Elections In A Hybrid Regime PDF Download

Elections under non-democratic regimes have been studied so far mostly from an elite point of view, focusing on how elections support a regime's stability and provide opportunities for its opposition. Consequently, the role of ordinary voters in elections in non-democratic countries has thus far been neglected on the grounds that these elections are meaningless to ordinary voters due to the absence of a real choice, as well as voters' general lack of efficacy. Despite this claim, this dissertation argues that elections and voters in "hybrid" regimes need to be studied independently, as different from the other non-democratic political systems. The 25-year period of post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan, as discussed in this research, presents ample and important experience to make such a case. Thus, based on the analysis of the existing studies and literature, this dissertation begins by asking, "Why do voters keep voting in 'hybrid' regimes when they know the regime is non-democratic and they possess high levels of mistrust in the elections?" Are there any other reasons for them to vote beyond compulsions of state-run mobilization, coercion or manipulation? How do elections in the "hybrid" regimes differ from elections in strictly authoritarian ones? Based on analysis of election results and voter-level data in the case of Kyrgyzstan, this dissertation argues that elections in "hybrid" regimes do have important implications and meanings both for the opposition and for ordinary voters. Kyrgyzstan's example confirms Levitsky & Way's (2010) assertion that elections in such regimes polarize a ruling elite and help the opposition. But this dissertation goes on to discern how elections also affect voters. In particular, the findings of this research demonstrate that individual voter turnout is positively influenced by such objective sociodemographic factors as age, marital status, ethnicity, religion, education, and income as well as by attitudes towards a country's direction, state of democracy, electoral efficacy, political affiliation, and interest in politics. On the subjective level, most Kyrgyzstanis consider the "right to choose" to be the most important reason for voting, but they likewise refer to voting as an important act of "civic duty" and "contribution for the better future of the country." The voters of Kyrgyzstan enjoy having choice and opportunities for contribution to the country's development provided by the elections, even under the uncertain conditions of a "hybrid" regime. The findings of this dissertation, generalized to other Central Asian states, offer a new perspective in understanding of voters' behavior in the post-Soviet region and suggest important implications for the study of prospects of democratization in the other "hybrid" regimes in the Central Asian region and beyond. Regular elections provide opportunities not only for the government and its opposition, but also for ordinary voters who view elections not only as a fulfillment of their civic duty, but also as a meaningful contribution to the country's overall well-being, even though they know they cannot trust their government. In addition, elections play an important role in the political socialization and learning process, which has longer-term implications for the regime: should the government ever arrive at a breaking point, voters will be there to support the change and legitimize a new political order, as happened in the Soviet Union during Gorbachev's perestroika and in Kyrgyzstan since independence and onward.