Challenges to the dichotomy of democracy vs. totalitarianism
After the late-1960s
The mid-1990s: Linz’s new typology
Similarities and differences along four dimensions
Linz and Stepan (1996), Table 3.1
A form of government in which the right to make political decisions is exercised directly by the whole body of citizens, acting under procedures of majority rule, usually known as direct democracy.
A form of government in which the citizens exercise the same right not in person but through representatives chosen by and responsible to them, known as representative democracy.
Liberal constitutional, democracy refers to political systems in which there are attempts to defend and increase civil liberties against the encroachment of governments, institutions and powerful forces in society
A form of government that theoretically permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of the individual's life to the authority of the government.
Dominant leader using a mass party and ideology to mobilize people to achieve state objectives
Control citizen and group behavior totally
State attempts to control the whole of society
Concentrates power in the hands of an individual or a group
Use of secret police, concentration or labor camps, ideological control or indoctrination
Examples: the former Soviet Union under Stalin, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Maoist China
Authoritarian system refers to any political system that concentrates power in the hands of a leader or a small elite that is not constitutionally responsible to the body of the people.
It also differs from totalitarianism, since authoritarian governments usually have no highly developed guiding ideology, tolerate some pluralism in social organization, lack the power to mobilize the entire population in pursuit of national goals, and exercise that power within relatively predictable limits.
Post-totalitarianism refers to a type of non-democratic regime before the transition to democracy.
How is post-totalitarianism different from totalitarianism and authoritarianism?
This is a system based on personal rulership, but loyalty to the ruler is motivated not by his embodying or articulating an ideology, nor by a unique personal mission, nor by any charismatic qualities, but by a mixture of fear and rewards to his collaborators.
Look for similarities and differences in different settings
Compare in one setting but across time
Compare regions within a single country
Good for theory building
The Comparative Method
John Stuart Mill
The method of agreement: The method of agreement consists in making paired comparisons in order to ascertain what causes changes we observe in the world.
The method of difference consists in a double application of the method of agreement. This double application springs from the need to make counterfactual comparisons when the explanatory variable is absent in the cases we chose to compare.
Causes of Revolution
"Revolution is caused by the combination of three factors: 1. High income inequality, 2. conflict within the governing group, 3. defeat in war.“
Whenever and wherever "1", "2", and "3" are present revolution will occur-- a comparative (general) statement.
Focuses on differences within a group of cases (region/area)
Compares like-with-like to ‘control’ for shared factors such as culture, history, social or economic structure
Seeks to identify key features that are different among similar countries, which account for the observed political outcome.
Most different systems design (MDSD):
Focuses on similarities in outcome among cases that differ from each other in most aspects (culture, history, social or economic structure)
Seek to identify key features that are similar among different countries, which account for the observed political outcome.
In Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, Linz & Stepan use MSSD to examine democratic consolidation within regions (South America, Southern Europe, and Eastern Europe), and then use MDSD to compare democratic consolidation across regions.
Advantages & Disadvantages of Comparative Method
Combines both depth and breadth
Identifies variations within culturally-similar regional area or similarities across culturally different regional area
Builds middle-level theories
Higher demands for contextual fieldwork and language skills
Too many independent variables and too few nations