Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-18T15:30:42.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Myth of the Post-Communist Citizen: Communist Legacies and Political Trust

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2019

Brad Epperly
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In assessing legacy-based explanations for the “trust deficit” observed in the post-communist region, I argue that one need first specify what kind of legacy is being considered: either between post-communist countries and another region, or among the post-communist states. I further contend that the most valid reference for legacies is Western Europe, not the globe. Using data from the European Social Survey (2002–10), I examine the association between sociodemographic factors and political trust in Eastern and Western Europe, and communist legacy effects among post-communist states. Results answer the question of legacies with a strong negative: no evidence is found that communist legacies account for the trust deficit, and I examine four empirical implications instead suggesting this deficit is the result of poor institutional performance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Social Science History , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , Summer 2019 , pp. 297 - 317
Copyright
© Social Science History Association, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The author would like to thank Stephen Hanson, Josh Tucker, and conference participants at the NYU Florence La Pietra Dialogues, Midwestern Political Science Association, and Council for European Studies for feedback on earlier drafts of this essay.

References

Beissinger, Mark (2002) Nationalist Mobilization and the Collapse of the Soviet State. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beissinger, Mark, and Kotkin, Stephen (2014) “Historical legacies of communism: An empirical agenda,” in Beissinger, Mark and Kotkin, Stephen (eds.) Historical Legacies of Communism in Russia and Eastern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catterberg, Gabriela, and Morena, Alejandro (2005) “The individual bases of political trust: Trends in new and established democracies.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 18 (1): 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Melo, Martha, Denizer, Cevdet, Gelb, Alan, and Tenev, Stoyan (2001) “Circumstance and choice: The role of initial conditions and policies in transition economies.” The World Bank Economic Review 15 (1): 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekiert, Grzegorz, and Hanson, Stephen E. (2003) Capitalism and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe: Assessing the Legacy of Communist Rule. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ekiert, Grzegorz, and Kubik, Jan (1998) “Contentious politics in new democracies: East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, 1989–93.” World Politics 50 (4): 547–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epperly, Brad (2011) “Institutions and legacies: Electoral volatility in the postcommunist world.” Comparative Political Studies 44 (8): 829–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Social Survey (2012a) ESS-5 2010 documentation report. London, UK: European Social Survey Data Archive Norwegian Social Science Data Services.Google Scholar
European Social Survey (2012b) “European social survey,” www.europeansocialsurvey.org (accessed February 16).Google Scholar
Freedom House (2016) “Nations in transit 2016,” www.freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/nations-transit-2016 (accessed February 16).Google Scholar
Freitag, Markus, and Buhlmann, Marc (2009) “Crafting trust: The role of political institutions in a comparative perspective.” Comparative Political Studies 42 (12): 1537–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frye, Timothy (2010) Building States and Markets after Communism: The Perils of Polarized Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frye, Timothy (2014) “The limits of legacies: Property rights in Russian energy,” in Beissinger, Mark R. and Kotkin, Stephen (eds.) Historical Legacies of Communism in Russia and Eastern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press: 90–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaddy, Clifford G. (2014) “Room for error: The economic legacy of Soviet spatial misallocation,” in Beissinger, Mark R. and Kotkin, Stephen (eds.) Historical Legacies of Communism in Russia and Eastern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press: 52–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grzymala-Busse, Anna (2007) Rebuilding Leviathan: Party Competition and State Exploitation in Post-Communist Democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, Stephen E. (2009) “The contribution of area studies,” in Landman, Todd and Robinson, Neil (eds.) Sage Handbook of Comparative Politics. Los Angeles: Sage: 159–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Marc Morje (2003) The Weakness of Civil Society in Post-Communist Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ishiyama, John (2015) “Regime legacies and governance in post-communist states.” Taiwan Journal of Democracy 11 (2): 1–24.Google Scholar
Jowell, R. (2003) European social survey 2002–2003: Technical report. London, UK: Centre for Comparative Social Surveys, City University of London.Google Scholar
Jowitt, Ken (1992) New World Disorder: The Leninist Extinction. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert (2002) “Accounting for post-communist regime diversity,” in Hanson, Stephen E. and Ekiert, Grzegorz (eds.) Capitalism and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press: 49–86.Google Scholar
Kurtz, Marcus J., and Schrank, Andrew (2007) “Growth and governance: Models, measures, and mechanisms.” Journal of Politics 69 (2): 538–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Letki, Natalya, and Evans, Geoffrey (2005) “Endogenizing social trust: Democratization in East-Central Europe.” British Journal of Political Science 35 (3): 515–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieven, Anatol (1994) The Baltic Revolution: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Path to Independence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lovell, David W. (2001) “Trust and the politics of postcommunism.” Communist and Post- Communist Studies 34 (1): 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luhiste, Kadri (2006) “Explaining trust in political institutions: Some illustrations from the Baltic States.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 39 (4): 475–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFaul, Michael (2002) “The fourth wave of democracy and dictatorship: Noncooperative transitions in the postcommunist world.” World Politics 54 (2): 212–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishler, William, and Rose, Richard (1997) “Trust, distrust and skepticism: Popular evaluations of civil and political institutions in post-communist societies.” Journal of Politics 59 (2): 418–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mishler, William, and Rose, Richard (1998) “Trust in untrustworthy institutions: Culture and institutional performance in post-communist societies.” Number 310. Centre for the Study of Public Policy, University of Stratchlyde.Google Scholar
Mishler, William, and Rose, Richard (2001) “What are the origins of political trust?” Comparative Political Studies 34 (1): 30–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrell, Peter, and Yijiang, Wang (1993) “When privatization should be delayed: The effect of communist legacies on organizational and institutional reforms.” Journal of Comparative Economics 17 (2): 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfaff, Steven (2006) Exit-Voice Dynamics and the Collapse of East Germany: The Crisis of Leninism and the Revolution of 1989. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pop-Eleches, Grigore (2007) “Historical legacies and post-communist regime change.” Journal of Politics 69 (41): 908–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pop-Eleches, Grigore (2015) “Pre-communist and communist developmental legacies.” East European Politics and Societies 29 (2): 391–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pop-Eleches, Grigore, and Tucker, Joshua A. (2011) “Communism’s shadow: Postcommunist legacies, values, and behavior.” Comparative Politics 43 (4): 379–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pop-Eleches, Grigore, and Tucker, Joshua A. (2017) Communism’s Shadow: Historical Legacies and Contemporary Political Attitudes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Popova, Maria (2012). “Why doesn’t the Bulgarian judiciary prosecute corruption?” Problems of Post-Communism 59 (5): 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeskens, Tim, and Hooghe, Marc (2008) “Cross-cultural measurement equivalence of generalized trust.” Social Indicators Research 85 (3): 515–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Graham, Law, Vivien, Wilson, Andrew, Bohr, Annette, and Allworth, Edward (1998) Nation-Building in the Post-Soviet Borderlands: The Politics of National Identities. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szporluk, Roman (1990) “The imperial legacy and the Soviet nationalities problem,” in Hajda, Lubomyr and Beissinger, Mark R. (eds.) The Nationalities Factor in Soviet Politics and Society. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Wezel, Katja (2010) Lettlands “Ruckkehr nach Europa”—Erfullung eines lettischen Traums? Der EU-Beitritt als Projekt der lettischen Elite. Nordost-Archiv XVIII: 132–151.Google Scholar
Wittenberg, Jason (2015) “Conceptualizing historical legacies.” East European Politics and Societies 29 (2): 366–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank (2013) “Worldwide Governance Indicators,” www.govindicators.org (accessed February 16).Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Epperly supplementary material

Epperly supplementary material 1

Download Epperly supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 304.1 KB