liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Social hierarchies in democracies and authoritarianism: The balance between power asymmetries and principal-agent chains
Linköping University.
2020 (English)In: Rationality and Society, ISSN 1043-4631, E-ISSN 1461-7358, Vol. 32, no 3, p. 334-366Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Social hierarchies exist in democracies as well as in authoritarian societies. However, their nature is different. Democratic hierarchies are built bottom-up through election while autocratic hierarchies are built top-down through domination. Both, however, have power asymmetries between the weaker citizens and the stronger politicians, which are amplified the stronger the hierarchies are. This manuscript introduces a model that combines pro-/anti-social behavior with different degrees of hierarchies. It is argued that this model has the power to categorize countries according to these criteria and indicate when and how societies move between democracy and authoritarianism. Importantly, I illustrate that the balance between power asymmetries and principal-agent chains is key for understanding when and why democracies sometimes transcend into authoritarianism.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2020. Vol. 32, no 3, p. 334-366
Keywords [en]
Authoritarianism; democracy; hierarchy; power asymmetries; principal-agent problem
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-165240DOI: 10.1177/1043463120904051ISI: 000524139800001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85082118434OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-165240DiVA, id: diva2:1424785
Available from: 2020-04-20 Created: 2020-04-20 Last updated: 2022-10-27Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Social Hierarchies between Democracy and Autocracy
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Social Hierarchies between Democracy and Autocracy
2020 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Social hierarchies exist in democracies as well as in authoritarian societies. However, their nature is different. Democratic hierarchies are built bottom-up through election, while autocratic hierarchies are built top-down through coalition formation and domination. Both have power asymmetries between the weaker citizens and the stronger politicians, which are amplified the stronger the hierarchies are. This thesis introduces a model which combines pro-/anti-social behavior with different degrees of hierarchies which I unite in a model called the Structure-Behavior Diagram (Toelstede, 2020/1). This model has the power to categorize countries according to these criteria, and indicates when and how societies move between democracy and authoritarianism.

The movements of societies in the political space of the Structure-Behavior Diagram are marked by certain patterns and dynamics. I use the path dependence theory (Toelstede, 2019/2) and examine how so-called path-creating mechanisms can emerge and influence societies to move from democracy to authoritarianism. I show that path dependency-induced dynamics can put democracies at risk and are more serious in hierarchical societies than in horizontal societies.

Institutional punishment is widely seen as more stable then peer punishment. However, in political reality, institutional punishment – here in the form of policing – can be marked by over- and under-punishment as well as changes in sociality (Toelstede, 2019/1 and 2020/2). These findings show, together with hierarchy-sensitive characteristics of the path dependency, that institutional punishment and social hierarchies require more attention.

Lastly, I show that most democratic societies are intuitively aware of the power asymmetries and long principal-agent chains between them and their political agents. Together, these features provide increasing benefits for an anti-social descent of the agents, although some societies are prepared to trade personal freedom for higher socio-economic welfare. They therefore strive for higher socio-economic efficiency by embracing strong governmental forms and high conformity levels. I call this efficient statism (Toelstede, 2019/2). In doing so, societies compliantly put their free and democratic order at risk.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2020. p. 66
Series
Linköping Studies in Arts and Sciences, ISSN 0282-9800 ; 797
Keywords
Democracy, Autocracy, Social hierarchies, Power asymmetries, pro- and anti-sociality, Path-dependence, Principal-agent chains
National Category
Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology)
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-171091 (URN)10.3384/diss.diva-171091 (DOI)9789179297497 (ISBN)
Public defence
2020-12-15, ACAS, A-Building, Campus Valla, Linköping, 17:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2020-11-04 Created: 2020-11-04 Last updated: 2020-11-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Toelstede, Björn
By organisation
Linköping University
In the same journal
Rationality and Society
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 171 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf