DWA 227 · Authoritarianism in the Age of Globalization · Week 3 · Tue Sep 8

From Fear
to Spin

Regime types on four dimensions; informational autocracy; post-totalitarian China

A framework for the week · Linz & Stepan, Table 1

DemocracyAuthoritarianismTotalitarianismPost-totalitarianismSultanism
Pluralism Responsible political pluralism reinforced by extensive areas of pluralist autonomy in economy, society, and internal life of organizations. Political system with limited, not responsible political pluralism. Often quite extensive social and economic pluralism. No significant economic, social, or political pluralism. Official party has de jure and de facto monopoly of power. Limited, but not responsible social, economic, and institutional pluralism. Almost no political pluralism because party still formally has monopoly of power. Economic and social pluralism does not disappear but is subject to unpredictable and despotic intervention. No rule of law.
Ideology Extensive intellectual commitment to citizenship and procedural rules of contestation. Not teleological. Political system without elaborate and guiding ideology but with distinctive mentalities. Elaborate and guiding ideology that articulates a reachable utopia. Guiding ideology still officially exists and is part of the social reality. But weakened commitment to or faith in utopia. Highly arbitrary manipulation of symbols. Extreme glorification of ruler.
Mobilization Participation via autonomously generated organization of civil society and competing parties of political society guaranteed by a system of law. Political system without extensive or intensive political mobilization except at some points in their development. Extensive mobilization into a vast array of regime-created obligatory organizations. Effort at mobilization of enthusiasm. Progressive loss of interest by leaders and nonleaders involved in organizing mobilization. Boredom, withdrawal, and ultimately privatization of population’s values become an accepted fact. Low but occasional manipulative mobilization of a ceremonial type by coercive or clientelistic methods without permanent organization.
Leadership Top leadership produced by free elections and must be exercised within constitutional limits and state of law. A leader or occasionally a small group exercises power within formally ill-defined but actually quite predictable norms. Totalitarian leadership rules with undefined limits and great unpredictability for members and nonmembers. Often charismatic. Growing emphasis by post-totalitarian political elite on personal security. Checks on top leadership via party structures, procedures, and “internal democracy.” Highly personalistic and arbitrary. No rational-legal constraints. Strong dynastic tendency.

Linz & Stepan · the case for revising the tripartite scheme

If we use these studies and the traditional tripartite regime type distinction, it turns out that more than 90 percent of modern nondemocratic regimes would have to share the same typological space—“authoritarian.” Obviously, with so many heterogenous countries sharing the same typological “starting place,” this typology of regime type cannot tell us much about the extremely significant range of variation in possible transition paths and consolidation tasks that we believe in fact exists. Linz & Stepan 1996: 155
3 → 5
regime types: democratic, authoritarian, totalitarian; plus post-totalitarian, sultanistic
4
dimensions: pluralism, ideology, leadership, mobilization
1953
Stalin’s death; Soviet-type regimes “no longer conformed to the totalitarian model”

Linz & Stepan · post-totalitarianism as a continuum

Linz & Stepan · Mobilization

Thus, Kadar’s famous saying, “Those who are not against us are for us,” is a saying that is conceivable only in a post-totalitarian regime, not in a totalitarian one. Linz & Stepan 1996: 161

Supplementary video

What North Korea Doesn’t Want You To See

VICE, “Super Users”

Guriev & Treisman · the argument

The model of dictatorship that dominated in the twentieth century was based on fear. … The key to such regimes, we argue, is the manipulation of information. Rather than terrorizing or indoctrinating the population, rulers survive by leading citizens to believe—rationally but incorrectly—that they are competent and public-spirited. Guriev & Treisman, “Informational Autocrats,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 33, no. 4 (2019): 100–101

Fear → spin · 1 · Violence

Repression by cohort of dictator

Earlier cohortDictators taking office in the 2000s

Fear → spin · 1 · Violence

I said to Li Peng, you had the world’s TV cameras there waiting for the meeting with Gorbachev, and you stage this grand show. His answer was: We are completely inexperienced in these matters. Lee Kuan Yew, on the June 1989 Tiananmen crackdown, interview quoted in Elegant & Elliott 2005; in Guriev & Treisman 2019: 106

Fear → spin · 2 · Ideology

Nondemocracies with an official ideology

Earlier yearLater year

Fear → spin · 3 · Institutions

Elections and legislatures in nondemocracies

EarlierLater

Fear → spin · 4 · Rhetoric

Vocabulary of leaders’ public speeches

Overt dictatorsInformational autocratsDemocrats

Fear → spin · 5 · Elite and public

At least some dictators in power today survive not by preventing the masses from rebelling, but by removing their desire to do so. Guriev & Treisman 2019: 121
~8 pts
maximum gap between elite and public perceptions of media freedom, where the press is censored
Polity2 ≤ 8
regimes where the highly educated approve of the leadership less than the general public
Polity2 9–10
where the highly educated are, “if anything, more supportive”

Bridge · legitimation strategies

Repression, or performance

Linz & Stepan · post-totalitarianism

The relative de-ideologization of post-totalitarian regimes and the weakening of the belief in utopia as a foundation of legitimacy mean that, as in many authoritarian regimes, there is a growing effort in a post-totalitarian polity to legitimate the regime on the basis of performance criteria. Linz & Stepan 1996: 160

Guriev & Treisman · informational autocrats

When old-style dictators address the general public, they seek to instill anxiety, prompting citizens to rally behind the nation’s protector-in-chief. We argue that informational autocrats, like democratic leaders, aim for something different: a reputation for competence. Guriev & Treisman 2019: 112

Pei · the case

An even more worrying aspect of the China puzzle is that since Xi Jinping became paramount leader in 2012, the CCP has reverted to a neo-Stalinist path. Xi has revived one-man rule, escalated political repression to its worst level since Mao Zedong died in 1976, reintroduced ideological indoctrination, and launched an aggressive foreign policy that openly challenges the theory and practice of a liberal, rules-governed international order. Pei, “China: Totalitarianism’s Long Shadow,” Journal of Democracy 32, no. 2 (2021): 6

Pei · the puzzle · Table 2

Development at the moment of transition

Noncommunist dictatorships, avg. at transitionCommunist dictatorships, avg. at transitionChina, no transition (2017/18)

Pei · China, 1949–2018, in Linz & Stepan’s terms

As Linz and Stepan wrote, the post-Tiananmen regime was a form of “frozen post-totalitarianism in which, despite the persistent tolerance of some civil society critics of the regime, almost all the other control mechanisms of the party-state stay[ed] in place for a long period and [did] not evolve.” Pei 2021: 12, quoting Linz & Stepan 1996

Pei · Pluralism

State, party, and the economy since 1989

54 mn
employed by fully state-owned entities, 2019
50 → 92 mn
CCP members, 1991–2019 (4.3% → 6.7% of the populace)
~¼ of GDP
from state-owned enterprises, 2017; 16% of all workers
83%
of bank credit to nonfinancial firms went to SOEs, 2016

Pei · Leadership

Deng’s rules and Xi’s offices

Pei · Ideology

“An important reason” why Mikhail Gorbachev was able to send “a great [communist] party” to oblivion, said Xi, “was that their ideals and convictions wavered. … In the end nobody was a real man, nobody came out to resist.” Xi Jinping to a closed gathering of CCP officials, shortly after becoming general secretary (2012); in Pei 2021: 17

Pei · Mobilization and coercion

The coercive apparatus since 1989

~8×
real increase in domestic-security spending, 2002–2018
1999
Falun Gong campaign: a movement “with more than a hundred-million followers” dismantled
≥ 1 mn
Muslims held in mass-detention facilities in Xinjiang
Due to security-forces modernization since 1989, China’s post-totalitarian regime now wields as much repressive capacity as a classic totalitarian regime, if not more. Pei 2021: 13–14

Pei · three propositions

  1. Legacies of totalitarianism blunt and neutralize the democratizing effects of economic modernization.
  2. If the interests entrenched in the Leninist party-state remain in place, economic reform will lose momentum and the CCP regime will grow even more resistant to democratization and hostile to democratic values.
  3. Lack of political reform, including democratization, greatly raises the risks of reversion to neo-Stalinist rule.

Development and regime type · two readings

Guriev & Treisman

In highly modern countries, the informed elite is generally too large for manipulation to work, and censoring all private media is costly: democracy is the only option. In undeveloped countries, repression often remains more cost effective. But at intermediate levels of development, both democracy and informational autocracy are possible outcomes. Guriev & Treisman 2019: 117

Pei

Communist dictatorships that go for economic reform without political democratization, like those in China and Vietnam, may achieve swift socioeconomic progress. But the legacy institutions of totalitarianism will allow the democratizing effects of development to be blunted and perhaps even neutralized altogether. Pei 2021: 7–8

Discussion · development and regime type

China against the frameworks

The frameworkChina
Case selection G&T’s informational-autocrat exemplars, selected on low repression (<5 killings/yr, ≤100 prisoners at peak): Putin, Chávez, Correa, Nazarbayev, Lee Kuan Yew 112 Domestic-security spending ~8× in real terms, 2002–18; ≥1 mn Muslims in Xinjiang detention Pei 13–14
Development threshold “In highly modern countries … democracy is the only option … at intermediate levels of development, both democracy and informational autocracy are possible” 117 Per capita income $13,056 (2017 PPP) — above the $10,717 average at which communist dictatorships historically democratized Pei 10
Explanatory engine Four dimensions — pluralism, ideology, leadership, mobilization — classify a regime’s type L&S 157 “The Chinese experience … forces us to rethink the relationship between economic development and democracy … modernization theory remains relevant and useful because it helps us to ask the right question” Pei 6

This week, mapped

Four dimensions, three texts

Totalitarian (L&S)Post-totalitarian (L&S)Informational autocracy (G&T)China under Xi (Pei)
Pluralism “No significant economic, social, or political pluralism” 157 “Limited, but not responsible social, economic, and institutional pluralism” 157 By 2015, > ⅔ of nondemocracies had legislatures with nongovernment parties present 110 54 mn state employees; GONGOs; independent unions and associations banned 13
Ideology “Elaborate and guiding ideology that articulates a reachable utopia” 157 “Weakened commitment to or faith in utopia” 157 Official ideology: 42% of nondemocracies (1983) → ~20% (1990s–2000s) 109 “Reintroduced ideological indoctrination” 6
Leadership “Undefined limits and great unpredictability” 158 “Checks on top leadership via party structures, procedures” 158 Originally elected: 14% (1970s cohort) → 56% (2000s) 110 Presidential term limit removed 2018; three top posts, no term limits 16
Mobilization “Extensive mobilization into … regime-created obligatory organizations” 157 “Boredom, withdrawal, and ultimately privatization” 157 Words of violence in speeches: 0.51% vs. 1.41% for overt dictators 116 Domestic-security spending ~8× in real terms, 2002–18 13

This week and next

1 / 26
↓ / → / space to advance