Advertisement

Between Authoritarianism and Liberalism: The Potential and Limits of Elections

Chapter
  • 264 Downloads

Abstract

“Democracy in Crisis,” the title of the 2018 Freedom house data warns against the declining political rights and civil liberties in the world politics. Following the global pattern the countries of the East Mediterranean region has the average score of 41.5 out of 100 (see the Fig. 1 below for regional and country specific scores). What distinguishes the region from others, however, is the incredibly uneven scores and the concerning decline. On the one hand, the current situation in Syria introduced a rare rating of negative one, on the other hand the relatively high scores of Israel and Greece and designation as “free,” do not eliminate the concerns regarding declining some liberties and freedom. For instance, Israel’s civil liberties score declined because of new legislation aimed at tightening restrictions on critical nongovernmental organizations and denying them access to international support.

Keywords

Critical Nongovernmental Organizations Country-specific Scoring East Mediterranean Region Competitive Authoritarian Regimes (CARs) Invalid Votes 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author acknowledges Michael Dirksen and Mine Tafolar’s significant contributions to the analysis.

References

  1. Analysis of the results of the November 1st election and the electorate. (2015). Konda November 15’ Barometer. Retrieved from http://konda.com.tr/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/KONDA_Nov1BallotandElectorateAnalysisReport.pdf
  2. Arbatlı, E. (2014). Turkey’s new path: The rise of electoral authoritarianism. Centre for Policy and Research on Turkey (Research Turkey), III(12), 76-92. http://researchturkey.org/
  3. Bekdil, B. (2017). Turkey’s slide into authoritarianism. Middle East Quarterly, 24(1), 1-9. http://www.meforum.org/meq/Google Scholar
  4. Berman, S. (2017). The pipe dream of undemocratic liberalism. Journal of Democracy. 28(3), 29-38. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boas, T. (2015). Voting for democracy: Campaign effects in Chile’s democratic transition. Latin American Politics & Society. 57(2), 67-90. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-2456.2015.00267.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burnham, W. D. (1970). Critical elections and the mainsprings of American politics. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.Google Scholar
  7. Chacko, P., & Mayer, P. (2014). The Modi lahar (wave) in the 2014 Indian national election: A critical realignment? Australian Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 518-528. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2014.937392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chari, R. S. (2000). The March 2000 Spanish election: A ‘critical election’? West European Politics, 23(3), 207-214. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380008425393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dahl, R. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Esen, B., & Gümüşçü, S. (2016). Rising competitive authoritarianism in Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 1-26. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Esen, B., & Gümüşçü, S. (2017). A small yes for presidentialism: The Turkish constitutional referendum of April 2017. South European Society and Politics, 22(3), 303-326. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2017.1384341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freedom in the World 2018. (2018). Freedom House. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/
  13. June 7 election and electorate analysis. (2015). Konda June Election Report. Retrieved from http://konda.com.tr/en/rapor/june-7-election-and-electorate-analysis/
  14. Key, V. O. (1955). A theory of critical elections. The Journal of Politics, 17(1), 3-18. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.2307/2126401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Langston, J., & Morgenstern, S. (2009). Campaigning in an electoral authoritarian regime: The case of Mexico. Comparative Politics, 41(2), 165-181. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.5129/001041509X12911362971954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2010). Competitive authoritarianism: Hybrid regimes after the Cold War. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morse, Y. L. (2012). The era of electoral authoritarianism. World Politics, 64(1), 161-198. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887111000281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Omotola, J. S. (2006). The limits of election monitoring in Nigeria’s 2003 general election. Representation, 42(2), 157-167. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/00344890600736473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. On the amendments to the constitution adopted by the Grand National Assembly on 21 January 2017 and to be submitted to a national referendum on 16 April 2017. (2017). European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission). Retrieved from http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=cdl-ad(2017)005-e
  20. Özbudun, E. (2015). Turkey’s judiciary and the drift toward competitive authoritarianism. International Spectator, 50(2), 42-55. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2015.1020651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Power, T. J., & Roberts, J. T. (1995). Compulsory voting, invalid ballots, and abstention in Brazil. Political Research Quarterly, 48(4), 795-826. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/106591299504800407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Simpser, A., & Donno D. (2012). Can international election monitoring harm governance? Journal of Politics, 74(2), 501-513. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1017/S002238161100168XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sohn, H. (1989). Authoritarianism and opposition in South Korea. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Sundquist, J. L. (1973). Dynamics of the party system: Alignment and realignment of the political parties in the United States. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  25. Ufen, A. (2009). The transformation of political party opposition in Malaysia and its implications for the electoral authoritarian regime. Democratization, 16(3), 604-627. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340902884804CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations