Still ‘like birds on the wire’? Freedom after neoliberalism

In this paper I suggest that we might understand some features of contemporary populism by reworking the concept of ‘authoritarian populism’ first proposed by Stuart Hall in his analysis of ‘Thatcherism’. Following a brief review of my earlier analytics of ‘governing through freedom’, I suggest that while the political movements identified by the names of Trump, Wilders, Le Pen, the Austrian Freedom Party, the True Finns etc. may be ephemeral, it is worth considering whether they are beginning to articulate a new set of rationalities and technologies for governing ‘after neoliberalism’. I analyse some key elements of these movements, the new epistemologies that they employ and the ethopolitics that they espouse, and suggest that the key operative concepts may be ‘the people’, security and control. We may still be ‘birds on the wire’ as Leonard Cohen once put it, but perhaps what we are enjoined to seek in these strategies for ‘governing liberty’ is not so much freedom but security.     

International sanctions against Iran and Tehran's responses: political effects on the targeted regime

This article seeks to explain the combined political effects of international sanctions against Iran and Tehran's domestic responses on the power structure of the targeted regime. It contends that although sanctions have contributed to elite infighting in Iran, they have not weakened the targeted regime. The Iranian leadership's modified reading of the imposed sanctions from targeted United Nations, US and European Union (EU) nonproliferation sanctions as an opportunity to develop indigenous nuclear capabilities to the perception of comprehensive and coordinated US and EU sanctions as regime change efforts marked a critical juncture. Tehran's adjusted responses to these sanctions, shaped by the interplay between Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmud Ahmadinejad, affected Iran's balance of power to the detriment of the outgoing president and his faction. This impact sheds a light on the workings of a targeted hybrid regime under intensive sanction pressure.     

Authoritarian populism in rural Belarus: distinction,commonalities, and projected finale

ABSTRACT

The paper inspects how agrarian debates apply to rural Belarus. Following the ‘persistence versus disappearance’ debate, it finds the moral economy alongside request for change. Pursuing the ‘adaptation versus resistance’ debate, it spots adaptability and exclusion of those failing to adapt. Here ‘lukascism’ surfaces resting on constructing the ‘other’. A rare case of agrarian populism employed by top authority, lukascism is otherwise humdrum. Proclaiming some principles of the moral economy while disregarding others, inconsistent lukascism undercuts the ‘coexistence scenario’ of households with large-scale farming. Change avoidance is a commonplace foretelling lukascism’s finale: its appeal is limited by the older generation..     

Authoritarian populism and response to COVID-19: A comparative study of the United States,India, and Brazil

As the phenomenon of populism is in the preliminary stages of exploratory research, the present study involves an empirical investigation involving a case study of the United States, India, and Brazil to examine whether a correlation exists between populism and management of COVID-19. The study adopts the ideational approach of populism as a set of ideas or discourse to review how core conceptual features of populism have impacted on management of COVID-19. The study has two main objectives: (1) to examine whether populism in the United States, India, and Brazil has determined “a populist response” to the pandemic in dealing with the health crises and (2) to explore the management of COVID-19 in the states led by right-wing populism and the commonality of populist approaches adopted in handling the health crisis. Comparing the three states' statistical data of management models, the study has argued that common populist mechanisms such as distrust for experts, contempt for institutions, and suspicion of “others” have guided the US, India, and Brazilian leadership response to COVID-19. It further argues that leadership in the United States, India, and Brazil has prevented effective management by politicizing the crisis, aggravating social polarization, and contradicting expert advice. Moreover, populist and nationalist orientation of the leadership has evaded responsibility in these states with the leadership blaming ethnicities for spreading the virus and by weakening societal solidarity.     

东南亚的外国资本、民族资本与威权体制——以泰国和菲律宾为例

东南亚地区在威权体制下进行的现代化,始终面临着外国资本、民族资本和威权体制三者关系的问题。三者之间既存在合作共谋的基础和机制,又在一定程度上具有内在的冲突,前者是基于资本积累的原因,后者则是由于发展的缘故。外国资本、民族资本与威权体制三者关系的变迁,直接影响到东南亚的威权体制及其资本政治的转型。     

Authoritarian resilience and regime cohesion in Morocco after the Arab Spring

Abstract

This article argues that Morocco's competitive authoritarian regime is more resilient today in certain key respects than it was when the Arab Spring began. Drawing on Levitsky and Way's dimension of organisational power, the article contends the regime was sufficiently unnerved by the unrest to resort to the use of high intensity coercion as part of its response to the 20 February Movement. The article maintains that, in employing this force successfully, the regime has turned the protests into an important source of non-material cohesion for its security apparatus and thereby enhanced its ability to defend itself from similar challenges in the future.     

State-run media outlets in Central Asia: external regime legitimation through regional conflict and cooperation framing

ABSTRACT

In this article, we empirically examine how the Central Asian states apply external regime legitimation strategies to legitimize their regimes domestically. We used the Central Asia Watch Project’s data from five Central Asian state-run media outlets to examine spatial and temporal changes in regime legitimation strategies. All the Central Asian countries employed external regime legitimation strategies, but those strategies differ based on regime type. Overall, we see continuity and persistence in reporting regional cooperation but underreporting of regional conflict throughout the 2016–2017 timeframe of this study.     

The rise of the ‘China Model’ and ‘Beijing Consensus’: evidence of authoritarian diffusion?

The rise of authoritarian great powers has raised questions about the dominance of the liberal democratic model and has led to a perception that the relative balance between democracy and authoritarianism is shifting. Consequently, there is increasing interest in and concerns about the diffusion of alternative ‘models’ of political and economic development. Given that China's impressive economic development has led to growing military strength and geopolitical prestige, evaluating perceptions of the legitimacy, effectiveness, and applicability of that country's model of ‘illiberal capitalism’ is a good place to start. This paper evaluates whether the ‘China Model’ or ‘Beijing Consensus' is gaining traction internationally through a content analysis of eight years of US and non-US media sources. It finds that concerns about the beginnings of an anti-democratic ‘reverse wave’ are exaggerated and that at the present time there does not appear to be a decisive shift in favour of a model of authoritarian-capitalism.     

Sharing Power and Faking Governance? Lebanese State and Non-State Institutions during the War in Syria

ABSTRACT

The war in Syria has caused both external and internal pressures on the Lebanese political system and state institutions. Yet, the Lebanese power-sharing system rests on a set of institutional mechanisms, both state and non-state, which allow its politicians to continue to govern, even in this tumultuous situation, and to respond to crisis. Empirical evidence on how policies were negotiated concerning security, elections, and refugees between 2012 and 2018 shows an interaction between state and non-state institutions and highlights the role of such mechanisms in power-sharing institutions.     

Succession,power-sharing and the development of representative institutions in medieval Europe

Historians have documented that in medieval Europe, bargaining over the loyalty of lay magnates and high clergy was most intense during successions and that this often forced monarchs to give political concessions. We argue that matters related to succession predict short-term power-sharing concessions by rulers but that – because they do not permanently alter the balance of power between ruler and elite – they only trigger lasting changes of political institutions if these changes are in the mutual interest of the ruler and the elite groups. It follows that successions are unlikely to have long-term effects on representative institutions but that they may consolidate the rules regulating succession (the succession order). Using the natural deaths of monarchs as an instrument for successions, we confirm these claims with a new dataset that includes fine-grained data on succession and parliament-like assemblies in 16 European polities between 1000 and 1600. These findings shed new light on the development of representative institutions in medieval Europe, on the changes in succession orders that brought about clear rules about primogeniture and on the political leeway of legislatures in authoritarian regimes more generally.