The transformation of Russia: The role of the political Élite

Abstract

IN THE POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY of the 1970s theorising about political participation and change focused on the long-term effects of modemisation. Economic development was associated with rationalisation, differentiation, urbanisation, widespread education and the growth of the division of labour; these developments led to the decline of the ancien regime and to the rise, on the one hand, of market capitalism with its attendant freedom and competition and, on the other, to competitive pluralistic processes associated with modem democracy. This was an optimistic political scenario which, it was anticipated, would involve a shift from autocratically ruled societies to democratic ones. As Rueschemeyer, Stephens & Stephens summarise the research findings, 'quantitative cross-national comparisons of many countries ... found consistently a positive correlation between development and democracy. They thus come to relatively optimistic conclusions about the chances of democracy, not only in the advanced capitalist nations but also in the developing countries of today' (Rueschemeyer et al., 1992, p. 3).1 Failure to follow such a course, it was surmised, would lead to decay and decline. Yet such prognoses were faulted in the 1980s when regimes in South-East Asia and Latin America combined authoritarian rule with economic and social development. In the communist world, until the late 1980s, the centralisation of power in the party-state also belied the modernisation approach; political stability seemed assured without the legitimation of a pluralistic competitive party system or representative infrastructure. The political scenario was now pessimistic: autocratic rule was compatible with economic and social development. The transition from communism, which occurred in Eastern Europe in the late 1980s and in the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, may indeed have had underpinnings in the long-term maturation and growth of social groups, such as the intelligentsia-consequent on rising educational levels and occupational change. But such development cannot explain the breakdown of communism and neither can it predict the type of regime which will ensue. The transition from 'communism' may take the form of state capitalism, corporatism, pluralist democracy or even the reversion to some type of state socialism. Recent theorising has suggested that likely outcomes may be anticipated by examining the role of elites in the process of political change and also by considering their political orientation.2 Two kinds of 'transitions' are usually defined. 'Democratic' ones are characterised by negotiated pacts between actors in the dominant elites leading to the sharing or the conceding of power to ascendant elites (O'Donnell