Revolution and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century

IF 2.3 3区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Cross-Cultural Research Pub Date : 2024-04-08 DOI:10.1177/10693971241245862
Andrey Korotayev, A.I. Zhdanov, L. Grinin, V. Ustyuzhanin
{"title":"Revolution and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century","authors":"Andrey Korotayev, A.I. Zhdanov, L. Grinin, V. Ustyuzhanin","doi":"10.1177/10693971241245862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we analyze an inverted U-shaped relationship between the type of regime (on the autocracy-democracy scale) and the risks of revolutionary destabilization. Anocracies tend to be more vulnerable to revolutionary destabilization than full autocracies or full (consolidated) democracies. We also point to a strong positive association between the weakening of autocracies and the risks of revolutionary destabilization that exist among full autocracies. In addition, full autocracies moving towards democracy and transitioning to partial autocratic rule are at increased risk of revolutionary destabilization, which explains why the current global spread of democracy is associated with an upswing rather than a downswing in revolutionary activity. Finally, strong forms of revolutionary destabilization are quite possible in cases of deconsolidation of consolidated democracy, which additionally suggests that the era of revolutions will not end in the foreseeable future. Thus, we propose a general theory on the effect of regime type on revolutionary destabilization and address inconsistencies among various studies regarding the impact of the regime on revolutionary instability. The conducted research also allows us to contribute to the answer to the question posed by many researchers of revolutions at the end of the last century – will the era of revolutions end with the global spread of democracy? Our analysis suggests that if this happens someday, it will not be in any foreseeable future.","PeriodicalId":47154,"journal":{"name":"Cross-Cultural Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cross-Cultural Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10693971241245862","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, we analyze an inverted U-shaped relationship between the type of regime (on the autocracy-democracy scale) and the risks of revolutionary destabilization. Anocracies tend to be more vulnerable to revolutionary destabilization than full autocracies or full (consolidated) democracies. We also point to a strong positive association between the weakening of autocracies and the risks of revolutionary destabilization that exist among full autocracies. In addition, full autocracies moving towards democracy and transitioning to partial autocratic rule are at increased risk of revolutionary destabilization, which explains why the current global spread of democracy is associated with an upswing rather than a downswing in revolutionary activity. Finally, strong forms of revolutionary destabilization are quite possible in cases of deconsolidation of consolidated democracy, which additionally suggests that the era of revolutions will not end in the foreseeable future. Thus, we propose a general theory on the effect of regime type on revolutionary destabilization and address inconsistencies among various studies regarding the impact of the regime on revolutionary instability. The conducted research also allows us to contribute to the answer to the question posed by many researchers of revolutions at the end of the last century – will the era of revolutions end with the global spread of democracy? Our analysis suggests that if this happens someday, it will not be in any foreseeable future.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
二十一世纪的革命与民主
在本文中,我们分析了政权类型(在专制-民主尺度上)与革命动荡风险之间的倒 U 型关系。与完全专制或完全(巩固)民主政体相比,非专制政体往往更容易受到革命动荡的影响。我们还指出,专制政体的削弱与完全专制政体的革命动荡风险之间存在着很强的正相关性。此外,走向民主和向部分专制统治过渡的完全专制国家面临着更大的革命动荡风险,这也解释了为什么当前民主在全球的传播与革命活动的上升而非下降相关联。最后,在巩固的民主不再巩固的情况下,很有可能出现强烈的革命不稳定形式,这也表明革命的时代在可预见的未来不会终结。因此,我们提出了关于政权类型对革命不稳定性影响的一般理论,并解决了关于政权对革命不稳定性影响的各种研究之间的不一致。我们的研究还有助于回答上世纪末许多革命研究者提出的问题--革命时代是否会随着民主在全球的传播而终结?我们的分析表明,如果有一天这种情况会发生,那也不会是在可预见的未来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cross-Cultural Research
Cross-Cultural Research SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
8.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Cross-Cultural Research, formerly Behavior Science Research, is sponsored by the Human Relations Area Files, Inc. (HRAF) and is the official journal of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research. The mission of the journal is to publish peer-reviewed articles describing cross-cultural or comparative studies in all the social/behavioral sciences and other sciences dealing with humans, including anthropology, sociology, psychology, political science, economics, human ecology, and evolutionary biology. Worldwide cross-cultural studies are particularly welcomed, but all kinds of systematic comparisons are acceptable so long as they deal explicity with cross-cultural issues pertaining to the constraints and variables of human behavior.
期刊最新文献
The Interplay of Cultural Value Dimensions and Preferred Leadership Behaviors: Intersecting Pathways in the Case of Croatia Religious Beliefs and Civil Rights: Comparative Analysis Through the Fuzzy Clustering ECO-Extended Apostle Model European Family Patriarchy in the Past and Contemporary Developmental Inequalities A Cross-Cultural Study on the Effects of Government Control Policies on Mobility in COVID-19 Revolution and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1