What authoritarianism is … and is not: a practice perspective
What authoritarianism is … and is not: a practice perspective
复制标题
威权主义是什么……不是什么：实践视角
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Zheng
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chen;Xiao;Calvin Q Pan;M. Zheng
本文强调了当前权威主义概念化的三个主要问题：它们构成了一个负面或残留的类别，过度关注选举，并假设权威主义必然是一种国家层面的现象。这种“政权分类”无法帮助我们明智地评论公众的担忧，即总统罗德里戈·杜特尔特，总理纳伦德拉·莫迪，总理维克托·欧尔班或总统唐纳德·特朗普等政治家本质上是“独裁”领导人。本文提出，为了给政治学家提供更好的工具来区分当代对民主的威胁和充满左翼自由主义偏见的解释，威权主义研究必须重新定位，研究威权主义和非自由主义的做法，而不仅仅是国家选举的公平性。文章界定并举例说明了存在于专制、民主和跨国背景下的这种做法。对专制和不自由的做法进行比较分析，将有助于我们理解它们蓬勃发展的条件，以及如何最好地应对它们。
This article highlights three main problems with current conceptualizations of authoritarianism: they constitute a negative or residual category, focus excessively on elections and assume that authoritarianism is necessarily a state-level phenomenon. Such ‘regime classifications’ cannot help us comment intelligently on public concerns that politicians like President Rodrigo Duterte, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Prime Minister Viktor Orban or President Donald Trump are essentially ‘authoritarian’ leaders. This article proposes that, in order to provide political scientists with better tools to distinguish between contemporary threats to democracy and interpretations imbued by left-liberal prejudice, authoritarianism studies must be reoriented towards studying authoritarian as well as illiberal practices rather than the fairness of national elections alone. The article defines and illustrates such practices, which exist in authoritarian, democratic and transnational contexts. Comparative analysis of authoritarian and illiberal practices will help us understand conditions in which they thrive and how they are best countered.