Elections And Distributive Politics In Mubarak S Egypt

Despite its authoritarian political structure, Egypt's government has held competitive, multi-party parliamentary elections for more than 30 years. This book argues that, rather than undermining the durability of the Mubarak regime, competitive parliamentary elections ease important forms of distributional conflict, particularly conflict over access to spoils. In a comprehensive examination of the distributive consequences of authoritarian elections in Egypt, Lisa Blaydes examines the triadic relationship between Egypt's ruling regime, the rent-seeking elite that supports the regime, and the ordinary citizens who participate in these elections. She describes why parliamentary candidates finance campaigns to win seats in a legislature that lacks policymaking power, as well as why citizens engage in the costly act of voting in such a context.

"This book examines the meaning of elections in authoritarian Egypt"--

The starting point for the investigation outlined in this text is the relationship between political authority and economic change in Egypt and will be the presidency and the highest level of the political elite. The bulk of the field research on which this book is based was conducted in Egypt in 1986.

As a means of helping U.S. policymakers and Middle East watchers better understand voting patterns in Egypt since the 2011 revolution, RAND researchers identified regional voting trends, where Islamist parties run strongest, and where non-Islamists are most competitive. Egypt appears headed toward a much more competitive political environment in which Islamists will be increasingly challenged to maintain their electoral edge.

Despite its authoritarian political structure, Egypt's government has held competitive, multi-party parliamentary elections for more than 30 years. This book argues that, rather than undermining the durability of the Mubarak regime, competitive parliamentary elections ease important forms of distributional conflict, particularly conflict over access to spoils. In a comprehensive examination of the distributive consequences of authoritarian elections in Egypt, Lisa Blaydes examines the triadic relationship between Egypt's ruling regime, the rent-seeking elite that supports the regime, and the ordinary citizens who participate in these elections. She describes why parliamentary candidates finance campaigns to win seats in a legislature that lacks policymaking power, as well as why citizens engage in the costly act of voting in such a context.

The nature of personal authoritarian rule in Egypt has remained virtually unchanged for over five decades. Maye Kassem traces the shaping of contemporary Egyptian politics, considering why authoritarian rule has been so resilient and assessing why it hassurvived.

A conceptually rich, historically informed study of the contested politics emerging out of decades of authoritarian neoliberalism in Egypt.

This book presents the first analytical study of the levels of professionalism of campaigns in the 2012 Egyptian presidential elections. It considers the extent to which the election was professionalised and how far the levels of professionalism impacted the democratisation process of Egypt. It provides the story of the five main campaigns by applying the professionalisation index to analyse their structures (hardware) and strategies (software). The book also evaluates the application of the professionalization index to nascent democracies, and the impact of campaign professionalism on such democracies. The book encourages further studies within similar fragile democratic systems as well as offering campaigners practical guidance when approaching future elections.