Abstract
ABSTRACT What strategies do competitive authoritarian regimes use to target local-level opposition gains? How and why can these strategies vary subnationally? We analyse how national-level identity politics shapes regimes’ repression calculus at the local level. We suggest permissive prejudice leads regimes to choose harsher strategies in localities governed by stigmatized minority groups than in majority-led localities. To study this phenomenon, we identify three strategies varying in degrees of severity and visibility, and present an original dataset of repressive events in Turkey’s municipalities from 2016–2022. We argue anti-Kurdish prejudice explains the ruling AKP’s use of a harsh strategy of leader replacement in 149 cases of Kurdish-led municipalities yet only one Turkish-led municipality. Supporting our claim, the AKP used behind-the-scenes hamstringing to obstruct opposition mayors in Turkish-led municipalities. Our findings highlight the permissive and restrictive roles that identity politics plays in shaping local-level repression and wider patterns of authoritarian consolidation.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
