A bethleni konszolidáció jellege a legújabb nemzetközi szakirodalom tükrében

This article surveys recent literature of comparative politics, searching for a clue to categorization of interwar authoritarian regimes in East-Central Europe among the sub-categories of authoritarian regime. Theory of authoritarian regime has revived since recent cases of transition from dictatorship fail to complete the process of democratization and political scientists began to refer these cases to authoritarian regime, rather than to diminished sub-types of democracy. After reviewing how interwar East-Central European countries were mentioned scantily in the classic literature of authoritarian regime (Juan Linz, Guillermo O’Donnell), it examines the theories of electoral authoritarian regime (Andreas Schedler), competitive authoritarian regime (Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way), one-party or hegemonic party dictatorship (Barbara Geddes, Beatriz Magaloni, etc.), and post-Soviet countries’ regime cycle (Henry Hale). In conclusion, it confirms that the naming of electoral authoritarian regime fits well, but we can maintain the characterization of authoritarian regime with hegemonic party system also. It criticizes the theory of competitive authoritarian regime, because this theory overemphasizes external factors and underemphasizes domestic factors, although it draws an explicit parallel between Central European countries in the 1920s and current authoritarian countries. The article emphasizes the importance of bringing a viewpoint of dynamism or internal logic into regime analysis and, methodologically, the importance of contextualized comparison in political science.