Cart
Free Shipping in the UK
Proud to be B-Corp

United Front Paul Schuler

United Front By Paul Schuler

United Front by Paul Schuler


United Front Summary

United Front: Projecting Solidarity through Deliberation in Vietnam's Single-Party Legislature by Paul Schuler

Conventional wisdom emerging from China and other autocracies claims that single-party legislatures and elections are mutually beneficial for citizens and autocrats. This line of thought reasons that these institutions can serve multiple functions, like constraining political leaders or providing information about citizens. In United Front, Paul Schuler challenges these views through his examination of the past and present functioning of the Vietnam National Assembly (VNA), arguing that the legislature's primary role is to signal strength to the public. When active, the critical behavior from delegates in the legislature represents cross fire within the regime rather than genuine citizen feedback. In making these arguments, Schuler counters a growing scholarly trend to see democratic institutions within single-party settings like China and Vietnam as useful for citizens or regime performance. His argument also suggests that there are limits to generating genuinely consultative authoritarianism through quasi-democratic institutions. Applying a diverse range of cutting-edge social science methods on a wealth of original data such as legislative speeches, election returns, and surveys, Schuler shows that even in a seemingly vociferous legislature like the VNA, the ultimate purpose of the institution is not to reflect the views of citizens, but rather to signal the regime's preferences while taking down rivals.

United Front Reviews

Why does a single-party state have well-developed electoral and legislative institutions? Schuler provides a compelling answer to this question in this persuasive, far-reaching account. His work pushes forward our understanding of institutions not only in one of the few remaining Communist states, but also in authoritarian regimes more broadly. -- Jennifer Gandhi * Emory University *
A firecracker of a book and a critical contribution to scholarship on authoritarian institutions and Vietnamese politics. In punchy and thrilling prose, using deep knowledge and cutting-edge empirical tools, Schuler challenges existing theories that parliaments resolve informational problems for autocrats, arguing instead that they are better suited to signal dominance and promote popular legitimacy. -- Edmund Malesky * Duke University *
As a study of political science, Schuler makes a major contribution by challenging the dominant view in scholarship that often conflates legislatures in single-party regimes with other authoritarian or hybrid regimes... Schuler has written an outstanding book that deserves to be read widely by both political scientists and Vietnam experts. -- Tuong Vu * Pacific Affairs *

About Paul Schuler

Paul Schuler is Assistant Professor in the School of Government and Public Policy at the University of Arizona.

Table of Contents

Contents and AbstractsIntroduction: Introduction chapter abstract

The introduction presents the book's central research question and the theory and evidence used to explore it: Why might the Vietnam National Assembly and some single-party legislatures be empowered with greater responsibilities and greater electoral competitiveness? Recent work suggests that legislative institutionalization demonstrates resilient or consultative authoritarianism, whereby autocrats can inform or constrain themselves through limited debate in a legislature and limited electoral competitiveness. This book challenges this view, arguing that single-party legislatures and elections do not inform or constrain autocrats but instead are meant to signal strength. When such legislatures are active, they are supposed to direct their activity against the autocrat's agents in the government. Elections serve to mobilize compliance with the regime. The theory of this book suggests that autocrats cannot simultaneously encourage input and signal strength through the same institutions. The introduction concludes with a preview of the chapters.

1The Signaling Trap: Why Single-Party Legislatures Must Be Controlled chapter abstract

This chapter examines existing explanations for the role of authoritarian legislatures and elections, raising questions about the applicability of these theories to Vietnam. It also lays out the book's core theoretical argument that while autocrats may use institutions such as legislatures and elections to achieve multiple goals, some goals are incompatible. In particular, if autocrats hope to use legislatures and elections to signal strength, this compromises their ability to use those same institutions to constrain or inform themselves. The chapter then argues that autocrats in single-party regimes are more likely to use legislatures and elections to signal strength at the expense of constraint or information provision because these institutions are publicly visible and state sanctioned. The chapter concludes with the observable implications of the argument for legislative organization, electoral behavior, delegate behavior, and public opinion.

2How Elections Work in Vietnam chapter abstract

This chapter lays out the structure of Vietnam's electoral system, highlighting some of the key institutions that block linkages between citizens and delegates. It focuses in particular on party management of campaigns and vetting institutions to show how the five gates system effectively keeps genuinely independent candidates from winning seats. The chapter shows how the regime further undermines the competitiveness of elections by manipulating the districts such that even candidates who survive vetting face bias in favor of the regime's preferred candidates. This chapter serves two purposes: providing important background on Vietnam's electoral institutions, and highlighting important institutions that facilitate the signaling value of elections and give the regime control over legislative behavior.

3Unconditional Party Government: Legislative Organization in the VNA chapter abstract

This chapter examines legislative organization in the VNA, describing the extremely hierarchical system as unconditional party government. Building from a theory of conditional party government to explain party control of legislatures in democracies, this chapter describes the extreme dominance of the VNA Standing Committee over legislative proceedings and agenda setting. Given the party's role in deciding who will serve on the Standing Committee and fill vital full-time roles in the legislature, the party ensures its control over legislative output and the legislative agenda. As with elections, party dominance of legislative output through the Standing Committee ensures that the VNA serves to signal strength to the population at the expense of the legislature's capacity to inform or constrain.

4Explaining the Evolution of the VNA chapter abstract

This chapter explores the institutionalization of the VNA to examine the argument that the Vietnam Communist Party empowered it to check the government rather than to constrain or inform the party leadership. Before defending this argument, which contradicts existing accounts of the development of authoritarian legislatures and the VNA, the chapter also establishes that the VNA is a most likely case for the competing arguments for authoritarian legislative institutionalization and a least likely case for the book's signaling argument. The chapter then defends the signaling argument by examining the role party leaders played versus those of political and economic reformers at critical moments when the legislature gained increased powers. An examination of the decisions to empower the legislature with greater staff, televised query sessions, and a regularized vote of confidence measure shows that it was the party leaders who supported the measures rather than economic liberalizers in the government.

5Mobilized or Motivated? Voting Behavior in Vietnamese Elections chapter abstract

This chapter examines how electoral institutions impact electoral behavior in a single-party regime. Existing work suggests that citizens in authoritarian regimes vote in a partially informed manner and provide information through their votes. By contrast, this chapter argues that party strength rather than voter interest drives electoral behavior. Using unique data from Vietnam, which for the first time combine actual electoral returns with district-level survey data, this chapter shows little evidence of strategic voting, competitiveness driving turnout, or knowledge of candidates. Instead, connection to the party drives participation. The findings imply that Vietnamese voters are ill informed about their candidates and that their votes contain little informational content. Consequently, elections are largely an exercise in mobilizing public compliance and support for the party.

6Explaining Oversight Behavior: Position Taking or Position Ducking? chapter abstract

This chapter examines legislative behavior in the VNA. The signaling and blame deflection theory of the book holds that the legislature should not criticize the party. By contrast, when the legislature is critical, it should direct its attention toward government leaders. Using an original dataset of public opinion data and legislative behavior, this chapter uses automated text analysis to show that the VNA only debates hot-button issues on government-controlled issues. When issues arise on party-controlled portfolios, the legislature is not called into action. The findings imply that the legislature does not primarily inform or constrain the party through legislative behavior but rather serves to damage rivals in the government.

7Intimidation or Legitimation? The Signaling Value of the VNA chapter abstract

A final implication of the book's signaling theory is that legislative behavior and elections should increase support for the party and reduce the likelihood of public resistance. Such an effect could operate through two potential channels. First, it could convince citizens that resistance is futile. Alternatively, it could convince citizens more directly to support the regime. Using an Internet-based survey experiment in Vietnam, this chapter shows that legislative behavior and elections seem to boost public confidence in the legitimacy of the legislature and the electoral process. This in turn leads to greater support for the party and satisfaction in the overall political environment in Vietnam.

Conclusion: Conclusion: Curbing our Expectations for the VNA, Single-Party Legislatures chapter abstract

The conclusion examines the implications of the theory and findings for broader understanding of the role of legislatures in single-party and hybrid regimes outside Vietnam. This chapter argues that while elections for legislatures in hybrid regimes may be more informative than in single-party contexts, the importance of legislatures for policy outcomes is likely minimal in these contexts as well. The chapter then examines why such legislatures have been associated with improved investment and economic growth if they have little policy input. It suggests that one reason is that legislative closures are typically correlated with the process of consolidation, which hinders these outcomes. The chapter also considers the implications of the argument for theories of democratization and Vietnam's political development. It argues that while the VNA may facilitate a smoother transition should democratization occur, the VNA and other single-party legislatures are not likely to spearhead such a transition.

Additional information

NGR9781503614741
9781503614741
1503614743
United Front: Projecting Solidarity through Deliberation in Vietnam's Single-Party Legislature by Paul Schuler
New
Paperback
Stanford University Press
2021-01-12
272
N/A
Book picture is for illustrative purposes only, actual binding, cover or edition may vary.
This is a new book - be the first to read this copy. With untouched pages and a perfect binding, your brand new copy is ready to be opened for the first time

Customer Reviews - United Front