Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Comparative Political Studies
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HAGOPIAN, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

"Democracy by Undemocratic Means"?

Elites, Political Pacts, and Regime Transition in Brazil

FRANCES HAGOPIAN

Harvard University

Why has Brazil failed to develop strong democratic institutions, despite widespread opposition to authoritarianism and support for civilian rule in the 1980s? This article argues that the political pacts bargained by elites that made the regime transition possible limited the extension of democracy. By restoring to old regime elites many sources of their political power as the price for their support for democratization, political pacts left the military with a substantial degree of formal and informal power over civilians, preserved clientelism, and undermined the ability of political parties to transform themselves into genuine transmission belts for nonelite interests. The undemocratic character of the Brazilian state, as embodied by military autonomy, technocratic modes of policymaking, and executive dominance over the legislature, moreover, was reinforced by the defeat of parliamentarism by the constituent assembly in 1988.

Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 23, No. 2, 147-170 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/0010414090023002001
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Comparative Political StudiesHome page
B. N. Field
De-Thawing Democracy: The Decline of Political Party Collaboration in Spain (1977 to 2004)
Comparative Political Studies, November 1, 2005; 38(9): 1079 - 1103.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Comparative Political StudiesHome page
K. S. Tsai
Capitalists without a Class: Political Diversity Among Private Entrepreneurs in China
Comparative Political Studies, November 1, 2005; 38(9): 1130 - 1158.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Latin American PerspectivesHome page
P. Oxhorn
Where Did All the Protesters Go?: Popular Mobilization and the Transition to Democracy in Chile
Latin American Perspectives, July 1, 1994; 21(3): 49 - 68.
[PDF]

Home page
 Comparative Political StudiesHome page
B. ZHANG
Corporatism, Totalitarianism, and Transitions to Democracy
Comparative Political Studies, April 1, 1994; 27(1): 108 - 136.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Journal of Peace ResearchHome page
G. K. KIEH Jr and P. O. AGBESE
From Politics Back to the Barracks in Nigeria: A Theoretical Exploration
Journal of Peace Research, November 1, 1993; 30(4): 409 - 426.
[Abstract]