The ‘competitive authoritarian’ turn in Turkey: bandwagoning versus reality

Bibliography

• Akkoyunlu, K. 2017. “Electoral Integrity in Turkey: From Tutelary Democracy to Competitive Authoritarianism.” In Authoritarian Politics in Turkey: Elections, Resistance, and the AKP, edited by A. E. Öztürk and B. Başer, 47–63. London: I.B. Tauris. doi:10.5040/9781350985438.ch-003
   Google Scholar
• Akkoyunlu, K., and K. Öktem. 2016. “Existential Insecurity and the Making of a Weak Authoritarian Regime in Turkey.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 16 (4): 505–527. doi:10.1080/14683857.2016.1253225
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altunışık, M. B. 2005. “The Turkish Model and Democratization in the Middle East.” Arab Studies Quarterly 27 (1/2): 45–63.
   Google Scholar
• Alvarez, M., J. A. Cheibub, F. Limongi, and A. Przeworski. 1996. “Classifying Political Regimes.” Studies In Comparative International Development 31 (2): 3–36. doi:10.1007/BF02719326
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arbatlı, E. 2014. “Turkey’s New Path: The Rise of Electoral Authoritarianism.” Research Turkey 3: 76–92.
   Google Scholar
• Arbatlı, E., and D. Rosenberg. 2021. “United We Stand, Divided We Rule: How Political Polarization Erodes Democracy.” Democratization 28 (2): 285–307. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1818068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ark-Yıldırım, C. 2017. “Political Parties and Grassroots Clientelist Strategies in Urban Turkey: One Neighbourhood at a Time.” South European Society and Politics 22 (4): 473–490. doi:10.1080/13608746.2017.1406431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arslanalp, M., and T. D. Erkmen. 2020. “Mobile Emergency Rule in Turkey: Legal Repression of Protests during Authoritarian Transformation.” Democratization 27 (6): 947–969. doi:10.1080/13510347.2020.1753701
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arslantaş, D. 2019. “Clientelism and Dominance: Evidence from Turkey.” Doctoral diss., University of Cologne.
   Google Scholar
• Arslantaş, D., and Ş. Arslantaş. 2020a. “How Does Clientelism Foster Electoral Dominance? Evidence from Turkey.” Asian Journal of Comparative Politics 7 (3): 559–575. doi:10.1177/2057891120920718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arslantaş, D., and Ş. Arslantaş. 2020b. “Keeping Power through Opposition: Party System Change in Turkey.” New Perspectives on Turkey 62: 27–50. doi:10.1017/npt.2020.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arslantaş, D., and Ş. Arslantaş. 2021. “The Evolution of the Party Model in Turkey: From Cadre to Cartel Parties?” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 1–18. doi:10.1080/13530194.2021.1990745
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arslantaş, D., Ş. Arslantaş, and A. Kaiser. 2020. “Does the Electoral System Foster a Predominant Party System? Evidence from Turkey.” Swiss Political Science Review 26 (1): 125–143. doi:10.1111/spsr.12386
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babacan, E., M. Kutun, E. Pınar, and Z. Yılmaz, eds. 2021. Regime Change in Turkey: Neoliberal Authori­tarianism, Islamism and Hegemony. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bayulgen, O., E. Arbatlı, and S. Canbolat. 2018. “Elite Survival Strategies and Authoritarian Reversal in Turkey.” Polity 50 (3): 333–365. doi:10.1086/698203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekaroğlu, E. A., and G. K. Osmanbaşoğlu, eds. 2021. Turkey’s Electoral Geography: Trends, Behaviors, and Identities. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bertelsmann Stiftung. 2021. “Sustainable Governance in the Context of the COVID-19 Crisis.” https://www.sgi-network.org/docs/2021/country/sgi2021_Turkey.pdf doi:10.11586/2021108
   Google Scholar
• Bickerstaff, S. 2020. Election Systems and Gerrymandering Worldwide. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bilgiç, A. 2018. “Reclaiming the. National Will: Resilience of Turkish Authoritarian Neoliberalism after Gezi.” South European Society and Politics 23 (2): 259–280. doi:10.1080/13608746.2018.1477422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birgün. 2021. “Kamu İhale Kanunu 192. Kez Değişiyor.” 30 April. Accessed June 25, 2021. https://www.birgun.net/haber/kamu-ihale-kanunu-192-kez-degistiriliyor-343171
   Google Scholar
• Blaydes, L. 2010. Elections and Distributive Politics in Mubarak’s Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bozkurt-Güngen, S. 2018. “Labour and Authoritarian Neoliberalism: Changes and Continuities under the AKP Governments in Turkey.” South European Society and Politics 23 (2): 219–238. doi:10.1080/13608746.2018.1471834
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cagaptay, S. 2020. The New Sultan: Erdogan and the Crisis of Modern Turkey. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Çalışkan, K. 2018. “Toward a New Political Regime in Turkey: From Competitive toward Full Authoritarianism.” New Perspectives on Turkey 58: 5–33. doi:10.1017/npt.2018.10
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Candaş, A. 2021. “From Dual Republic to Totalitarian State: The Counterrevolution in Turkey 2007-2021.” Social Research: An International Quarterly 88 (2): 381–412. doi:10.1353/sor.2021.0019
   Google Scholar
• Carothers, T. 2002. “The End of the Transition Paradigm.” Journal of Democracy 13 (1): 5–21. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castaldo, A. 2018. “Populism and Competitive Authoritarianism in Turkey.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 18 (4): 467–487. doi:10.1080/14683857.2018.1550948
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chehabi, H. E., and J. J. Linz. eds. 1998. Sultanistic Regimes. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng, T. J. 1989. “Democratizing the Quasi-Leninist Regime in Taiwan.” World Politics 41 (4): 471–499. doi:10.2307/2010527
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çınar, M., and Ç. Sayın. 2014. “Reproducing the Paradigm of Democracy in Turkey: Parochial Democratization in the Decade of Justice and Development Party.” Turkish Studies 15 (3): 365–385. doi:10.1080/14683849.2014.954743
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleary, M. R., and A. Öztürk. 2022. “When Does Backsliding Lead to Breakdown? Uncertainty and Opposition Strategies in Democracies at Risk.” Perspectives on Politics 20 (1): 205–221. doi:10.1017/S1537592720003667
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collier, D., and S. Levitsky. 1997. “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research.” World Politics 49 (3): 430–451. doi:10.1353/wp.1997.0009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, S. A. 2007. Ruling But Not Governing: The Military and Political Development in Egypt, Algeria, and Turkey. Baltimore: JHU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coppedge, M., J. Gerring, C. H. Knutsen, S. I. Lindberg, J. Teorell, N. Alizada, D. Altman, et al., 2022. "V-Dem [Turkey-2022/Turkey-1980-2022] Dataset v12." Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. doi:10.23696/vdemds22
   Google Scholar
• Cumhuriyet. 2011. “Vergide Denetim Tek Çatı Altında Toplanıyor.” July 10. Accessed September 15, 2021. https://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/vergide-denetim-tek-cati-altinda-toplaniyor-264932
   Google Scholar
• Cumhuriyet. 2021. “Konda’dan Seçim Anketi: MHP’ye Şok.” January 15. Accessed December 23, 2021. https://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/kondadan-secim-anketi-mhpye-sok-1806171
   Google Scholar
• Dağı, I. 2008. “Islamist Parties and Democracy: Turkey’s AKP in Power.” Journal of Democracy 19 (3): 25–30. doi:10.1353/jod.0.0015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl, R. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsche Welle. 2021. “Almanya’dan Çarpıcı Türkiye Raporu: Kurumlar Felce Uğratıldı.” April 8. Accessed December 20, 2021. https://www.dw.com/tr/almanyadan-çarpıcı-türkiye-raporu-kurumlar-felce-uğratıldı/a-57127795
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, L. 2002. “Elections without Democracy: Thinking about Hybrid Regimes.” Journal of Democracy 13 (2): 21–35. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diamond, L., J. Hartlyn, J. J. Linz, and S. M. Lipset, eds. 1989. Democracy in Developing Countries: Latin America. London: Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• Diamond, L. J., and R. Gunther, eds. 2001. Political Parties and Democracy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Enyedi, Z. 2018. “Democratic Backsliding and Academic Freedom in Hungary.” Perspectives on Politics 16 (4): 1067–1074. doi:10.1017/S1537592718002165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, B., and S. Gümüşçü. 2016. “Rising Competitive Authoritarianism in Turkey.” Third World Quarterly 37 (9): 1581–1606. doi:10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, B., and S. Gümüşçü. 2019. “Killing Competitive Authoritarianism Softly: The 2019 Local Elections in Turkey.” South European Society and Politics 24 (3): 317–342. doi:10.1080/13608746.2019.1691318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esmer, Y., and U. V. Beek. 2019. “Identity Politics: Extreme Polarization and the Loss of Capacity to Compromise in Turkey.” In Democracy Under Threat: A Crisis of Legitimacy?, edited by U. V. Beek, 121–146. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-89453-9_5
   Google Scholar
• Euronews. 2018, July 18. “7 Kez Uzatıldı, 2 Yıl Sürdü: OHAL’in Bilançosu.” Accessed July 25, 2022. https://tr.euronews.com/2018/07/18/7-kez-uzatildi-2-yil-surdu-ohal-in-bilancosu
   Google Scholar
• Euronews. 2021. “Anket: Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan, Potansiyel Rakipleri İmamoğlu, Yavaş Ve Akşener’e Karşı Kaybediyor.” May 21. Accessed September 15, 2021. https://tr.euronews.com/2021/05/21/anket-cumhurbaskan-erdogan-potansiyel-rakipleri-imamoglu-yavas-ve-aksener-e-kars-kaybediyor
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2020. “Commission Staff Working Document.” October 6. Accessed June 14, 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/system/files/2020-10/turkey_report_2020.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Evrensel. 2020. “HDP’nin 65 Belediyesinden 48’i Kayyumla, 6’sı Mazbata Verilmeyerek Gaspedildi.” Accessed July 24, 2022. https://www.evrensel.net/haber/415521/hdpnin-65-belediyesinden-48i-kayyumla-6si-mazbata-verilmeyerek-gasbedildi
   Google Scholar
• Freedom House. 2022. “Turkey: Country Profile.” https://freedomhouse.org/country/turkey
   Google Scholar
• Gandhi, J., and A. Przeworski. 2007. “Authoritarian Institutions and the Survival of Autocrats.” Comparative Political Studies 40 (11): 1279–1301. doi:10.1177/0010414007305817
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gazeteduvar. 2018. “DPT Uzmanı: Türkiye Ekonomisi Artık Plansız Bir Ekonomidir.” October 12. Accessed June 14, 2021. https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/yazarlar/2018/10/12/dpt-uzmani-turkiye-ekonomisi-artik-plansiz-ongorulemez-bir-ekonomidir
   Google Scholar
• Geddes, B. 1999. “What Do We Know about Democratization after Twenty Years?” Annual Review of Political Science 2 (1): 115–144. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giersdorf, S., and A. Croissant. 2011. “Civil Society and Competitive Authoritarianism in Malaysia.” Journal of Civil Society 7 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1080/17448689.2011.553401
   Google Scholar
• Greene, K. F. 2007. Why Dominant Parties Lose: Mexico’s Democratization in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gümrükçü, S. B. 2022. “Populist Discourse, (Counter-)Mobilizations and Democratic Backsliding in Turkey.” Turkish Studies 23 (3): 407–429. doi:10.1080/14683849.2021.1999814
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Güneş-Ayata, A. 1994. Democracy, Clientelism, and Civil Society. London: Lynne Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• Huntington, S. P. 1991. “Democracy’s Third Wave.” Journal of Democracy 2 (2): 12–34. doi:10.1353/jod.1991.0016
   Google Scholar
• Huntington, S. P., and C. H. Moore, eds. 1970. Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society: The Dynamics of Established One-Party Systems. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kaygusuz, Ö. 2018. “Authoritarian Neoliberalism and Regime Security in Turkey: Moving to an ‘Exceptional State’ under AKP.” South European Society and Politics 23 (2): 281–302. doi:10.1080/13608746.2018.1480332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kılıçdaroğlu, K. 2020. “Change in Political Party Strategy and Organization in Turkey: The Republican People’s Party in Government and in Opposition.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 20 (4): 593–615. doi:10.1080/14683857.2020.1833619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehler, K. 2008. “Authoritarian Elections in Egypt: Formal Institutions and Informal Mechanisms of Rule.” Democratization 15 (5): 974–990. doi:10.1080/13510340802362612
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovarek, D., and L. Littvay. 2022. “Greater than the Sum of İts Part(ie)s: Opposition Comeback in the 2019 Hungarian Local Elections.” East European Politics 38 (3): 382–399. doi:10.1080/21599165.2022.2038571
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laebens, M. G., and A. Öztürk. 2021. “Partisanship and Autocratization: Polarization, Power Asymmetry, and Partisan Social Identities in Turkey.” Comparative Political Studies 54 (2): 245–279. doi:10.1177/0010414020926199
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancaster, C. 2016. “Ideology and Hegemonic Party Rule in South Africa, Hungary, and Turkey.” Politics, Religion & Ideology 17 (4): 370–391. doi:10.1080/21567689.2016.1263197
   Google Scholar
• Levitsky, S., and L. A. Way. 2002. “Elections without Democracy: The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism.” Journal of Democracy 13 (2): 51–65. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitsky, S., and L. A. Way. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Linz, J. J. 2000 [1975]. Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• Lust, E. 2009. “Democratization by Elections? Competitive Clientelism in the Middle East.” Journal of Democracy 20 (3): 122–135. doi:10.1353/jod.0.0099
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magaloni, B. 2006. Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and Its Demise in Mexico. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mardin, Ş. 1973. “Center-Periphery Relations: A Key to Turkish Politics?” Daedalus 169–190.
   Google Scholar
• Morse, Y. L. 2012. “The Era of Electoral Authoritarianism.” World Politics 64 (1): 161–198. doi:10.1017/S0043887111000281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mostofa, S. M., and D. B. Subedi. 2021. “Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism in Bangladesh.” Politics and Religion 14 (3): 431–459. doi:10.1017/S1755048320000437
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P., and M. Grömping. 2019. “Electoral Integrity Worldwide.” https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58533f31bebafbe99c85dc9b/t/604785d34098312195a143ee/1615300055051/electoral+integrity+worldwide.pdf
   Google Scholar
• O’Donnell, G. A. 1994. “Delegative Democracy.” Journal of Democracy 5 (1): 55–69. doi:10.1353/jod.1994.0010
   Google Scholar
• O’Dwyer, C., and M. Stenberg. 2022. “Local-Level Democratic Backsliding? The Consolidation of Aspiring Dominant-Party Regimes in Hungary and Poland.” Government and Opposition 57 (3): 508–531. doi:10.1017/gov.2021.12
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öniş, Z. 2014. “Turkey and the Arab Revolutions: Boundaries of Regional Power Influence in a Turbulent Middle East.” Mediterranean Politics 19 (2): 203–219. doi:10.1080/13629395.2013.868392
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öniş, Z., and M. Kutlay. 2019. “Global Shifts and the Limits of the EU’s Transformative Power in the European Periphery: Comparative Perspectives from Hungary and Turkey.” Government and Opposition 54 (2): 226–253. doi:10.1017/gov.2017.16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostwald, K. 2013. “How to Win a Lost Election: Malapportionment and Malaysia’s 2013 General Election.” The Round Table 102 (6): 521–532. doi:10.1080/00358533.2013.857146
   Google Scholar
• Özbudun, E. 2002. “The Institutional Decline of Parties in Turkey.” In Political Parties and Democracy, edited by L. Diamond and R. Gunther, 238–265. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Özbudun, E. 2015. “Turkey’s Judiciary and the Drift toward Competitive Authoritarianism.” The International Spectator 50 (2): 42–55. doi:10.1080/03932729.2015.1020651
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özden, B. A., I. Akça, and A. Bekmen. 2017. “Antinomies of Authoritarian Neoliberalism in Turkey.” In States of Discipline: Authoritarian Neoliberalism and the Contested Reproduction of Capitalist Order, edited by C. B. Tansel, 189–209. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Özen, H. 2020. “Reproducing ‘Hegemony’ Thereafter? The Long-Term Political Effects of the Gezi Protests in Turkey.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 20 (2): 245–264. doi:10.1080/14683857.2020.1745417
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öztan, G. G. 2014. Türkiye’de Militarizm: Zihniyet, Pratik ve Propaganda. Istanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniver­sitesi Yayınları.
   Google Scholar
• Polat, N. 2013. “Regime Change in Turkey.” International Politics 50 (3): 435–454. doi:10.1057/ip.2013.12
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polity IV Turkey Report. 2010. “Polity IV Regime Trends: Turkey, 1946–2013.” https://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/tur2.htm
   Google Scholar
• Poteete, A. R. 2012. “Electoral Competition, Factionalism, and Persistent Party Dominance in Botswana.” The Journal of Modern African Studies 50 (1): 75–102. doi:10.1017/S0022278X11000619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Przeworski, A., M. E. Alvarez, J. A. Cheibub, and F. Limongi. 2000. Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in The World, 1950-1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sartori, G. [1976] 2005. Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Colchester: ECPR Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sartori, G. 1991. “Comparing and Miscomparing.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 3 (3): 243–257. doi:10.1177/0951692891003003001
   Google Scholar
• Sayarı, S. 2014. “Interdisciplinary Approaches to Political Clientelism and Patronage in Turkey.” Turkish Studies 15 (4): 655–670. doi:10.1080/14683849.2014.985809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayarı, S., and Y. R. Esmer, eds. 2002. Politics, Parties, and Elections in Turkey. London: Lynne Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• Schedler, A. 2002. “Elections without Democracy: The Menu of Manipulation.” Journal of Democracy 13 (2): 36–50. doi:10.1353/jod.2002.0031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sezal, M. A., and I. Sezal. 2018. “Dark Taints on the Looking Glass: Whither ‘New Turkey’?” Turkish Studies 19 (2): 217–239. doi:10.1080/14683849.2017.1402681
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, I. O. 2014. “Election Boycotts and Hybrid Regime Survival.” Comparative Political Studies 47 (5): 743–765. doi:10.1177/0010414013488548
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snyder, R., J. Mahoney, P. G. Roeder, M. Bratton, and N. van de Walle. 1999. “The Missing Variable: Institutions and the Study of Regime Change.” Comparative Politics 32 (1): 103–122. doi:10.2307/422435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somer, M. 2014, April 11. “Türkiye Eksik Demokrasiden Rekabetçi Otoriterizme mi Kayıyor?” T24. Accessed June 20, 2021. http://storage.ku.edu.tr/∼musomer/opinion/somer,%20eksik%20demokrasiden%20rekabetci%20otoriterizme%2011%20nisan%202014.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sözcü. 2019. “CHP’li Büyükşehir Belediyelerinde Nüfusun Yüzde 45’i Yaşıyor!.” July 1. Accessed June 14, 2021. https://www.sozcu.com.tr/2019/gundem/chpli-buyuksehir-belediyelerinde-nufusun-yuzde-45i-yasiyor-5208359
   Google Scholar
• Sözen, Y. 2019. “Competition in a Populist Authoritarian Regime: The June 2018 Dual Elections in Turkey.” South European Society and Politics 24 (3): 287–315. doi:10.1080/13608746.2019.1688515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sözen, Y. 2020. “Studying Autocratization in Turkey: Political Institutions, Populism, and Neoliberalism.” New Perspectives on Turkey 63: 209–235. doi:10.1017/npt.2020.26
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tansel, C. B. 2018. “Authoritarian Neoliberalism and Democratic Backsliding in Turkey: Beyond the Narratives of Progress.” South European Society and Politics 23 (2): 197–217. doi:10.1080/13608746.2018.1479945
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taş, H. 2015. “Turkey: From Tutelary to Delegative Democracy.” Third World Quarterly 36 (4): 776–791. doi:10.1080/01436597.2015.1024450
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuğal, C. 2016, February 17. “In Turkey, the Regime Slides from Soft to Hard Totalitarianism.” Open Democracy. Accessed July 20, 2022. https://www.opendemocracy.net/cihan-tugal/turkey-hard-totalitarianism-erdogan-authoritarian
   Google Scholar
• Türkmen-Dervişog˘lu, G. 2015. “Turkey: From “Role Model” to “Illiberal Democracy.” Open Democracy, December 11. Accessed 15 June, 2021. https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/gulay-turkmen-dervisoglu/turkey-from-role-model-to-illiberal-democracy
   Google Scholar
• TUSES. 2021. “Demokrasiye Geçİş İçin Ittifak Ve Mutabakat Senaryoları.” TUSES Vakfı: Istanbul. http://www.tuses.org.tr/userfiles/files/I%CC%87ttifak%20ve%20Mutabakat%20Senaryolar%C4%B1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vachudova, M. A. “From Competition to Polarization in Central Europe: How Populists Change Party Systems and the European Union.” Polity 51, no. 4 (2019): 689–706. doi:10.1086/705704
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Way, L. “Comparing the Arab Revolts: The Lessons of 1989.” Journal of Democracy 22, no. 4 (2011): 13–23. doi:10.1353/jod.2011.0068
   Google Scholar
• Weiss, M. L. “Coalitions and Competition in Malaysia: Incremental Transformation of a Strong-Party System.” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 32, no. 2 (2013): 19–37. doi:10.1177/186810341303200202
   Google Scholar
• White, D., and M. Herzog. “Examining State Capacity in the Context of Electoral Authoritarianism, Regime Formation and Consolidation in Russia and Turkey.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 16, no. 4 (2016): 551–569. doi:10.1080/14683857.2016.1242891
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong, J., 2008. “Maintaining KMT Dominance: Party Adaptation in Authoritarian and Democratic Taiwan.” In Political Transitions in Dominant Party Systems, Edited by Wong, J. And E. Friedman, 73–90. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, C. H., and K. B. Ooi. “Introduction: How Did Malaysia End UMNO’s 61 Years of One-Party Rule? What’s Next?” The Round Table 107, no. 6 (2018): 661–667. doi:10.1080/00358533.2018.1545944
   Google Scholar
• Wuthrich, F. M. “An Essential Center–Periphery Electoral Cleavage and the Turkish Party System.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 45, no. 4 (2013): 751–773. doi:10.1017/S0020743813000895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yıldırım, Y. “Demokrasilerde Otoriterleşme ve Hibrid Rejim Tartışmaları ve Türkiye’ye Dair Çıkarımlar.” Politik Ekonomik Kuram 2, no. 2 (2018): 1–26. doi:10.30586/pek.471152
   Google Scholar