‘Discoursive ideology’ of authoritarian regimes: the case of social policy and regulation of non-profit organisations in Russia

Electoral authoritarian regimes have been perceived as nonideological and largely based on materialistic incentives for the elites and the public. The latter have been seen as demobilised from political participation and the contract between them and the authorities involved economic growth and public services valued by the citizens. Recently, however, scholars increasingly recognise the opposite trend in which autocracies appeal to their citizens’ emotions, by providing narratives of traditional values in the speeches of authoritarian leaders, controlling and manipulating the media, seeking to organise citizens in state-sponsored movements, and involving civil society in participatory governance. This research underlines the importance of non-material – ideational – elements of contemporary authoritarian rule. Yet, while scholars studying authoritarian public policy acknowledge the role of ideas, for example, in the introduction of policy reforms, the role of ideas and ideology for the maintenance of stability of contemporary authoritarian regimes remains insufficiently understood. Adopting the insights of research on ideas and discourses, we argue that an ideology of contemporary autocracies can be viewed as a vibrant ideational landscape comprising different ideational types (beliefs, values and cultures) and practices (communicative and coordinative discourses). While authoritarian leaders and top officials are important actors in the construction of authoritarian discourses, ideational processes are not confined to them and include lower-level officials, civil society organisations at the national and local levels, and even the broader public through their protest activity. This kind of ‘discoursive ideology’ is far from the top-down ideologies practiced by totalitarian dictatorships. This ideology is co-constructed with different segments of the public and their ideas. Although it involves a top-down element associated with ideas expressed by the leaders, the discoursive ideology is also an inclusive process, akin to authoritarian electoral institutions, aiming at the co-optation of citizens, importantly – the regime opponents, whom it traps to invest in regime survival rather than rebelling against it. Our analysis relies on evidence from social policy in Russia, in particular the policy towards and activities of non-profit organisations as welfare providers, which we use as an illustrative case for ideational politics in authoritarian regimes.