Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Foundations of Political Psychology
- Part II The Politics of Intergroup Attitudes
- Part III Contemporary Challenges to Democracy
- 23 The Political Psychology of Inequality
- 24 How Social Class Influences Political Choices
- 25 Fear and Loathing in American Politics
- 26 Political Extremism
- 27 The Politics of Hate
- 28 Populism
- 29 A Cultural Theory of Autocracy-vs-Democracy
- 30 Psychological Theories Meet the Challenge of Persuading and Mobilising Voters
- 31 Collective Action for Social Change
- 32 Opinion Formation and Polarisation in the News Feed Era
- 33 Conspiracy Theory Belief and Conspiratorial Thinking
- 34 Political Psychology and the Climate Crisis
- 35 The Political Psychology of Cyberterrorism
- 36 Reconciliation in the Aftermath of Collective Violence
- Part IV Diversifying Perspectives in Political Psychology
- Index
- References
29 - A Cultural Theory of Autocracy-vs-Democracy
On the Psychological Foundations of Political Regimes
from Part III - Contemporary Challenges to Democracy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 February 2022
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Foundations of Political Psychology
- Part II The Politics of Intergroup Attitudes
- Part III Contemporary Challenges to Democracy
- 23 The Political Psychology of Inequality
- 24 How Social Class Influences Political Choices
- 25 Fear and Loathing in American Politics
- 26 Political Extremism
- 27 The Politics of Hate
- 28 Populism
- 29 A Cultural Theory of Autocracy-vs-Democracy
- 30 Psychological Theories Meet the Challenge of Persuading and Mobilising Voters
- 31 Collective Action for Social Change
- 32 Opinion Formation and Polarisation in the News Feed Era
- 33 Conspiracy Theory Belief and Conspiratorial Thinking
- 34 Political Psychology and the Climate Crisis
- 35 The Political Psychology of Cyberterrorism
- 36 Reconciliation in the Aftermath of Collective Violence
- Part IV Diversifying Perspectives in Political Psychology
- Index
- References
Summary
Which psychological orientations form the cultural foundations of political regimes? To answer this question, I demonstrate as a point of departure that (1) the countries’ membership in culture zones explains some 70% of the global variation in autocracy-vs-democracy and (2) that this culture-bound variation has remained astoundingly constant over time – in spite of all the trending patterns in the global distribution of regime types over the last 120 years. Furthermore, the explanatory power of culture zones over autocracy-vs-democracy roots in the cultures’ differentiation on 'authoritarian-vs-emancipative values'. Against this backdrop, regime change happens as a result of glacially accruing regime-culture misfits – driven by generational value shifts into a predominantly emancipatory direction. Consequently, the backsliding of democracies into authoritarianism is limited to societies in which emancipative values remain underdeveloped. Contrary to the widely cited deconsolidation-thesis, the prevalent generational profile in people’s moral orientations exhibits an almost ubiquitous ascension of emancipative values that will lend more, not less, legitimacy to democracy in the future.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology , pp. 458 - 475Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Alemán, J., & Woods, D. (2016). Value orientations from the World Values Survey: How comparable are they cross-nationally?. Comparative Political Studies, 49(8), 1039–1067. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414015600458Google Scholar
Alexander, A. C., & Welzel, C. (2017). The myth of deconsolidation [Online exchange]. Journal of Democracy. https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/online-exchange-democratic-deconsolidation/Google Scholar
Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M. (1996). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. University of California Press.Google Scholar
Brown, A. (2001). Ten years after the Soviet breakup: From democratization to guided democracy. Journal of Democracy, 12(4), 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2001.0063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunkert, L., Kruse, S., & Welzel, C. (2019). A tale of culture-bound regime evolution: The centennial democratic trend and its recent reversal. Democratization, 26(3), 422–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2018.1542430Google Scholar
Chenoweth, E., & Cunningham, K. G. (2013). Understanding nonviolent resistance: An introduction. Journal of Peace Research, 50(3), 271–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343313480381Google Scholar
Cho, Y. (2014). To know democracy is to love it: A cross-national analysis of democratic understanding and political support for democracy. Political Research Quarterly, 67(3), 478–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912914532721Google Scholar
Claassen, C. (2019). Does public support help democracy to survive?. American Journal of Political Science, 64(1), 118–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12452Google Scholar
Crozier, M., Huntington, S. P., Watanuki, J., & Commission, T. (1975). The crisis of democracy: Report on the governability of democracies to the Trilateral Commission. New York University Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268436.001.0001Google Scholar
Dalton, R. J. (2013). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies (6th ed.). CQ Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, R. J. (2018). Political realignment (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198830986.001.0001Google Scholar
Dalton, R. J., & Welzel, C. (Eds.). (2014). The civic culture transformed: From allegiant to assertive citizens. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139600002Google Scholar
Foa, R. S., & Mounk, Y. (2016). The danger of deconsolidation: The democratic disconnect. Journal of Democracy, 27(3), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0049Google Scholar
Foa, R. S., & Mounk, Y. (2017). The signs of deconsolidation. Journal of Democracy, 28(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstone, J. A., & Diamond, L. (2020). Demography and the future of democracy. Perspectives on Politics, 18(3), 867–880. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592719005000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haerpfer, C., Inglehart, R., Moreno, A., et al. (2018). World Values Survey, time-pooled waves 1 to 6 dataset. JD Systems.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. F. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. F. (2018). Cultural evolution: People’s motivations are changing, and reshaping the world. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108613880Google Scholar
Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790881Google Scholar
Kirsch, H., & Welzel, C. (2019). Democracy misunderstood: Authoritarian notions of democracy around the globe. Social Forces, 98(1), 59–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soy114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruse, S., Ravlik, M., & Welzel, C. (2019). Democracy confused: When people mistake the absence of democracy for its presence. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 50(3), 315–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022118821437Google Scholar
Lührmann, A., & Lindberg, S. I. (2019). A third wave of autocratization is here: What is new about it?. Democratization, 26(7), 1095–1113. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2019.1582029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Márquez, X. (2017). Non-democratic politics: Authoritarianism, dictatorship, and democratization. Palgrave, Macmillan Education.Google Scholar
Mechkova, V., Lührmann, A., & Lindberg, S. I. (2017). How much democratic backsliding?. Journal of Democracy, 28(4), 162–169. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0075Google Scholar
Moore, B. (1966). The social origins of dictatorship and democracy: Lord and peasant in the making of the modern world. Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Norris, P. (Ed.). (1999). Critical citizens. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198295685.001.0001Google Scholar
Norris, P. (2002). Democratic phoenix: Reinventing political activism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511973383Google Scholar
Norris, P. (2017). Is democracy backsliding? [Online Exchange]. Journal of Democracy. https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/online-exchange-democratic-deconsolidation/Google Scholar
Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2019). Cultural backlash: Trump, Brexit, and authoritarian populism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108595841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pharr, S. J., & Putnam, R. D. (Eds.). (2000). Disaffected democracies: What’s troubling the trilateral countries? Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (2018). Enlightenment now: The case for reason, science, humanism, and progress. Viking.Google Scholar
Rosling, H., Rosling, O., & Rosling Roennlund, A. (2018). Factfulness: Ten reasons we’re wrong about the world – and why things are better than you think. Flatiron Books.Google Scholar
Sokolov, B. (2018). The index of emancipative values: Measurement model misspecifications. American Political Science Review, 112(2), 395–408. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055417000624Google Scholar
Van den Bosch, J. J. J. (2020). Introducing regime cluster theory: Framing regional diffusion dynamics of democracy and autocracy promotion. International Journal of Political Theory, 4(1), 71–106. https://philarchive.org/archive/VANIRC-2v1Google Scholar
Voeten, E. (2017). Turning away from democracy [Online exchange]. Journal of Democracy. https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/online-exchange-democratic-deconsolidation/Google Scholar
Welzel, C. (2013). Freedom rising: Human empowerment and the quest for emancipation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139540919Google Scholar
Welzel, C. (2020). The cultural pre-requisites of democracy. In Rohrschneider, R. & Thomassen, J. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political representation of liberal democracies (pp. 76–94). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198825081.001.0001Google Scholar
Welzel, C. (2021). Democratic horizons: What value change reveals about the future of democracy. Democratization, 28(5), 992–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2021.1883001Google Scholar
Welzel, C., Brunkert, L., Inglehart, R. F., & Kruse, S. (2019). Measurement equivalence? A tale of false obsessions and a cure. World Values Research, 11(3), 54–84.Google Scholar
Welzel, C., & Inglehart, R. F. (2016). Misconceptions of measurement equivalence: Time for a paradigm shift. Comparative Political Studies, 49(8), 1068–1094. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414016628275Google Scholar
Welzel, C., & Inglehart, R. F. (2019). Political culture, mass beliefs and value change. In Haerpfer, C., Bernhagen, P., Welzel, C., & Inglehart, R. F. (Eds.), Democratization (2nd ed., pp. 134–157). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780199233021.003.0007Google Scholar
Yilmaz, H. (2019). The international context. In Haerpfer, C., Bernhagen, P., Welzel, C., & Inglehart, R. F. (Eds.), Democratization (2nd ed., pp. 103–118). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780199233021.003.0007Google Scholar