Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Authoritarian legacies and mass left–right regime support in new democracies: The Baltic States and Southern Europe compared

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Comparative European Politics Aims and scope

Abstract

The formation of left–right (LR) identities depends upon effective partisan and ideological differentiation at the supply level and is associated with the existence of free political competition. In a new democracy, however, does the type of authoritarian legacy (left-wing versus right-wing) have any effect on the impact of citizen LR identities on regime support? If so, then how does that impact evolve over time? To answer this, we compare the impact of citizen LR identities on regime support in six countries (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania for the Baltic States, and Greece, Portugal and Spain for Southern Europe) over a 20–30-year period. We show that in both the cases of the evaluation of authoritarian regimes and democratic diffuse support, authoritarian legacy has a significant and rather robust impact. In the case of democratic diffuse support, criticisms come more from the left in the Baltic States and more from the right in Southern Europe, while the opposite was found in the evaluation of authoritarian regimes. We also demonstrate that over time, while the relationships remain significant – albeit much weaker – for the evaluation of authoritarian regimes, they almost disappear in terms of democratic diffuse support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In Greece between the Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) and New Democracy (ND); in Spain between the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) and the Union of the Democratic Centre (UCD), the Popular Alliance (AP) and the Popular Party (PP).

  2. The centre-right Social Democratic Party (PSD) and Social and Democratic Centre (CDS) are able to form working coalitions, while the Socialist Party (PS), the Communist Party (PCP) and the Left Bloc (BE) have been unable to do so.

  3. We accept the idea of regime transition winners and losers has been applied mainly to the formation of political and partisan cleavages. However, we argue and show that in new democracies the above-mentioned framework can also be applied with heuristic gain to analyse and understand connections between the LR divide and support for the democratic regime and the assessment of the previous authoritarian regime.

  4. We acknowledge that, at least for Southern Europe, it would be interesting to have data that is closer to the democratic transition. However, that kind of comparative data for the three countries either does not exist (the EVS wave 1 for 1981 includes only Spain, Eurobarometer before 1985 include only Greece), is not suitable for our purpose or is inaccessible. It should also be noted that the mid-1980s was a time of poor economic performance and high political instability across Southern Europe (government instability, especially in Portugal, and electoral volatility in all three countries), both situations that are characteristic of democratic transition (Gunther, 2005) and which are similar to the transitional situation in the Baltic States during the mid-1990s.

  5. For the evaluation of the political past/authoritarian regimes, we use the following indicators: Southern Europe 1985 – ‘V 83: On the basis of what you know or remember about Franquism/Fascism/Salazarism/Dictatorship, do you think: 1 – All things considered it was good, 2 – It was partly good and in partly bad, 3 – It was bad’; Baltic States 1996–7 – ‘E112: Where on this scale would you put the political system as it was 10 years ago (during the communist period)? 1 – Very bad to 10 – Very good’; Southern Europe and the Baltic States 2008 – ‘E114: I’m going to describe various types of political systems and ask you what you think about each as a way of governing this country. For each one, would you say it is a very good, fairly good, fairly bad or very bad way of governing this country? Having a strong leader who does not have to bother with parliament and elections. 1 – Very good to 4 – Very Bad’.

  6. For the evaluation of support for democratic principles/diffuse democratic support, we use the following indicators: Southern Europe 1985 – ‘V 79: Now we are going to talk about different types of political regimes. I would like you to tell me with which of the following statements you agree. 1 – An authoritarian regime can be preferable, 2 – For people like me it is all the same, 3 – Democracy is preferable to any other regime’; Southern Europe and Baltic States 1996-1997 and 2008 – ‘E123: Democracy may have problems but it is better than any other form of government – 1 Agree strongly to 4 Disagree strongly’.

  7. Using data from the Third Wave European Value Study (1999) rather than from the Fourth Wave tends to produce similar results in respect of 2008, which means the fading out process concerning the relationship between regime evaluations and citizen LRSP began earlier in Southern Europe (the data is not shown because of the limitations on space, but will be supplied on request).

References

  • Anderson, C.J. and Guillory, C.A. (1997) Political institutions and satisfaction with democracy: A cross-national analysis of consensus and majoritarian systems. American Political Science Review 91(1): 66–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, S.H. (2002) Left and right in old and new democracies. Central European Political Science Review 3(7): 6–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, S.H., McDonough, P. and Pina, A.L. (1985) The development of partisanship in new democracies: The case of Spain. American Journal of Political Science 3(7): 695–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruneau, T.C., Diamandouros, P.N., Gunther, R., Lijphart, A., Morlino, L. and Brooks, R.A. (2001) Democracy, Southern European style. In: P.N. Diamandouros and R. Gunther (eds.) Parties, Politics, and Democracy in the New Southern Europ. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 16–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duvold, K. and Jurkynas, M. (2003) Lithuania. In: S. Berglund, J. Ekman and F. Aarebrot (eds.) The Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 133–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehin, P. (2007) Political support in the Baltic states, 1993–2004. Journal of Baltic Studies 38(1): 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Value Study (1999) Wave 3, ZA Nº 4804.

  • European Value Study (2008) Wave 4, ZA Nº 4804.

  • Evans, G. and Whitefield, S. (1998) Identifying the bases of party competition in Eastern Europe. British Journal of Political Science 23(4): 521–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, A. (2006) L-R ideological identities in new democracies: Greece, Portugal and Spain in the Western European context. Pôle Sud – Revue de Science Politique de l’Europe Méridionale 25(II): 153–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, A. (2008) Party polarization and citizens’ L-R orientations. Party Politics 14(2): 189–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, A. and Ana, B. (2011) What left and right means to Portuguese citizens. Comparative European Politics 9(2): 145–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, A. and Kivistik, K. (2013) Mapping and explaining the use of the left-right divide. Brazilian Political Science Review 7(3): 61–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunther, R. (2005) Parties and electoral behavior in Southern Europe. Comparative Political Studies 37(3): 253–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunther, R., Puhle, H.-J. and Diamandouros, P.N. (1995) Introduction. In: R. Gunther, N.P. Diamandouros and H.-J. Puhle (eds.) The Politics of Democratic Consolidation: Southern Europe in Comparative Perspective. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jerschina, J. and Górniak, J. (1997) Leftism, achievement, orientation and basic dimensions of the socio-economic and political attitudes in Baltic countries versus other Central and East European countries. In: N. Hood, R. Hilis and J.-E. Vahlne (eds.)(1997) Transition in the Baltic States: Micro-Level Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 80–108.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jou, W. (2010a) Political cleavages in Serbia: Changes and continuities in structuring L-R orientations. South East European and Black Sea Studies 10(2): 187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jou, W. (2010b) Continuities and changes in L-R orientations in new democracies: The cases of Croatia and Slovenia. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 43(1): 97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jurkynas, M. (2004) Emerging cleavages in new democracies: The case of Lithuania. Journal of Baltic Studies 35(3): 278–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitschelt, H. (1995) Formation of party cleavages in post-Communist democracies. Party Politics 1(4): 447–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitschelt, H., Mansfeldova, Z., Markowski, R. and Toka, G. (1999) Post-Communist Party Systems: Competition, Representation and Inter-Party Cooperation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Klingemann, H.-D., Fuchs, D. and Zielonka, J. (eds.) (2006) Democracy and Political Culture in Eastern Europe. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klingemann, H.-D., Volkens, A., Bara, J., Budge, I. and McDonald, M. (eds.) (2006) Uniquely! The mapping of party policy movements in Central and Eastern Europe 1990–2003. In: Mapping Policy Preferences II: Estimates for Parties, Electors and Governments in Eastern Europe, European Union and OECD 1990–2003. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagerspetz, M. and Vogt, H. (2003) Estonia. In: S. Berglund, J. Ekman and F. Aarebrot (eds.) The Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 57–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linz, J.J. and Stepan, A. (1996) Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linz, J.J., Stepan, A. and Gunther, R. (1995) Transition and consolidation. In: R. Gunther, N.P. Diamandouros and H.-J. Puhle (eds.) The Politics of Democratic Consolidation: Southern Europe in Comparative Perspective. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 77–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonough, P. (1995) Identities, ideologies, and interests: Democratization and the culture of mass politics in Spain and Eastern Europe. The Journal of Politics 57(3): 649–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishler, W. and Rose, R. (1996) Trajectories of fear and hope: Support for democracy in post-communist Europe. Comparative Political Studies 28(4): 553–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishler, W. and Rose, R. (2002) Learning and re-learning regime support: The dynamics of post-communist regimes. European Journal of Political Research 41(1): 5–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morlino, L. (1998) Democracy Between Consolidation and Crisis: Parties, Groups and Citizens in Southern Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morlino, L. and Montero, J.R. (1995) Democracy and legitimacy in Southern Europe. In: R. Gunther, P.N. Diamandouros and H.-J. Puhle (eds.) The Politics of Democratic Consolidation: Southern Europe in Comparative Perspective. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 231–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munro, N. (2002) Post-communist regime support in space and time context. Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 18(2): 103–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neundorf, A. (2009) Growing up on different sides of the wall – A quasi-experimental test: Applying the L-R dimension to the German mass public. German Politics 18(2): 201–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, R.G., Powell, Jr G.B., Stanley, H.W. and Evans, C.L. (1985) Testing the converse partisanship model with new electorates. Comparative Political Studies 18(3): 300–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plakans, A. (2011) A Concise History of the Baltic States. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pop-Eleches, G. and Tucker, J.A. (2010) After the Party: Legacies and Left-Right Distinctions in Post-Communist Countries. Estudio/Working Paper 2010/250, Chicago, June.

  • Regt, S.d.e., Mortelmans, D. and Smits, T. (2011) Left-wing authoritarianism is not a myth, but a worrisome reality: Evidence from 13 Eastern European countries. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 44(4): 299–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. and Mishler, W. (2002) Comparing regime support in non-democratic and democratic countries. Democratization 9(2): 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. and Munro, N. (2009) Parties and Elections in New European Democracies. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R., Berglund, S. and Munro, N. (2006) Baltic identities and interests in a European setting: A bottom-up perspective. In: J. McGarry and M. Keating (eds.) European Integration and the Nationalities Question. London: Routledge, pp. 308–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sani, G., Santamaria, J., Mavrogordatos, G. and Bacalhau, M. (1985) Political culture in Southern Europe: A four-nation study. In: A. Freire, M.C. Lobo, P. Magalhães and A. Espírito-Santo (eds.)(2005) Comportamentos e Atitudes Políticas: Inquéritos e Bases de Dados, 1973–2002. Lisbon, Portugal: Imprensa de Ciências Sociais.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sitter, N. (2002) Cleavages, party strategy and party system change in Europe, east and west. Perspectives on European Politics and Society 3(3): 425–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Sivertsen, H. (2003) Latvia. In: S. Berglund, J. Ekman and F. Aarebrot (eds.) The Handbook of Political Change in Eastern Europe. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 95–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen, A. (1996) Confidence in institutions in post-communist societies: The case of the Baltic States. Scandinavian Political Studies 19(3): 205–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steen, A. (2007) Do elite beliefs matter? Elites and economic reforms in the Baltic States and Russia. Comparative Social Research 23: 79–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torcal, M. (2006) Political disaffection and democratization history in new democracies. In: M. Torcal and J.R. Montero (eds.) Political Disaffection in Conemporary Democracies: Social Capital, Institutions and Politics. London: Routledge, pp. 157–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torcal, M. and Magalhães, P. (2010) Cultura política en el sur de Europa: Un estudio comparado en busca de su excepcionalismo. In: M. Torcal (ed.) La Ciudadania Europea en El Siglo XXI: Estudio Comparado de sus Actitudes, Opinion Pública y Comportamentos Políticos. Madrid, Spain: CIS, pp. 45–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Eijk, C., Schmitt, H. and Binder, T. (2005) Left-right orientations and party choice. In: J. Thomassen (ed.) The European Voter. A Comparative Study of Modern Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 167–191.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Various Authors (2012) Baltic voices, CSPP: Centre for the study of public policy, University of Strathclyde, http://www.balticvoices.org/, accessed 16 May 2012.

  • Whitefield, S. (2002) Political cleavages and post-communist politics. Annual Review of Political Science 5: 181–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Values Survey for Central and Eastern Europe (1996–1997) ZA Study Number (N°) 3062, https://dbk.gesis.org/dbksearch/sdesc2.asp?no=3062&db=e&doi=10.4232/1.3062.

  • Zarycki, T. (2000) Politics in the periphery: Political Cleavages in Poland interpreted in their Historical and International Context. Europe-Asia Studies 52(5): 851–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science and Public Policies & CIES-IUL, ISCTE – IUL (Lisbon University Institute), Lisboa, 1649-026, Portugal

    André Freire

  2. Tartu University, Institute of Government and Politics (IGP), Lossi 36, Tartu, 51003, Estonia

    Kats Kivistik

Authors
  1. André Freire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kats Kivistik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to André Freire.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Freire, A., Kivistik, K. Authoritarian legacies and mass left–right regime support in new democracies: The Baltic States and Southern Europe compared. Comp Eur Polit 16, 249–270 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2015.25

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2015.25

Keywords

Search

Navigation