TY - JOUR
T1 - Representation and leadership in post-communist political systems
AU - Rose, Richard
AU - Mishler, William
N1 - Funding Information:
Richard Rose is director of the Centre for the Study of Public Policy, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow; William Mishler is Professor of Political Science, University of South Carolina. The authors would like to acknowledge the generosity of the Paul Lazarsfeld Society, Vienna, in making available the results of the second annual New Democracies Barometer survey, sponsored by the Austrian Federal Ministry for Science and Research and the Austrian National Bank, and the efforts of Monnika Wammerl and Yevgeny Tikhomirov. The study is part of Richard Rose's British ESRC-funded project Y309 25 3047, Social Welfare and Individual Enterprise in Post-Communist Societies. William Mishler's participation was supported by grants from the University of Strathclyde.
PY - 1996/6
Y1 - 1996/6
N2 - Ideally, a democratic system is representative and has effective leaders. But in postcommunist political systems it is an open question whether leadership and representation are mutually supportive or in conflict. Survey data from the New Democracies Barometer, used to analyse the priority that people in nine Central and East European countries give to representation in parliament and to strong leaders, allow a distinction to be made between representative democrats and leadership democrats, and to distinguish both from authoritarians who value strong leadership without parliament and those disaffected with both. A discriminant function analysis shows that political attitudes towards democracy and markets and towards order and economic security are most important in determining views of governance. National differences are indirectly significant, inasmuch as views of individuals about leadership vary with national context. Where there has been a history of repressive dictatorship, people are more likely to value representation and reject strong leadership.
AB - Ideally, a democratic system is representative and has effective leaders. But in postcommunist political systems it is an open question whether leadership and representation are mutually supportive or in conflict. Survey data from the New Democracies Barometer, used to analyse the priority that people in nine Central and East European countries give to representation in parliament and to strong leaders, allow a distinction to be made between representative democrats and leadership democrats, and to distinguish both from authoritarians who value strong leadership without parliament and those disaffected with both. A discriminant function analysis shows that political attitudes towards democracy and markets and towards order and economic security are most important in determining views of governance. National differences are indirectly significant, inasmuch as views of individuals about leadership vary with national context. Where there has been a history of repressive dictatorship, people are more likely to value representation and reject strong leadership.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030423980&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030423980&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/13523279608415310
DO - 10.1080/13523279608415310
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0030423980
SN - 1352-3279
VL - 12
SP - 224
EP - 246
JO - Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics
JF - Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics
IS - 2
ER -