Clientelism and the classification of dominant party systems

The view of clientelism as an abuse of state power casts doubt on thedemocratic credentials of highly clientelistic political systems. The questionis particularly relevant for the classification of dominant party systems thatheavily rely on clientelism to elicit popular support and retain a relativelyopen structure of participation. Knowing that clientelism is a widespreadpractice in modern democracies too, how do we evaluate the impact ofclientelism on political competitiveness in order to sort out the position ofthese regimes along the lines of democracy and authoritarianism? This taskrequires identifying the conditions under which clientelism becomes anessentially authoritarian practice and qualifies these regimes as such. Thearticle puts forward two propositions about the circumstances under whichclientelism infringes basic democratic standards under a thin and a thickdefinition of democracy. Clientelism under one-party monopoly engendersauthoritarianism when it thwarts and punishes the contesting voice ofcitizens by effectively blocking exit from its incentives and sanctions.