Narrow authoritarian coalitions raise mobilization stakes and zero-sum perceptions among excluded groups.

Evidence

These processes were mirrored by similar countermobilization efforts from ethnic groups outside the ruling coalition (Wimmer, Cederman & Min, 2009). The competitiveness of the mobilization was higher with more exclusionary coalitions. The stakes increased with the number of groups excluded from power, fostering a perception of politics as a zero-sum game. More inclusionary coalition-building did not feed into competitive mobilization of ethnic groups in the same way. The shares of groups in the regime coalitions were larger, reducing ethnic elites’ political premium from marshalling their own constituents to signal strength. — Johan BroschĂ© and Hanne Fjelde and Kristine Höglund, Electoral violence and the legacy of
, 34

Categorization

  • XREF: The zero-sum perception mechanism appears identical under both authoritarian exclusion and pluralist threatened privilege, supporting the generalizability the reader is testing. — connects to: Exclusionary authoritarian coalitions seed later electoral violence while inclusive ones do not. — Johan BroschĂ© and Hanne Fjelde and Kristine Höglund, Electoral violence and the legacy of
, 4; Authoritarian coalition-building approaches shape post-transition political incentives. — Johan BroschĂ© and Hanne Fjelde and Kristine Höglund, Electoral violence and the legacy of
, 30; Authoritarian regimes vary in how inclusively they build ethnic ruling coalitions. — Johan BroschĂ© and Hanne Fjelde and Kristine Höglund, Electoral violence and the legacy of
, 28 (+3 more)
  • QUESTION: Does this reframe ‘threatened privilege’ as one instance of a broader ‘exclusion-fueled zero-sum’ mechanism rather than a distinct category?

Broader Connections