1985
DOI: 10.1016/0039-3592(85)90064-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Conceptualizing political power in the USSR: Patterns of binding and bonding

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1989
1989
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…6. Examples of this behavior abound: Urban (1985) notes that the Soviet Union implicitly encouraged officials to engage in prohibited-corrupt-behaviors, and would selectively prosecute those that did not show sufficient zeal in serving their superiors. During the early 1990s in the PRC, the Shanghai prosecutor's office announced that 'able individuals' would be granted leniency in corruption cases if they repented for their acts (Sun, 2001).…”
Section: Argumentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6. Examples of this behavior abound: Urban (1985) notes that the Soviet Union implicitly encouraged officials to engage in prohibited-corrupt-behaviors, and would selectively prosecute those that did not show sufficient zeal in serving their superiors. During the early 1990s in the PRC, the Shanghai prosecutor's office announced that 'able individuals' would be granted leniency in corruption cases if they repented for their acts (Sun, 2001).…”
Section: Argumentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These elites were patrimonial in two ways. First, they were members of networks of affinity that had initially developed to protect officials from the vagaries of the planned economy (Urban, 1985), but which had subsequently developed into parasitic machines for the private accumulation of wealth and influence (Jowitt, 1983). Second, their relationship to society at large was patrimonial since Soviet communism had been a patrimonial system in which rapid modernization from a peasant economic base had served to create structures for co-option of new social groups (as a neo-patrimonial system the USSR tended towards the top left of the space defined in Fig.…”
Section: Patrimonial Capitalism and Its Development In The Former Ussrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this respect the 'Catch 22' present in these speeches does not constitute a double bind as such, but rather presents us with the paradoxical communication which is characteristic of, and necessary to, a double bind. As Urban has pointed out, 31 a double bind to be complete requires not only paradoxical communication of this sort and the elimination of meta-communication, but also requires the very real threat of force and a relationship of active dependency between the super-and subordinate parties, to lock it into place.…”
Section: The Re-entry Of Historymentioning
confidence: 99%