“Settled” and “Unsettled” Paths: From Traditional Monarchy to Modern Regimes

• In Event: The Road to Representative Institutions

Abstract

Looking back at countries’ pathways out of traditional monarchy to modern regimes, why are some countries’ regime development relatively smooth and peaceful with reforms from above, while other countries’ pathways are violent and volatile, featuring revolutions and restorations? In Ziblatt’s language, what drives a country onto a “settled path” or an “unsettled path?” By examining two pairs of cases in Europe and Asia—England and France; Japan and China—this paper proposes that countries need to accomplish two tasks in the process of coming out of traditional monarchy: to centralize state power and to develop the constraints on the executive; and the sequencing of the unfolding of these two tasks determines the pathways states take in getting out of the traditional monarchy, which, in turn, has an impact on their immediately chosen regime type. Drawing on various sources of quantitative and historical data, the paper argues that if certain constraints on the executive had been put into place before the country engaged in substantial centralization, the monarch is unlikely to develop absolutist power (England and Japan). In this case, compromise, negotiation, and reforms from above are possible; the regime evolvement is relatively peaceful; and the outcome is usually constitutional monarchy. By comparison, the monarch’s power will reach an absolutist point during the process of centralization absent prior checks on it, until the regime can only be overthrown by violent revolutions (France and China). In this scenario, republic is usually the immediate regime outcome, but typically does not last long before restorations occur. This pathway, instead, features volatility and violence in its regime development from traditional monarchy to modern regimes. This argument contributes to the discussion of patterns of democracy formation by offering a structural and temporal perspective, focusing on the history of political power distribution per se, instead of the dynamics of class struggle or economic development. Furthermore, this paper expands the discussion of democracy formation from Europe to Asia, which can potentially shed light on patterns of democracy formation in a larger range of the late-developing world.

Author

• Anqi Yang, University of Florida