{"title":"Clientelism, Brokers Dominance, and Rigged Election: A Process of Authoritarian Democracy in Bangladesh","authors":"Muhammad Zahidul Islam Miaji, M. Islam","doi":"10.1177/00219096231176747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is often assumed that power is exerted through patron–client exchanges in Bangladesh. These patron–client relationships are dispersed and multifaceted, kept together by moral closeness and tenderness. The incumbent government of Bangladesh rigged the last 2014 and 2018 national elections through the clientelist process. In Bangladesh, clientelism has become an art form that encompasses a wide variety of illegal electoral strategies and crimes. Brokers have a crucial part to play in this process because they are responsible for controlling patron–client interactions. Even while clientelism is thought of as an investment in public goods for the underprivileged, it has been demonstrating severe democratic degradation causes in countries that are still in the process of creating their democracies. This study explores how clientelism, broker dominance, and particularly the patron–client situation led Bangladesh to transition from a two-party or multiparty democratic state to a one-party dominant state that is flavored with authoritarian democracy. It also demonstrates how this has led to the emergence of a society in which free and fair election is an illusion.","PeriodicalId":46881,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asian and African Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asian and African Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00219096231176747","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
It is often assumed that power is exerted through patron–client exchanges in Bangladesh. These patron–client relationships are dispersed and multifaceted, kept together by moral closeness and tenderness. The incumbent government of Bangladesh rigged the last 2014 and 2018 national elections through the clientelist process. In Bangladesh, clientelism has become an art form that encompasses a wide variety of illegal electoral strategies and crimes. Brokers have a crucial part to play in this process because they are responsible for controlling patron–client interactions. Even while clientelism is thought of as an investment in public goods for the underprivileged, it has been demonstrating severe democratic degradation causes in countries that are still in the process of creating their democracies. This study explores how clientelism, broker dominance, and particularly the patron–client situation led Bangladesh to transition from a two-party or multiparty democratic state to a one-party dominant state that is flavored with authoritarian democracy. It also demonstrates how this has led to the emergence of a society in which free and fair election is an illusion.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Asian and African Studies (JAAS) was founded in 1965 to further research and study on Asia and Africa. JAAS is a peer reviewed journal of area studies recognised for consistent scholarly contributions to cutting-edge issues and debates. The journal welcomes articles, research notes, and book reviews that focus on the dynamics of global change and development of Asian and African nations, societies, cultures, and the global community. Published articles cover: -development and change -technology and communication -globalization -public administration -politics -economy -education -health, wealth, and welfare -poverty and growth -humanities -sociology -political science -linguistics -economics JAAS adheres to a double-blind reviewing policy in which the identity of both the reviewer and author are always concealed from both parties. Decisions on manuscripts will be taken as rapidly as possible. However, while it is hoped that a decision can be made in 6-8 weeks, the refereeing process makes it impossible to predict the length of time that will be required to process any given manuscript.