Talk:Hybrid regime/Archive 1

Tunisia

Is Tunisia still considered a hybrid regime? It is listed as one here, but the source is from 2015 and it is frequently cited in articles (including on Wikipedia) as the only Muslim democracy other than Turkey. Should it be listed as a hybrid regime? DemonDays64 | Tell me if I'm doing something wrong :P 19:03, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

DemonDays64, I think there's room to argue either way; even if that article in Medusza was published yesterday one could argue that we should examine more sources before calling a country a "hybrid regime" in Wikipedia's voice, and the recent political upheaval in the country could mean that whatever we have is simply outdated. I notice that we have an article, Democracy Index, about a ranking which a research group affiliated with The Economist puts out, which lists Tunisia as "flawed democracy", the category above "hybrid regime" (although as these are 2018 ratings, they may also be outdated). There's a few entries on there that seem a little questionable, so I wouldn't advocate turning around and treating those list entries as ground truth, but it's a starting point to work with. I think that until we have a broad survey of sources on this issue, it's probably best to avoid listing countries in Wikipedia's voice. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:07, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Outline

Outlining the list of information that will be added to the article.

• Adding a section of the history of the academic debate on defining and conceptualizing hybrid regimes, the certain criteria that may indicate the regime type, such as civil society and elections.
• Expanding on the "Signs" section, countries that can be looked at as examples, following the third wave of democratization, Latin American countries as literature is available, conceptualizing them as hybrid regimes.
  • There can also be a section added talking about democratic indexes, the topic in itself is a separate article, but bringing up democratic indexes and how certain countries are categorized as hybrid regimes is relevant and can be related to the list of hybrid countries that are already in the article.

Wmair00 (talk) 11:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Wmair00 I agree that history needs to be expanded on. I also suggest removing the first paragraph that is in the history section. The two sentences don't relate to one another. It also states that hybrid regimes are not illiberal democracies but there is a whole section on illiberal democracies. The history section is also confusing becomes it seems to be a history of the term hybrid regime rather than the phenomena. Maybe state why hybrid regimes became more common after the cold war, or make it clear that following the cold war, academics expected for former communist states to transition into democracies but instead remained within the 'gray zone'.

I suggest changing the title for the "Signs" section because signs does not portray academic language. Maybe but criteria, indicators, or qualities? Also, the typology section should be labeled definitions because I am not seeing how they are typologies. I also suggest putting these definitions into complete sentences. I suggest editing the sections for electoral authoritarianism and illiberal democracy because the sentence and paragraph structures make it so it doesn't flow. Also, make sure to relate them back to hybrid democracies, what is their relevance in this article? Carter925 (talk) 02:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wmair00 I think you have some great ideas that would definitely improve the page. I think the most important part would be to add to the overall meaning of the concept. So, like you have suggested, add attributes that make a hybrid state .

I saw you are planning on adding examples (states) that are named hybrid states into this sections. I would recommend adding a new section and listing states that either are or were hybrid states just to keep everything organised.

I hope this is of some help to you and wish you the best of luck writing it. I am looking forward to seeing what you will implement into your page!

MyrtheSpecht (talk) 08:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks so much for wanting to improve the article! I hope everything works out.·Carn·!? 09:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

"arises on the basis"

Carn questioned the {{clarify}} tag that I added. The original sentence read "A hybrid regime is a mixed type of political regime that arises on the basis of an authoritarian as a result of an incomplete democratic transition." This has two problems: first it is unclear what it means to "arise on the basis" of something. Second, the phrase "an authoritarian" is of unclear meaning because there is no noun following the indefinite article. It was recently changed to "on the basis of an authoritarian regime" which solves the second problem but not the first. I think the intention is that an authoritarian regime changes into a hybrid regime, but I am not positive so I didn't just make a change to reflect that. If that is the intended meaning, I suggest "A hybrid regime is a mixed type of political regime created as a result of an incomplete transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic one." CodeTalker (talk) 15:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

• Yes, your suggestion that at first hybrid regimes were described as authoritarian regimes, that were changing to regime with more democratic traits. They were not fully democratic yet, and not authoritarian anymore, these regimes began to be called "hybrid". I will be grateful if you rephrase: English is not my native language.·Carn·!? 16:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)