Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization

Front Cover
Cambridge University Press, Jul 16, 2007 - Political Science
Far from sweeping the globe uniformly, the 'third wave of democratization' left burgeoning republics and resilient dictatorships in its wake. Applying more than a year of original fieldwork in Egypt, Iran, Malaysia, and the Philippines, in this book Jason Brownlee shows that the mixed record of recent democratization is best deciphered through a historical and institutional approach to authoritarian rule. Exposing the internal organizations that structure elite conflict, Brownlee demonstrates why the critical soft-liners needed for democratic transitions have been dormant in Egypt and Malaysia but outspoken in Iran and the Philippines. By establishing how ruling parties originated and why they impede change, Brownlee illuminates the problem of contemporary authoritarianism and informs the promotion of durable democracy.

What people are saying - Write a review

We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.


1 The Political Origins of Durable Authoritarianism
2 The Inception of Ruling Parties
3 Institutional Legacies and Coalitional Tensions
Egypt and Malaysia during the Third Wave
Iran during the Third Wave
The Philippines during the Third Wave
7 Conclusions

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page vi - And to throw further light on this part of my argument, I would say, that the nobles are to be considered in two different manners; that is, they are either to be ruled so as to make them entirely dependent on your fortunes, or else not. Those that are thus bound to you and are not rapacious, must be honoured and loved; those who stand aloof must be considered in two ways, they either do this through pusillanimity and natural want of courage, and in this case you ought to make use of them, and especially...
Page 26 - Authoritarian regimes are political systems with limited, not responsible, political pluralism: without elaborate and guiding ideology (but with distinctive mentalities); without intensive nor extensive political mobilization (except some points in their development); and in which a leader (or occasionally a small group) exercises power within formally ill-defined limits but actually quite predictable ones.
Page vi - ... overwhelming support — the Congo, Sudan, Nigeria — or where the nationalist party split after independence, as in Morocco, there often was considerable trouble. Where a major segment of the nationalist movement was systematically excluded from power, as in Cameroun, there was continued civil war. Almost everywhere, the trend after independence has been in one of two directions: toward a one-party state with consequent stability (if the resulting single party grouped the major elements) or...
Page 24 - I had reached the junction. Two decades later, in Spandau, I read in Sir James Jeans: The course of a railway train is uniquely prescribed for it at most points of its journey by the rails on which it runs. Here and there, however, it comes to a junction at which alternative courses are open to it, and it may be turned on to one or the other by the quite negligible expenditure of energy involved in moving the points.
Page 24 - In other words, a sociological theory of revolution ought not expect to be able to tell who will win in a revolutionary situation, but to tell that there will be a fight with unlimited means, a fight not conducted under defined norms for deciding political battles.
Page 11 - To be sure, party members are not altruists, and the existence of parties by no means eliminates selfish and unscrupulous motivations. The power-seeking drives of politicians remain constant. What varies is the processing and the constraints that are brought to bear on such drives.
Page 8 - ... number of independent structures of management and information. And liberalization is the conservation of all the foundations of the administrative system but in a milder form. Liberalization is an unclenched fist, but the hand is the same, and at any moment it could be clenched again into a fist.

About the author (2007)

Jason Brownlee is Assistant Professor of Government at the University of Texas, Austin. Prior to arriving at the University of Texas, he was a post-doctoral Fellow at Stanford University's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law. Professor Brownlee's research addresses domestic and international processes of democratization. His work has appeared in Comparative Politics, Studies in Comparative International Development and the Journal of Democracy.

Bibliographic information