Economic Performance and Regime Legitimacy in Post-Communist Bulgaria

Abstract

It is commonly assumed that socio‐economic conditions strongly influence political attitudes. Since democratic rule is based on the consent of the ruled, a secure and stable democracy cannot be established and maintained without broad‐based popular endorsement, which is especially important for nascent post‐communist democracies. Painful economic difficulties may engender deep anti‐system sentiments at the mass level, encouraging anti‐regime activism at the elite level. From this perspective, democratic legitimacy is a function of regime performance. But the Bulgarian evidence fails to validate the hypothesis that system legitimacy depends on regime effectiveness or that socio‐economic conditions determine mass‐level political attitudes. In spite of the economic fiasco, Bulgaria's democratic regime remains capable of commanding popular support. While the economic performance deficit of catastrophic proportions has become a source of widespread popular dissatisfaction threatening regime stability, it has not led to democratic backsliding or collapse.

The making of ‘democracy’s champions’: Understanding police support for democracy in Ghana

“…The evidence shows that these dimensions of economic performance influence support for and satisfaction with democracy (Fernandez and Kuenzi, 2010). However, most studies have found that political performance is far more important to democratic consolidation than economic performance is (Bratton and Mattes, 2001; Gilley, 2006; Mishler and Rose, 2001; Vassilev, 2004). Diamond (1999: 192) has summed up the evidence thus: ‘The growing evidence from many countries and regions suggests that, in forming beliefs about regime legitimacy, citizens weigh independently – and much more heavily – the political performance of the system.’ Political performance has been conceptualized in different ways, including respect for civil liberties and political rights, and control of corruption (Anderson and Tverdova, 2003; Bratton and Mattes, 2001; Seligson, 2002).…”

The Determinants of State Legitimacy: Results for 72 Countries

“…Political factors are the second main group of hypothesized sources of state legitimacy. In recent studies, the importance of political factors has been shown to overwhelm the sorts of socioeconomic factors mentioned above (Anderson and Guillory, 1997;Evans and Whitefield, 1995;Lillbacka, 1999;Miller and Listhaug, 1999;Mishler and Rose, 1997, 2001a, 2001bNorris, 1999;Vassilev, 2004). As Diamond summarized: "The growing evidence from many countries and regions suggests that, in forming beliefs about regime legitimacy, citizens weigh independently -and much more heavily -the political performance of the system" (1999: 192).…”

Political Variables and State Legitimacy

“…The goal of the current study is to determine the influence of different social groups on state legitimacy & Listhaug, 1999;Mishler & Rose, 1997, 2001a, 2001b, 2002Norris, 1999;Vassilev, 2004). The literature mentions political factors such as political support, institutional trust, or participation in the public sphere.…”