THE DURABILITY OF COERCION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF AUTHORITARIAN REGIME STRATEGIES AND RESILIENCE

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Despite the global diffusion of democratic norms, authoritarian regimes continue to persist and even adapt in the modern era. This study seeks to analyze the internal structures, strategies, and institutional mechanisms that explain the resilience of authoritarianism, moving beyond traditional “black box” views of dictatorship. Methods: A systematic review of comparative political science literature and case studies was conducted to examine different types of authoritarian regimes—single-party, military, personalist, and hybrid. The analysis focuses on how these systems combine coercion, co-optation, and legitimation to maintain control and stability. Results: Findings reveal that authoritarian durability is not solely dependent on repression but also on institutional design and strategic management of elites and citizens. Regimes sustain power through mechanisms such as performance legitimacy, nationalism, and controlled participation. Institutionalized single-party regimes demonstrate greater longevity than personalist or military juntas due to their ability to manage succession and integrate broader societal interests. Nonetheless, all face structural vulnerabilities, including economic crises, elite fragmentation, and mass mobilization. Conclusion: The study concludes that authoritarianism is a dynamic and adaptive mode of governance rather than a static remnant of the past. Understanding its evolution requires nuanced theoretical and empirical approaches that account for institutional complexity and regime adaptability in the 21st century.