| Description |
1 online resource (v, 42 pages) |
| Series |
Carnegie paper |
|
Working papers (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)
|
| Contents |
Summary -- Introduction -- The practices of static versus dynamic regimes -- Russia's history of revolutionary conservatism -- Russia's established pattern of static rule -- Open versus closed political regimes -- Russia's period of more dynamic rule -- Reining in the masses -- Toward a renewed monopoly on force -- The legitimating power of procedure -- The potential merits of static authoritarianism -- Conclusion |
| Summary |
"Revolutionary or dynamic regimes around the world tend to encourage supporters to act independently, or even engage in decentralized violence. By contrast, more conservative, static regimes typically discourage and distrust such unplanned, spontaneous demonstrations of support. For most of Russian history, the country's leaders have employed a top-down political system. When Crimea was annexed in 2014, the Kremlin temporarily allowed more decentralized patriotic activism to rally support, but they soon saw the potential risks and reverted to more centralized political control. Russia's reinstated traditional conservative rule may seem dull, but, paradoxically enough, its return might prove beneficial to future reformers"--Publisher's web site |
| Notes |
"January 2017." |
|
Series from resource home page |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references (pages 35-40) |
| Notes |
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (Carnegie, viewed January 17, 2017) |
| Subject |
Political participation -- Russia (Federation)
|
|
Political participation.
|
|
Politics and government.
|
| SUBJECT |
Russia (Federation) -- Politics and government -- 21st century
|
| Subject |
Russia (Federation)
|
| Form |
Electronic book
|
| Author |
Carnegie Moscow Center, issuing body.
|
|
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, publisher.
|
|
