Eurasian polities as hybrid regimes: The case of Putin's Russia

Most Eurasian countries' political systems are not accurately described as some version of either democracy or authoritarianism. Nor does it advance social science to study each of these countries' political systems as being completely unique, sharing no significant commonalities with those of other countries. Instead, it is more fruitful to understand many Eurasian countries as a type of hybrid regime, a system that combines important elements of both democracy and autocracy in some way. One of the most important features of Eurasia's hybrid regimes, one that is shared by many hybrid regimes worldwide, is that they combine contested elections with pervasive political clientelism. Political developments in these countries can thus be usefully understood as machine politics, and the development of political systems can be understood as processes of rearranging the components of the machines in different ways. The usefulness of this approach is demonstrated through an in-depth study of the Russian Federation. It is argued that Russian political development under Putin is best understood not as “authoritarianization” but as a process in which Russia transitioned from a system of “competing pyramids” of machine power to a “single-pyramid” system, a system dominated by one large political machine. It turns out that in single-pyramid systems that preserve contested elections, as does Russia, public opinion matters more than in typical authoritarian regimes.