A. (2015). Power, Politics, and Society: An Introduction to Political Sociology. Taylor & Francis. p. 47. ISBN   978-1-317-34529-9 . Retrieved Apr 30, 2023.
  3. 1 2 3 Juan José Linz (2000). Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. Lynne Rienner Publisher. p. 143. ISBN   978-1-55587-890-0. OCLC   1172052725.
  4. 1 2 Ginny Garcia-Alexander; Hyeyoung Woo; Matthew J. Carlson (3 November 2017). Social Foundations of Behavior for the Health Sciences. Springer. pp. 137–. ISBN   978-3-319-64950-4. OCLC   1013825392.
  5. ↑ "14.2 Types of Political Systems". 8 April 2016. Archived from the original on 22 October 2022. Retrieved 19 October 2022.
  6. ↑ Easton, David. (1971). The political system : an inquiry into the state of political science. Knopf. OCLC   470276419.
  7. ↑ https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences-and-law/sociology-and-social-reform/sociology-general-terms-and-concepts/political-system [ bare URL ]
  8. ↑ Haviland, W.A. (2003). Anthropology: Tenth Edition. Wadsworth:Belmont, CA.
  9. ↑ Carneiro, Robert L. (2011). "The Chiefdom: Precursor of the State". In Jones, Grant D.; Kautz, Robert R. (eds.). The Transition to Statehood in the New World. New Directions in Archaeology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. pp. 37–79. ISBN   978-0-521-17269-1.
  10. ↑ Jonathan Michie, ed. (3 February 2014). Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences. Routledge. p. 95. ISBN   978-1-135-93226-8.
  11. ↑ Allan Todd; Sally Waller (10 September 2015). Allan Todd; Sally Waller (eds.). History for the IB Diploma Paper 2 Authoritarian States (20th Century). Cambridge University Press. pp. 10–. ISBN   978-1-107-55889-2.
  12. ↑ Ezrow & Frantz 2011, pp. 14–17.
  13. ↑ Sondrol, P. C. (2009). "Totalitarian and Authoritarian Dictators: A Comparison of Fidel Castro and Alfredo Stroessner". Journal of Latin American Studies. 23 (3): 599–620. doi:10.1017/S0022216X00015868. JSTOR   157386. S2CID   144333167.
  14. ↑ "Democracy". Oxford University Press. Retrieved 24 February 2021.
  15. ↑ Schwartzberg, Melissa (2014). "Democracy". The Encyclopedia of Political Thought: 851–862. doi:10.1002/9781118474396.wbept0248. ISBN   978-1-4051-9129-6.
  16. ↑ "Democracy | Definition, History, Meaning, Types, Examples, & Facts". Encyclopædia Britannica. 2023-08-16. Retrieved 2023-08-17.
  17. 1 2 Przeworski, Adam (2024). "Who Decides What Is Democratic?". Journal of Democracy. 35 (3): 5–16. doi:10.1353/jod.2024.a930423. ISSN   1086-3214.
  18. ↑ Dahl, Robert A.; Shapiro, Ian; Cheibub, Jose Antonio (2003). The Democracy Sourcebook. MIT Press. p. 31. ISBN   978-0-262-54147-3.
  19. ↑ Møller, Jørgen; Skaaning, Svend-Erik (Jan 2013). "Regime Types and Democratic Sequencing". Journal of Democracy. 24 (1): 142–155. doi:10.1353/jod.2013.0010. ISSN   1045-5736. Archived from the original on 22 February 2024.
  20. ↑ Kalu, Kalu N. (2019). A Functional Theory of Government, Law, and Institutions. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 161–. ISBN   978-1-4985-8703-7. OCLC   1105988740.
  21. 1 2 Cerutti, Furio (2017). Conceptualizing Politics: An Introduction to Political Philosophy. Routledge. p. 17. Political scientists have outlined elaborated typologies of authoritarianism, from which it is not easy to draw a generally accepted definition; it seems that its main features are the non-acceptance of conflict and plurality as normal elements of politics, the will to preserve the status quo and prevent change by keeping all political dynamics under close control by a strong central power, and lastly, the erosion of the rule of law, the division of powers, and democratic voting procedures.
  22. ↑ Ezrow, Natasha M.; Frantz, Erica (2011). Dictators and Dictatorships: Understanding Authoritarian Regimes and Their Leaders. Continuum. p. 17.
  23. ↑ Lai, Brian; Slater, Dan (2006). "Institutions of the Offensive: Domestic Sources of Dispute Initiation in Authoritarian Regimes, 1950–1992". American Journal of Political Science. 50 (1): 113–126. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00173.x. JSTOR   3694260.
  24. ↑ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan A. (2010). Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. Problems of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511781353. ISBN   978-0-521-88252-1.
  25. ↑ Diamond, Larry (2002). "Elections Without Democracy: Thinking About Hybrid Regimes". Journal of Democracy. 13 (2): 21–35. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0025. ISSN   1086-3214. S2CID   154815836.
  26. ↑ Gunitsky, Seva (2015). "Lost in the Gray Zone: Competing Measures of Democracy in the Former Soviet Republics". Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance. Cambridge University Press: 112–150. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316161555.006. ISBN   978-1-107-09813-8. SSRN   2506195.
  27. ↑ Conquest, Robert (1999). Reflections on a Ravaged Century. Norton. pp. 73–74. ISBN   0393048187.
  28. ↑ "Monarchy | Definition, Examples, & Facts | Britannica". www.britannica.com. Retrieved 2023-02-28.
  29. ↑ "The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth". In Our Time. 14 October 2021. BBC Radio 4 . Retrieved 29 March 2023.
  30. ↑ Gagné, Jean-François (Mar 10, 2015), Hybrid Regimes, Oxford University Press (OUP), doi:10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0167
  31. ↑ Plattner, Marc F. (1969-12-31). "Is Democracy in Decline?". kipdf.com. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-12-27.
  32. 1 2 "Hybrid Concepts and the Concept of Hybridity". European Consortium for Political Research. 2019-09-07. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  33. ↑ Urribarri, Raul A. Sanchez (2011). "Courts between Democracy and Hybrid Authoritarianism: Evidence from the Venezuelan Supreme Court". Law & Social Inquiry. 36 (4). Wiley: 854–884. doi:10.1111/j.1747-4469.2011.01253.x. ISSN   0897-6546. JSTOR   41349660. S2CID   232400805. Archived from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  34. ↑ Göbel, Christian (2011). "Semiauthoritarianism". 21st Century Political Science: A Reference Handbook. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks California 91320 United States: SAGE Publications, Inc. pp. 258–266. doi:10.4135/9781412979351.n31. ISBN   9781412969017.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  35. ↑ Tlemcani, Rachid (2007-05-29). "Electoral Authoritarianism". Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  36. ↑ "What is Hybrid Democracy?". Digital Society School. 2022-05-19. Archived from the original on 2023-04-05. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  37. 1 2 Zinecker, Heidrun (2009). "Regime-Hybridity in Developing Countries: Achievements and Limitations of New Research on Transitions". International Studies Review. 11 (2). [Oxford University Press, Wiley, The International Studies Association]: 302–331. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2009.00850.x. ISSN   1521-9488. JSTOR   40389063. Archived from the original on 2022-11-16. Retrieved 2022-11-18.
  38. ↑ "Index". Dem-Dec. 2017-09-23. Archived from the original on 2022-11-21. Retrieved 2022-11-21.
  39. ↑ Ekman, Joakim (2009). "Political Participation and Regime Stability: A Framework for Analyzing Hybrid Regimes". International Political Science Review. 30 (1): 7–31. doi: 10.1177/0192512108097054 . ISSN   0192-5121. S2CID   145077481.
  40. ↑ Baker, A. (2021). Shaping the Developing World: The West, the South, and the Natural World. SAGE. p. 202. ISBN   978-1-0718-0709-5. Archived from the original on 2023-04-23. Retrieved 2023-04-23.
  41. ↑ "Why Parties and Elections in Dictatorships?". How Dictatorships Work. Cambridge University Press. 2018. pp. 129–153. doi:10.1017/9781316336182.006. ISBN   9781316336182.
  42. ↑ Riaz, Ali (2019). "What is a Hybrid Regime?". Voting in a Hybrid Regime. Politics of South Asia. Singapore: Springer. pp. 9–19. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-7956-7_2. ISBN   978-981-13-7955-0. ISSN   2523-8345. S2CID   198088445.
  43. ↑ Schmotz, Alexander (2019-02-13). "Hybrid Regimes". The Handbook of Political, Social, and Economic Transformation. Oxford University Press. pp. 521–525. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198829911.003.0053. ISBN   978-0-19-882991-1.
  44. ↑ Morlino, Leonardo (2011-11-01). "Are There Hybrid Regimes?". Changes for DemocracyActors, Structures, Processes. Oxford University Press. pp. 48–69. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199572533.003.0004. ISBN   978-0-19-957253-3.
  45. ↑ Подлесный, Д. В. (2016). Политология: Учебное пособие [Political Science: Textbook] (in Russian). Kharkiv: ХГУ НУА. pp. 62–65/164. Archived from the original on 2023-04-22. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  46. ↑ Schulmann, Ekaterina (15 August 2014). "Царство политической имитации" [The kingdom of political imitation]. Ведомости. Archived from the original on 2019-07-30. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  47. ↑ Croissant, A.; Kailitz, S.; Koellner, P.; Wurster, S. (2015). Comparing autocracies in the early Twenty-first Century: Volume 1: Unpacking Autocracies - Explaining Similarity and Difference. Taylor & Francis. p. 212. ISBN   978-1-317-70018-0. Archived from the original on December 9, 2022. Retrieved Nov 27, 2022.
  48. ↑ Carothers, Christopher (2018). "The Surprising Instability of Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. 29 (4): 129–135. doi:10.1353/jod.2018.0068. ISSN   1086-3214. S2CID   158234306.
  49. ↑ Levitsky, Steven; Way, Lucan (2002). "The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism". Journal of Democracy. 13 (2). Project Muse: 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0026. ISSN   1086-3214. S2CID   6711009.
  50. ↑ "Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War". Department of Political Science. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2022-11-16.
  51. ↑ "Hybrid Regimes". obo. Archived from the original on 2019-07-29. Retrieved 2019-08-13.
  52. ↑ Mufti, Mariam (Jun 22, 2018). "What Do We Know about Hybrid Regimes after Two Decades of Scholarship?". Politics and Governance. 6 (2). Cogitatio: 112–119. doi: 10.17645/pag.v6i2.1400 . ISSN   2183-2463. S2CID   158943827.
  53. ↑ "Home - IDEA Global State of Democracy Report". International IDEA. Archived from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved Nov 26, 2022.
  54. ↑ Schedler, Andreas (Aug 1, 2013). "Shaping the Authoritarian Arena". The Politics of Uncertainty. Oxford University Press. pp. 54–75. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199680320.003.0003. ISBN   978-0-19-968032-0.
  55. ↑ Brooker, P. (2013). Non-Democratic Regimes. Comparative Government and Politics. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 222. ISBN   978-1-137-38253-5. Archived from the original on December 9, 2022. Retrieved Nov 27, 2022.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.