Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Session Submission Type: In-Person Author meet critics
Russia under Vladimir Putin offers distinct advantages for understanding modern autocracy. Putin’s Russia is often depicted as typical modern autocracy that both influences and is influenced by autocracies in Singapore, Hungary, Turkey, Venezuela as well as the autocracies of the former Soviet Union (Magaloni 2006; Svolik 2012; Guriev and Treisman 2019). Like other modern autocracies, the Kremlin’s formula for ruling includes manipulated elections, government-controlled media, a relatively popular incumbent, xenophobia, and selective repression as needed (Ledeneva 2012; Simpser 2013; Hale 2014; Rozenas and Stukal 2019). In addition, Russia provides especially fertile ground for researching autocracy. Scholars can rely on higher quality survey firms and work with fewer political impediments than in most other autocracies. Russia also provides relatively high-quality administrative data and boasts more than 80 subnational units for comparison. Moreover, as a major global player with the 6th largest economy and the second largest nuclear arsenal, Russia is worthy of scholarly attention on its own.
This “Authors Meets Critics” panel proposes a discussion of two very recent books that offer distinct approaches to understanding politics in Putin’s Russia.
In Weak Strongman, The Limits of Power in Putin’s Russia, Timothy Frye draws on a host of recent academic research and 30 years of personal observation to critique dominant narratives that view Russian politics as an extension of Vladimir Putin’s personality or as determined primarily by Russian history. Instead, he emphasizes Russia as a personalist autocracy that shares common features with other modern autocracies. Frye borrows insights from formal theories of autocracy and highlights the difficult tradeoffs confronting the Kremlin on issues from election fraud and the economy to propaganda and repression while also highlighting the blunt tools that Putin has to govern a modern society.
In contrast, Red Mirror: Putin’s Leadership and Russia’s Insecure Identity by Gulnaz Sharafutdinova roots Russian politics in social identity theory. She highlights how Putin articulates a shared collective perspective that unites many Russian citizens. She also explores how the Kremlin has tapped into powerful group emotions of shame and humiliation and transformed these emotions into pride and patriotism.
The works are an especially good pairing for discussion as they provide different perspectives on a host of questions central to modern autocracy in general and Russia in particular. What are the sources of Putin’s popular support and opposition? How does Putin stay in power? What are the the prospects for political change? More generally, they present two competing approaches to understanding modern autocracy: one driven by a rational/institutionalist approach and, another, by a social psychological understanding of leadership and followership.
The critics on the panel are very well placed to contribute to the discussion. Henry Hale has published books and articles on many diverse topics in Russian politics and on the politics of authoritarianism in the former Soviet Union. Jennifer Gandi is one of the leading experts on comparative autocracy in the field and brings a global perspective to the panel. Elise Guiliano is not only deeply knowledgeable about Russian politics, but is also well versed in identity politics. Graeme Robertson is among the leaders in studying Russian public opinion and is also a co-author Putin Versus the People, which addresses many related issues. This panel promises to be a lively discussion of Russian politics and the politics of autocracy.