Elections Without Democracy

Most authoritarian regimes hold elections. In the Soviet Union, voters were usually presented with one approved candidate, and official turnout was routinely over 99%; such elections were rituals of loyalty rather than choices. Many modern authoritarian regimes hold multiparty elections that opposition parties can enter but are very unlikely to win, a pattern Andreas Schedler called 'electoral authoritarianism'. Tactics include controlling media, harassing or disqualifying candidates, using state resources, and manipulating counts.

Why hold elections at all? Scholars suggest several reasons: to claim legitimacy at home and abroad, to show the regime's strength and discourage challengers, to gather information about public support and local officials, and to distribute patronage. Yet elections also carry risks for rulers: unexpected defeats, as in Chile's 1988 plebiscite, or disputed results that trigger mass protests, have sometimes opened the way to democratic change.