Democracy, threats and political repression in developing countries: Are democracies internally less violent?

De FactoJudicial Independence and Physical Integrity Rights

“…One approach emphasizes the role of threats to the regime as stimuli of repression (Gurr 1986;Poe and Tate 1994;Davenport 1995Davenport , 1996Gartner and Regan 1996;Poe et al 1999;Bueno De Mesquita et al 2003;Poe 2004). Another perspective explains repression as the result of state characteristics-mainly the level of democracy in a society (e.g., Mitchell and McCormick 1988;Poe and Tate 1994;Fein 1995;Davenport 1996;Poe et al 1999;Regan and Henderson 2002;Davenport and Armstrong 2004) or its degree of economic development (Mitchell and McCormick 1988;Poe and Tate 1994;Poe et al 1999;Zanger 2000;Hathaway 2002). Yet another viewpoint stresses the growing importance of transnational noneconomic and economic forces such as foreign aid, trade (Richards et al 2001;Hafner-Burton 2005), arms sales (Blanton 2000(Blanton , 2005, foreign direct investment (Richards et al 2001), and the activities of nongovernmental organizations (Welch 1995).…”

Torture Approval in Comparative Perspective

“…Fein (1995) argues that personal integrity violations are more likely among countries that have extended but not institutionalized democracy, what is termed the `more murder in the middle hypothesis. ' Regan and Henderson (2002) find a curvilinear relationship between regime type and political repression; semi-democratic states have the highest rates of repression. This literature concludes that transitional states are the most vulnerable to torture and other repressive governmental actions.…”

Neoliberalismo y movilización ciudadana: Dos eslabones perdidos en la comprensión de la crisis de Derechos Humanos en México

“…04, Rio de Janeiro, 2017. pp. 2377-2395 2379 1995 y King 1998) según la cual, la mayor violación de los derechos resulta de que: (1) la parcial apertura del sistema político proporciona, a grupos previamente excluidos, la posibilidad de movilizarse para mudar "el orden político y distributivo"; (2) los estados "en transición" se abren suficientemente para permitir las expresiones públicas de disenso, pero no bastante para aliviar las causas de la insatisfacción, por lo que las demandas de los ciudadanos aumentan y, dada la falta de canales institucionales, se expresan como acción colectiva contenciosa; (3) la incoherencia institucional, se fragilizan ante la movilización social y las élites, temiendo la revuelta popular y el derrocamiento político, responden con represión a los desafíos (Reagan y Henderson 2002).…”