Russia today represents one of the major examples of the phenomenon of “electoral authoritarianism†which is characterized by adopting the trappings of democratic institutions (such as elections; political parties; and a legislature) and enlisting the service of the country’s essentially authoritarian rulers. Why and how has the electoral authoritarian regime been consolidated in Russia? What are the mechanisms of its maintenance; and what is its likely future course? This book attempts to answer these basic questions. Vladimir Gel’man examines regime change in Russia from the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 to the present day; systematically presenting theoretical and comparative perspectives of the factors that affected regime changes and the authoritarian drift of the country. After the fall of the Soviet Union; Russia’s national political elites aimed to achieve their goals by creating and enforcing of favorable “rules of the game†for themselves and maintaining informal winning coalitions of cliques around individual rulers. In the 1990s; these moves were only partially successful given the weakness of the Russian state and troubled post-socialist economy. In the 2000s; however; Vladimir Putin rescued the system thanks to the combination of economic growth and the revival of the state capacity he was able to implement by imposing a series of non-democratic reforms. In the 2010s; changing conditions in the country have presented new risks and challenges for the Putin regime that will play themselves out in the years to come.
#2467104 in Books Ohio University Press 2005-07-27Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.00 x .90 x 6.00l; 1.02 #File Name: 082141626X352 pages
Review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Great book to learn more about the history of the ...By D. C.Great book to learn more about the history of the slave trade and ethical business. I recommend this book for business people.1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Chocolate and slavery in the early 1900's - exhaustive account of British commercial; philosophical and political attitudesBy Adrenalin StreamsLowell Satre's book provides an exhaustive account of the positions of British anti-slavery activists; the Cadbury company; and British government officials with regard to the use of Portuguese colonial slave labour to produce cacao on Sao Tome (off the coast of Angola) in the first decade of the 20th Century. The first half of the book; in particular; is very completist in terms of detailing what must be virtually every statement or piece of correspondence by or between the three camps on the subject of slave labour and what should be done about it. This is brilliant if you want to use the book for academic research; but can be a little hard going (with some repetition) if you do not. In essence; all parties agree that something needs to be done about the use of Portuguese slave labour (nominally contract labour); but each adopts a different approach as to how to go about it. The activists want the Cadbury company (and other chocolate companies) to boycott cacao from Sao Tome; and for the British government to use force if necessary to ensure the Portuguese government honours existing laws prohibiting slavery; and allowing for repatriation of workers at the end of their contracts. The Cadbury family come out strongly against slave labour but hold a view that they must be guided by the government and that; at least initially; a boycott would exacerbate rather than resolve the situation. The British government do not like the use of slave labour but are loathe to openly antagonise their Portuguese allies; preferring to apply a certain diplomatic pressure over time. All this leads up to the famous Cadbury Bros v The Standard Newspaper libel trial of 1909. The Standard accused Cadbury's of hypocrisy over its position on Sao Tome; and Cadbury's felt the need to defend its reputation. Two of the leading barristers of the day represented the two parties; and this is where the book moves from being a largely academic work to being one of genuine pace and excitement. The trial; and its verdict; makes for riveting reading; and the final few chapters neatly sum up the consequences for its players; as well as letting the reader know what eventually happened to the use of colonial labour in Sao Tome. If you want to skip all the detail of the first part of the book; and cut to the chase; then I recommend reading pages 145-148; in which the author neatly summarises everything said to that point. To sum up; not a perfect book; but a highly praiseworthy one; written in a non-partisan manner and one that lets the facts speak for themselves. A highly worthwhile read.8 of 8 people found the following review helpful. Outstanding study of capitalism in practiceBy William PodmoreThis superb book studies the connection between slavery in West Africa and the British; and Quaker; firm of Cadbury; particularly in the first decade of the twentieth century.From the 15th century; the slave trade was the foundation of the Portuguese empire. Even in the early 1900s; Angola was still a slave state; with half its people enslaved. The British Empire was an ally of Portugal; so it was complicit in the slavery. Portugal's islands of Sao Tome and Principe; 150 miles off Africa's west coast; had 40;000 slaves producing cocoa beans which Cadbury had been buying since 1886. From 1901 to 1908; Cadbury got half its beans from the islands. A Foreign Office official noted; "The fact of the matter is that the system is neither more nor less than slavery but that we do not dare to say much as we might thus offend the Portuguese with whom we desire to stand well." In the 1900s; the British Empire was trying to recruit African labour from Portuguese Africa for its gold mines in South Africa. The Foreign Office warned against the "danger of learning inconvenient facts which might oblige us to make representations to the Portuguese Govt. which we don't want to do." So Britain; like Portugal; ignored the treaties obliging them to act to halt the slave trade. Prime Minister Lord Salisbury ordered; "Leave it alone."In 1901; William Cadbury first heard rumours of slave labour on the islands. All the evidence that he later received confirmed that there was a brutal slave trade in Angola; that the labourers on the islands were forced; that the death rate was huge (often 20% a year); and that none was free ever to leave. Yet Cadbury did not boycott the products of slave labour until 1909.The company claimed that discreet diplomacy; and continued purchase of Sao Tome's cocoa; would improve the workers' position. Their position; however; did not improve: 6;000 slaves died every year; though profits certainly increased; as did the number of slaves and the amount of cocoa exported.Humanitarian pressure groups tried to get the British government to act in the labourers' interests. It responded with endless promises to press the Portuguese state to reform; and repeated investigations and commissions. This all proves the folly of relying on companies; pressure groups; treaties or governments to effect improvement. Angola and the islands used forced labour until they won independence from Portugal in 1975. How we have progressed since then! Such outrages are long gone. Yet in 2001; the Financial Times reported; "Nestle and Cadbury were accused of turning a blind eye to child slavery in the cocoa industry." A 2002 study estimated that 284;000 children worked in West Africa's cocoa farms. Another study concluded that there were 15;000 child slaves in the Ivory Coast alone. Cadbury responded; "We were completely unaware of the allegations concerning cocoa growing in the Cote d'Ivoire." Plus ca change.The USA spends $8.5 billion a year on chocolate products; Britain spends £4 billion; while the children who produce the chocolate toil in poverty and slavery.
