Elections Without Choice 1978
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-349-03342-3_3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Non-Competitive Elections in Europe

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

1995
1995
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…If the opposition takes part in elections, it legitimizes the system. 12 If it boycotts elections, it automatically excludes itself from potential influence and visibility. Elections provide rulers with an effective divide and rule strategy as they co-opt parts of the opposition through small concessions, leaving the rest of the opposition out.…”
Section: The Paradox Of Authoritarian Electionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the opposition takes part in elections, it legitimizes the system. 12 If it boycotts elections, it automatically excludes itself from potential influence and visibility. Elections provide rulers with an effective divide and rule strategy as they co-opt parts of the opposition through small concessions, leaving the rest of the opposition out.…”
Section: The Paradox Of Authoritarian Electionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For dictators, elections do not work as an instrument for transmitting public preferences to the leadership and influencing policies. Rather, it acts as 'instruments of authoritarian rule' that help autocrats legitimize their rule (Linz, 1978;Powell, 2000;Schedler, 2002). Scholars consider countries that adopt democratic institutions but remain authoritarian rule as neither democracy nor pure authoritarian regimes, but a form of hybrid regime termed as competitive authoritarianism (Carothers, 2002;Diamond, 2002;Levitsky and Way, 2002;Schedler, 2002).…”
Section: Elections and Regime Sustainabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In competitive authoritarian regimes, which are also branded as hybrid regimes combining characteristics of democracy and authoritarianism (Levitsky and Way 2010: 5), formal elections are held but manipulated by authoritarian rulers to varying degrees in order to maintain, if not enhance, their grip on power. In fact, authoritarian regimes use elections to consolidate and increase their legitimacy (Schmitter 1978), divide and weaken the opposition (Linz 1978), identify critics of the regime, provide forums for forging compromises with potential challengers (Gandhi 2008;Lust 2009), reduce official corruption and malfeasance (Nathan 2003), increase government responsiveness (Manion 1996), and give dictators the opportunity to make a non-violent exit from power (Schedler 2009). In effect, authoritarian regimes that hold nominally democratic elections have substantially greater longevity than those that do not (Gandhi and Przeworski 2007).…”
Section: Extant Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%