Consociational Democracy in Crisis
The Case of Lebanon
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6247486 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Richard Hrair Dekmejian |
| Year | 1978 |
| Volume | 10 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 251 |
| Publication date | 1978-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Comparative Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0010-4159 • E-ISSN: 2151-6227 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/421648 |
| OpenAlex | W2315158251 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 24 |
| References cited | 4 |
components, the region remains a mosaic of subnational collectivities. This faulty notion of viewing the Middle East monolithically is partly attributable to the Western propensity to favor the nation-state-a bias which has become universal. In a milieu of nation-states any other kind of political unit is deemed subversive and perhaps even illegal. One hears more frequently about Arabs, Iranians, or Egyptians, rather than Maronites, Azeris, or Copts. Even in such a pluralistic society as the United States, the melting pot syndrome made it unfashionable to talk about ethnicity until the last decade. Nor is it an accepted practice to manifest ethnic nationalism in communist states, e.g., the U.S.S.R., China, and Yugoslavia. The Middle East is no exception; few of its governments have been able to develop effective public policies toward the ethnic, sectarian, and/or tribal components of their respective mosaics. The result has been official repression, communal violence, and massacrerealities which have been endemic in that part of the world particularly in the last one hundred years. These communal conflicts are often exacerbated by neighboring states, not to mention the great powers which have made intervention in ethnic problems a part of their national policies. Students of the Middle East also manifest strong biases in favor of national units. The usual practice is either to write single country studies or to group countries together in a cross-national framework. Not only are cross-ethnic studies rare,1 but there is a notable deemphasis on the ethnic and sectarian components of individual Middle Eastern states. In typical textbooks on Middle Eastern politics, the reader interested in the Kurds has to look under four chapter headings-Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria; and information on the Druzes may be found in the chapters on Lebanon, Israel, and Syria. Yet the
China · Communism · Democracy · Development economics · Ethnic group · Middle East · Nationalism · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · State (computer science · Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies · Law · Middle East and Rwanda Conflicts · Middle East Politics and Society
Kings, Queens, Rooks and Pawns
Lebanon
Communal armed organizations
Consociational Lebanon and the Palestinian Threat of Sameness
Islamist Actors from an Anti-system Perspective
Credible Power-Sharing Agreements
Leadership and foreign engagement
Special Issue Introduction
On older learners’ naïveté
Ḥizballāh and Lebanese Nationalism
The Calculus of Consensus
The Consociational Democracy at Stake
Governance Strategies and Refugee Response
From Belfast to Bosnia
New Perspectives on Trust in International Conflicts
Rethinking Power-Sharing in Post-War Lebanon
Religion, Pluralism, and Iconography in the Public Sphere
Commitment to the “National” in Post-Conflict Countries
Power Shift or Paradigm Shift? China's Rise and Asia's Emerging Security Order
What Do We Know about Power Sharing after 50 Years
Consociational Democracy
The Puzzle of Indian Democracy
Multicultural Institutions, Distributional Politics, and Postelectoral Mobilization in Indigenous Mexico
Ethnic Identification and Nationalist Movements
| Unique citing works | 24 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,6 |
| Citation span | 1986 - 2026 (41) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 24 |