On Dictatorship, Economic Development and Stability

1 Introduction

Dictatorship - as a catch-all concept for non-democratic societies - is universally considered
as an undesirable political regime.¹ Although the number of dictatorships has significantly
decreased in the last two decades (Figure 1) and across continents, this regime has been
persistent and widespread throughout history, still exists in large parts of the world today
and constantly threatens fragile democracies.²

If a political regime is assumed to be the result of rational choices rather than a cultural
or a random event, what can explain the existence and persistence of a decried political
regime in many societies?

We propose to define dictatorship by the concentration of force, the political specialization
and the absence of a constraint obliging the government to be continuously responsive
to the preferences of its citizens. The first two criteria characterize the existence of
a state apparatus that is common to dictatorships and democracies but differentiates

¹ The normative judgement on political regimes has evolved much through history. Before the French
Revolution, monarchy was considered as the best form of government in most of the classics of political
thought. From the nineteenth century on, democracy has gained the status of the best political regime
(Bobbio 1989).

² For instance, Russia under the rule of Vladimir Putin is moving away from democracy little by little
with, as it seems, the support of its population (Pipes 2004). Pakistan has returned to dictatorship in
1999 after 12 years of democracy while its neighbor, India, remains firmly democratic. In Latin America,
a recent UN report shows a large disillusionment regarding democracy. This represents a worrying and
partly surprising feeling in a continent with a long experience of tough and bloody dictatorships (UNDP
2004).

<<   1   2   3   4   5   6   >>

More intriguing information