Why Russia’s Democracy Never Began
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6288485 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Maria Snegovaya (0000-0002-7979-5672, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 105-118 |
| Publication date | 2023-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of democracy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1045-5736 • E-ISSN: 1086-3214 |
| Publisher | Project MUSE (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1353/jod.2023.a900436 |
| OpenAlex | W4382044619 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
Scholars often blame Russia”s recent re-autocratization on mistakes of individual leaders: Yeltsin or Putin. This essay casts doubt on such accounts. It argues instead that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia experienced not a democratic transition but a temporary weakening of the state (incumbent capacity). This is evidenced by a lack of elite rotation and the preservation of the same type of formal and informal institutions that characterized Russia’s political system in the past. Accordingly, subsequent re-autocratization of Russian politics was just a matter of time
Blame · Democracy · Development economics · Economics · Elite · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Soviet union · State (computer science · Law · Political Conflict and Governance · Psychology · Russia and Soviet political economy · Social Psychology
| Citations per year | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Highly cited | No |