Elections without Order: Russia's Challenge to Vladimir Putin [Paperback]

Richard Rose (Author), Neil Munro (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 23, 2002

Russians want free elections and order. Although their political elites have had no difficulty in supplying candidates and parties in the last decade, predictability in everyday life and the rule of law have suffered. This book is about Russia's attempt to achieve democratization backwards, by holding elections without having created a modern state. This dilemma is the challenge that Russia presents to Vladimir Putin.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"[A]n unusually insightful book that will long remain topical. Rose and Munro have captured the essence of the conundrums and contradictions that have characterized Russia's rocky political developments since the collapse of the Soviet Union now more than ten years ago." Andrew Kuchins, Carnegie Moscow Center, Slavic Review

"Rose and Munro have written an important, original, and exceptionally lucid book. Elections Without Order deepens our understanding of the nature and dynamics of political change in Russia during the past decade. The study is conceptually innovative and especially valuable for its analyses of recent trends in Russian public opinion." Professor George Breslauer, University of California, Berkeley

"Richard Rose, who has a justly high reputation as a comparativist, and Neil Munro, a knowledgeable Russianist, have together produced a very valuable book. Elections without Order rests on the solid foundation of the cumulatively important survey data gathered by Rose on the post Communist states (from 1992 to the present) and from the authors' skill in interpreting these findings. Rose and Munro pay attention to the state as well as society. In their top-down as well as bottom-up analyses, they perceptively identify and vividly illuminate some of the major obstacles in the path of democratization in Russia." Professor Archie Brown, Oxford University

"...provides a timely discussion that not only presents Russia's challenge to Putin but also challenges scholars to reassess the meaning of post-Communist elections." The Russian Review

"Highly recommended." Choice

Book Description

Russians want both free elections and order. In the past decade Russia's political elites have had no difficulty in supplying a great choice of candidates and parties. But order--a sense of predictability in everyday life and the rule of law--has been in short supply. This book is about Russia's attempt to achieve democratization backwards, holding elections without having created a modern state. This is the challenge t hat Russia presents to Vladimir Putin. The authors draw on unrivalled survey and polling data, presented concisely and clearly.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 274 pages
• Publisher: Cambridge University Press (September 23, 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0521016444
• ISBN-13: 978-0521016445
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,417,071 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

5.0 out of 5 stars A dense analysis of various polling results, November 5, 2006

By 

Andreas Umland "SPPS" (ZIMOS) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Elections without Order: Russia's Challenge to Vladimir Putin (Paperback)

The book proposes a number of sophisticated theoretical statements on the sources of the protraction or partial failure of Russia's transition so far. One of its basic claims is that Russia has entered the road of democratization without yet being a fully "modern" state. This implies that it does not yet have a rule of law, an effective civil society, and mechanisms to hold politicians accountable between elections and even through them. The positive effect of the introduction of electoral procedures - though being by themselves more or less meaningful - is thus diminished by the context in which the candidates and voters interact. That is what is meant by "Russia's challenge to Vladimir Putin." Such a proposition constitutes an adequate and lucid diagnosis though I doubt that the term "modern" is the most appropriate one to conceptualize the issue at hand here. ("Modernity" is, in general, such a diffuse concept that it might be better to avoid it in focused social analysis.) Still, the substance of Rose's and Munro's argument is certainly relevant. One would wish Putin, his assistants and Russian politicians in general would read the book because it so refreshingly clearly states what Russia's major problem today seems to be.
This is one of the general advantages of this text. The authors' opinions are stated explicitly, and their critique of Russian practices sometimes borders to what Russians might consider "politically incorrect." For instance, the authors affirmatively quote S.E. Finer who judged Ivan the Terrible's rule to have been "the most extreme example of arbitrary and capricious despotism to be found anywhere" (as quoted on p. 17). When Rose and Munro deal with the pathologies of the post-Soviet Russian political structure by way of not lamenting the absence of a real party system, as is often done, but introducing the idea that there are four party systems producing "a system of floating parties" they can be envied for finding original ways to decipher one of the major paradoxes of post-Soviet Russian politics.
I found reading Rose's and Munro's thus to be fun and a challenge at the same time. We learn a lot about Russia. The opinions of the authors on many issues in her politics and society are well-informed. But the range of issues dealt with is too broad, and the amount of numbers and percentages sometimes overwhelming (at least, for those among us not trained in memorizing and computing large amounts of numerical data). A narrower focus of the study, presentation of less survey results, and use of more qualitative data might have made the argument clearer.