Advertisement

Compartmentalized Ideology: Presidential Addresses and Legitimation in Kazakhstan

  • Diana T. Kudaibergenova
Chapter
Part of the International Political Theory book series (IPoT)

Abstract

The chapter explores how non-democratic regimes sustain legitimacy and power through the use of ideological tools such as compartmentalized ideology. Compartmentalized ideology is defined as a set of rather conflicting discourses about nation-building guided by the socio-linguistic differences and interests of the domestic audiences. This ideology creates a system of discourses and experiences, ways of thinking and imagining oneself only within the framework provided by the non-democratic regime itself without allowing further alternatives. It becomes the dominant discursive system with which regime legitimates itself. The main mechanism of compartmentalized ideology is the shift of various different discourses that are all connected by the authority and power of the president N. A. Nazarbayev and that are mainly presented in his official public speeches.

References

  1. Bissenova, A. (2012). Post-Socialist Dreamworlds: Housing Boom and Urban Development in Kazakhstan. PhD dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
  2. Castells, M. (2013). Communication Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Census 1989. (1990). Kratkie itogi Vsesoyuznoi perepisi naseleniya 1989 goda po Kazakhskoi SSR (Brief Conclusions of the All-Union Census of 1989 in Kazakh SSR). Alma-Ata.Google Scholar
  4. Cummings, S. (2006). Legitimation and Identification in Kazakhstan. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 12(2), 177–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dave, B. (2007). Kazakhstan: Ethnicity and Power. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Diener, A. C. (2005). Kazakhstan’s Kin Diasporas: Settlement Planning and the Oralman Dilemma. Europe-Asia Studies, 57(2), 327–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eleuova, G. (2007). Strategiya Opinion Polls. Almaty: Strategiya.Google Scholar
  8. Fierman, W. (1998). Language and Identity in Kazakhstan: Formulations in Policy Documents 1987–1997. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 32(2), 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fierman, W. (2009). Identity, Symbolism, and the Politics of Language in Central Asia. Europe-Asia Studies, 61(7), 1207–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ginsburg, T., & Moustafa, T. (2008). Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ileuova, G. (2007). Prezident v Kazakhstane: status ili missiya (President in Kazakhstan: Status or Mission). Report. Almaty: Strategy.Google Scholar
  12. Ileuova, G. (2009, March). Specificity and Peculiarity of Identity Consolidation of Kazakhstan’s Population. Almaty: Centre for Social and Political Research Strategy.Google Scholar
  13. Isaacs, R. (2010). ‘Papa’ – Nursultan Nazarbayev and the Discourse of Charismatic Leadership and Nation-Building in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan. Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 10(3), 435–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Isaacs, R. (2013). NurOtan, Informal Networks and the Countering of Elite Instability in Kazakhstan: Bringing the ‘Formal’ Back In. Europe-Asia Studies Journal, 65(6), 1055–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Isaacs, R. (2014). Neopatrimonialism and Beyond: Reassessing the Formal and Informal in the Study of Central Asian Politics. Contemporary Politics, 20(2), 229–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kudaibergenova, D. (2015). The Ideology of Development and Legitimation: Beyond ‘Kazakhstan-2030’. Central Asian Survey Special Issue on ‘Social and Economic Development in Central Asia’, 34(4), 440–455.Google Scholar
  17. Kudaibergenova, D. (2016). Use and Abuse of Postcolonial Discourse in Kazakhstan. Europe-Asia Studies, 68(5), 917–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Laruelle, M. (2012). The Paradigm of Nationalism in Kyrgyzstan. Evolving Narrative, the Sovereignty Issue, and Political Agenda. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 45(1), 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Laurelle, M. & Peyrouse, S. (2004). Les Russes du Kazakhstan Identités nationales et nouveaux États dans l’espace post-soviétique (The Russians of Kazakhstan. National Identities and New State in the Post-Soviet Space). Paris: Maisonneuve et Larose – Institut français d’études sur l’Asie centrale.Google Scholar
  20. Linz, J. J. (2000). Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Malešević, S. (2002). Identity: Conceptual, Operational and Historical Critique. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  22. March, A. (2003). State Ideology and the Legitimation of Authoritarianism: The Case of Post-Soviet Uzbekistan. Journal of Political Ideologies, 8(2), 209–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Matveeva, A. (2009). Legitimising Central Asian Authoritarianism: Political Manipulation and Symbolic Power. Europe-Asia, 61(7), 1095–1121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nazarbayev, N. (1993). Ideinaia konsolidatsiya obschestvakakuslovie progressa Kazakhstana (Ideational Consolidation of the Society as a Condition for the Progress of Kazakhstan). Almaty: Kazakhstan XXI vek.Google Scholar
  25. Nazarbayev, N. (2008). The Kazakhstan Way. London: Stacey International.Google Scholar
  26. Nazarbayev, N. (2009). Izbrannye rechi (Selected Speeches). Astana: SaryArka.Google Scholar
  27. Nazarbayev, N. (2014). Kazakhstani Way-2050: United Goal, United Interests, United Future. Address to the Nation, January 17. Available at: www.akorda.kz. Accessed 20 Jan 2014.
  28. Robinson, N. (2013). Economic and Political Hybridity: Patrimonial Capitalism in the Post-Soviet Sphere. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 4(2), 136–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schatz, E. (2009). The Soft Authoritarian Tool Kit. Agenda-Setting Power in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Comparative Politics, 41(2), 203–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schatz, E., & Maltseva, E. (2012). Kazakhstan’s Authoritarian ‘Persuasion’. Post-Soviet Affairs, 28(1), 45–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Slezkine, Y. (1994). The USSR as a Communal Apartment, or How a Socialist State Promoted Ethnic Particularism. Slavic Review, 53(02), 414–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smailov, A. A. (Ed.). (2011). Analytical Report: Results of the 2009 National Population Census of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Astana: The Agency on Statistics of the Republic of Kazakhstan.Google Scholar
  33. Solzhenitsyn, A. I. (1991). Rebuilding Russia: Reflections and Tentative Proposals. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  34. Tsay, G. (2011). Sotsia’no-politicheskaya stratificatsiya kazakhstanskogo obschestva. Po resul’tatam sotsiologicheskogo issledovaniya KISI i nauchno-issledovatel’skogoproekta IFiP (Social and Political Stratification of Kazakhstani Society. Based on the Results of the Sociological Study of KISI and Scientific Research Project IFiP). Almaty: Kazakhstani Institute for Strategic Research Under President of Republic of Kazakhstan.Google Scholar
  35. Van Dijk, T. (2006). Ideology and Discourse Analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11(2), 115–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Weber, M. (1969). Economy and Society III. New York: Bedminster.Google Scholar
  37. Yessenova, S.B. (2003). The Politics and Poetics of the Nation: Urban Narratives of Kazakh Identity. Doctoral Dissertation. McGill Univerisity.Google Scholar
  38. Zhakupov, Z. (2009). Shala Kazak. Proshloe, nastoyashee, budushee (Shala Kazakh. Past, Present, Future). Almaty: Aspandau.Google Scholar
  39. Zhusupov, S. (2008). Dinamika Reports 1998–2001. In S. Zhussupov (Ed.), Politicheskaya analitika issledovaniya (Political Analysis of Research). Almaty: Arna-b.Google Scholar
  40. Zimovina, E. (2003). Census 1999. Dinamika chislennosti i sostava naseleniya Kazakhstana vo vtoroi polovide XX veka (Dynamics of the Number and Composition of the Population of Kazakhstan in the Second Half of the XX Century). Almaty: Zhalyn.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diana T. Kudaibergenova
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Sociology of Law DepartmentUniversity of LundLundSweden
  2. 2.POLIS Department, Centre for Development StudiesUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations