Only game in town? the persistence of competitive authoritarian regimes in modern Turkey

Bibliography

• Ahmad, Feroz. Turkey: The Quest for Identity. Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Aksin, Sina. Turkey: From Empire to Revolutionary Republic. New York: New York University Press, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Albayrak, Mustafa. “Türkiye’de Demokrasiye Geçiş Yılları ve Demokratikleşme Sürecinin Ilk on Yılı.” Ankara Barosu Dergisi 1 (2014): 296–312.
   Google Scholar
• Asrak Hasdemir, Tuba. “1980 Sonrası Türkiye’de Seçim Sistemi: Kimi Saptamalar.” Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi 47, no. 1 (1992). published online at doi:10.1501/SBFder_0000001530.
   Google Scholar
• Ayan, Pelin. “Authoritarian Party Structures in Turkey: A Comparison of the Republican People’s Party and the Justice and Development Party.” Turkish Studies 11, no. 2 (2010): 197–215.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayan Musil, Pelin. Authoritarian Party Structures and Democratic Political Setting in Turkey. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Aydın-Düzgit, Senem, and E. Fuat Keyman. “EU-Turkey Relations and the Stagnation of Turkish Democracy.” Working Paper. Istanbul Policy Center. Sabancı University, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Aydınlı, Ersel. “Civil-Military Relations Transformed.” Journal of Democracy 23, no. 1 (2012): 100–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Başlevent, Cem. “Socio-Demographic Determinants of the Support for Turkey’s Justice and Development Party.” Economics Bulletin 33, no. 2 (2013): 1215–1228.
   Google Scholar
• Bingöl, Yılmaz, and Şener Akgün. “Demokratlıktan Muhafazakâr Demokratlığa: Demokrat Parti Ile Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisinin Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analizi.” Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 9, no. 1 (2005): 1–33.
   Google Scholar
• Boix, Carles. Democracy and Redistribution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Booysen, Susan. “The African National Congress and Its Transfer of Power from Zuma to Ramaphosa: The Intraparty-Multiparty Nexus.” Transformation: Critical Perspectives on Southern Africa 98, no. 1 (2019): 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Brancati, Dawn. “Democratic Authoritarianism: Origins and Effects.” Annual Review of Political Science 17, no. 1 (2014): 313–326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownlee, Jason. Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Bulut, Sedef. “Üçüncü Dönem Demokrat Parti Iktidarı (1957-1960): Siyasi Baskılar ve Tahkikat Komisyonu.” Gazi Akademik Bakış 2, no. 4 (2009): 125–145.
   Google Scholar
• Capoccia, Giovanni, and Daniel Ziblatt. “The Historical Turn in Democratization Studies: A New Research Agenda for Europe and Beyond.” Comparative Political Studies 43, no. 8–9 (2010): 931–968.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carothers, Thomas. “The End of the Transition Paradigm.” Journal of Democracy 13, no. 1 (2002): 5–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collier, David, and Steven Levitsky. “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research.” World Politics 49, no. 3 (1997): 430–451.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, Ian. “Dominant Party Cohesion in Comparative Perspective: Evidence from South Africa and Namibia.” Democratization 24, no. 1 (2017): 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corrales, Javier. “Autocratic Legalism in Venezuela.” Journal of Democracy 26, no. 2 (2015): 37–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, William P., and Richard S. Katz. The Challenges of Intra-Party Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• De Mesquita, Bruce Bueno, George W. Downs, Alastair Smith, and Feryal Marie Cherif. “Thinking Inside the Box: A Closer Look at Democracy and Human Rights.” International Studies Quarterly 49, no. 3 (2005): 439–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demir, Şerif. “Adnan Menderes ve 6/7 Eylül Olayları.” Yakın Dönem Türkiye Araştırmaları 12 (2007): 37–63.
   Google Scholar
• Demirel, Ahmet. Tek Partinin İktidarı. Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Donno, Daniela. “Elections and Democratization in Authoritarian Regimes.” American Journal of Political Science 57, no. 3 (2013): 703–716.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emre-Kaya, Ayşe Elif. “Demokrat Parti Döneminde Basın-İktidar İlişkileri.” İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi 39 (2010): 93–118.
   Google Scholar
• Esen, Berk, and Sebnem Gumuscu. “Rising Competitive Authoritarianism in Turkey.” Third World Quarterly 37, no. 9 (2016): 1581–1606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esen, Berk, and Sebnem Gumuscu. “Building a Competitive Authoritarian Regime: State–Business Relations in the AKP’s Turkey.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 20, no. 4 (2018): 349–372.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geddes, Barbara. “What Causes Democratization.” In The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics, edited by Carles Boix, and Susan Carol Stokes, 317–339. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• İnan, Süleyman. “Demokrat Parti Dönemi (1950-1960).” In Yakın Dönem Türk Politik Tarihi, edited by Süleyman İnan, and Ercan Haytoğlu, 117–145. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Kadioğlu, Ayşe. “The Paradox of Turkish Nationalism and the Construction of Official Identity.” Middle Eastern Studies 32, no. 2 (1996): 177–193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin. “The Motherland Party: The Challenge of Institutionalization in a Charismatic Leader Party.” Turkish Studies 3, no. 1 (2002): 41–61.
   Google Scholar
• Keloğlu-İşler, Esra. “Demokrat Parti’nin Halkla Ilişkileri Üzerine Bir Inceleme.” İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi 24 (2007): 111–128.
   Google Scholar
• Kemahlioglu, Ozge, Rebecca Weitz-Shapiro, and Shigeo Hirano. “Why Primaries in Latin American Presidential Elections?” The Journal of Politics 71, no. 1 (2009): 339–352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancaster, Caroline. “The Iron Law of Erdogan: The Decay from Intra-Party Democracy to Personalistic Rule.” Third World Quarterly 35, no. 9 (2014): 1672–1690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Legler, Thomas, and Thomas Kwasi Tieku. “What Difference Can a Path Make? Regional Democracy Promotion Regimes in the Americas and Africa.” Democratization 17, no. 3 (2010): 465–491.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehrer, Ron. “Intra-Party Democracy and Party Responsiveness.” West European Politics 35, no. 6 (2012): 1295–1319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitsky, S., and L. Way. “The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism.” Journal of Democracy 13, no. 2 (2002): 51–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linz, Juan J., and Alfred Stepan. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Lizzeri, Alessandro, and Nicola Persico. “Why did the Elites Extend the Suffrage? Democracy and the Scope of Government, with an Application to Britain's “Age of Reform”.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 119, no. 2 (2004): 707–765.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loxbo, Karl. “The Fate of Intra-Party Democracy: Leadership Autonomy and Activist Influence in the Mass Party and the Cartel Party.” Party Politics 19, no. 4 (2013): 537–554.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahoney, James. “Path-Dependent Explanations of Regime Change: Central America in Comparative Perspective.” Studies in Comparative International Development 36, no. 1 (2001): 111–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mainwaring, Scott, and Edurne Zoco. “Political Sequences and the Stabilization of Interparty Competition.” Party Politics 13, no. 2 (2007): 155–178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metinsoy, Murat. “Fragile Hegemony,: Flexible Authoritarianism, and Governing from Below: Politicians’ Reports in Early Republican Turkey.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 43, no. 4 (2011): 699–719.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Møller, Jørgen. “When one Might not see the Wood for the Trees: The ‘Historical Turn’ in Democratization Studies, Critical Junctures, and Cross-Case Comparisons.” Democratization 20, no. 4 (2013): 693–715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müftüler-Baç, Meltem, and E. Fuat Keyman. “The Era of Dominant-Party Politics.” Journal of Democracy 23, no. 1 (2012): 85–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nasr, Seyyed Vali Reza. “The Rise of ‘Muslim Democracy.” Journal of Democracy 16, no. 2 (2005): 13–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öniş, Ziya. “Turgut Özal and His Economic Legacy: Turkish Neo-Liberalism in Critical Perspective.” Middle Eastern Studies 40, no. 4 (2004): 113–134.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öniş, Ziya. “Sharing Power: Turkey’s Democratization Challenge in the Age of the AKP Hegemony.” Insight Turkey 15, no. 2 (2013): 103–122.
   Google Scholar
• Ottaway, Marina. Democracy Challenged: The Rise of Semi-Authoritarianism. Washington, D.C: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Özçelik, Pınar Kaya. “Demokrat Parti’nin Demokrasi Söylemi.” Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi 65, no. 3 (2010): 163–187.
   Google Scholar
• Pepinsky, Thomas. “The Institutional Turn in Comparative Authoritarianism.” British Journal of Political Science 44, no. 3 (2014): 631–653.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Przeworski, Adam. Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Przeworski, Adam. “Institutions Matter?” Government and Opposition 39, no. 4 (2004): 527–540.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, James A., and Daron Acemoglu. Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. New York: Crown Business, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Sarigil, Zeki. “Showing the Path to Path Dependence: The Habitual Path.” European Political Science Review 7, no. 2 (2015): 221–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayari, Sabri. “The Turkish Party System in Transition.” Government and Opposition 13, no. 1 (1978): 39–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schedler, Andreas, ed. Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Shadmehr, Mehdi. “Mobilization, Repression, and Revolution: Grievances and Opportunities in Contentious Politics.” The Journal of Politics 76, no. 3 (2014): 621–635.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somer, Murat. “Does It Take Democrats to Democratize? Lessons from Islamic and Secular Elite Values in Turkey.” Comparative Political Studies 44, no. 5 (2011): 511–545.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somer, Murat. “Moderation of Religious and Secular Politics, a Country's “Centre” and Democratization.” Democratization 21, no. 2 (2014): 244–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanpınar, Ahmet H. The Time Regulation Institute. New York: Penguin, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Taşkın, Yüksel. “Hegemonizing Conservative Democracy and the Problems of Democratization in Turkey: Conservatism Without Democrats?” Turkish Studies 14, no. 2 (2013): 292–310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tepe, Sultan. “Turkey’s AKP: A Model ‘Muslim-Democratic’ Party?” Journal of Democracy 16, no. 3 (2005): 69–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turam, Berna. “Are Rights and Liberties Safe?” Journal of Democracy 23, no. 1 (2012): 109–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turan, Ilter. “Leadership Change in Turkey.” In Mediterranean Politics. Vol. 1, edited by Richard Gillespie, 232–245. London: Pinter, s, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Uzman, Nasrullah. “İktidardan Muhalefete M. Fuad Köprülü’nün Siyasi Mücadelesi (1956-1966).” Gazi Akademik Bakış 7, no. 13 (2013): 185–208.
   Google Scholar
• Wuthrich, F. Michael. National Elections in Turkey: People, Politics, and the Party System. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Yardımcı-Geyikçi, Şebnem, and Hakan Yavuzyilmaz. “Party (De)Institutionalization in Times of Political Uncertainty: The Case of the Justice and Development Party in Turkey.” Party Politics 28, no. 1 (2022): 71–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaşar, Beril. “Demokrat Parti’de Parti İçi Demokrasi (1946-1960).” Journal of History School XVIII (2014): 503–541.
   Google Scholar
• Yeşil, Bilge. “Authoritarian Turn or Continuity? Governance of Media Through Capture and Discipline in the AKP Era.” South European Society and Politics 23, no. 2 (2018): 239–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yildirim, A. Kadir, and Marc Lynch. “Contemporary Turkish Politics.” POMEPS Studies 22, December 7, 2016, available at https://pomeps.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/POMEPS_Studies_22_Turkish_Politics_Web.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Zakaria, Fareed. “The Rise of Illiberal Democracy.” Foreign Affairs 76, no. 6 (1997): 22–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zürcher, Erik J. “The Ottoman Legacy of the Turkish Republic: An Attempt at a New Periodization.” Die Welt Des Islams 32, no. 2 (1992): 237–253.
   Google Scholar