The Putin Factor: Personalism, Protest, and Regime Stability in Russia

Abstract

Vladimir Putin remains central to regime stability in the Russian Federation. However, the role that Mr. Putin's personalist appeal—rooted in both charismatic and noncharismatic linkages—plays in maintaining regime support is undertheorized. I argue that personalism is a powerful political resource in electoral authoritarian regimes because it provides a positive logic for skeptical voters to support the leader. Personalist linkages obscure the role that electoral bias plays in shaping electoral outcomes, diminishing the impulse for mass postelection protest. When the effectiveness of personalism declines, discontented citizens are more likely to protest biased elections. This article shows that Mr. Putin's appeal as a sound steward of the economy declined by 2012 but that other sources of issue satisfaction continued to shape some respondents' trust in the president.

Testosterone and Repression in Non‐Democracies: Evidence from a Sample of Russian Governors

“…Possibly, our results are driven by the differences in the ‘management style’ between the governors with a federal background and governors, who spent their entire career in the region. Putin himself repeatedly demonstrates proclivity to highly aggressive public stances and images of masculinity (Goscilo ; Smyth ). Possibly, those who have a long experience in the federal bureaucracy, are more inclined to have absorbed this management style themselves and use it in the regions (precisely for the theft repressiveness, where, as mentioned, the stimuli for rational decision‐making are the lowest).…”

Protests and Voter Defections in Electoral Autocracies: Evidence From Russia

“…Moreover, in systems with high levels of personalist rule, such as Putin’s Russia, support for incumbents who embody the stability of the regime is often remarkably resilient to revelations of abuses and malpractices, even as support for other institutions and politicians declines. Existing research also shows significant personalist support for Vladimir Putin and finds that votes for the ruling party have traditionally increased on Putin’s coattails (see, for example, Smyth, 2014). Finally, focusing on a presidential election provides a tougher test for evaluating a disengagement scenario, as abstention in presidential elections in Russia has been traditionally lower than abstention in the Duma elections.…”

State capacity and regime resilience in Putin’s Russia

“…Moreover, elite unity is crucial in the consolidation of authoritarian rule (Way, 2005). The personalized nature of the regime, in which the president is essentially the guarantor of regime legitimacy and social peace, has therefore provided a powerful incentive for elites to stay on board rather than risk challenging the leader (Smyth, 2014: 574). The link between neo-patrimonialism and the nature of the Russian political regime is clear.…”