Hybrid regimes like electoral authoritarianism blend elements of democratic and non-democratic political practices. Hybrid regimes can develop from populism or can themselves develop populism to explain and justify their democratic shortcomings. Where the latter occurs, populism is a tool of regime stabilisation rather than a form of ‘populism in power’. Moving from using some populist themes to assist regime stabilisation to official populism requires the development of populist discourse to a point where it becomes definitional of what constitutes the relationship between state and society. The paper uses the example of Russia to discuss the uses of populism in a hybrid regime. Populist rhetoric has been used by the Putin regime since the mid-2000s, but was initially balanced by other discourses. This changed during the 2011–2012 electoral cycle as a conservative-traditional populist discourse was deployed that redefined political agency and the relationship of the state to Russian society.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robinson et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: