지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2001.4
- 수록면
- 171 - 211 (41page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article analyzes how economic crisis under the authoritarian Marcos regime facilitated regime change toward democracy in the Philippines in 1986.
The possibility for democratization of an authoritarian regime is a function of the strength of the regime in question and the environment in which its strength is manifested. In the case of the Philippines, the economic situation of the country, and in particular the existence of an economic crisis, is thought to have been a critical factor in propelling regime change in 1986.
The export-oriented economic policies adopted by the Marcos regime to support the government created a number of internal and external pressures. The governments failure to resolve these pressures had four major consequences. First, the emergence of acute cronyism between the Marcos regime and the Philippine business community distorted the economy and ultimately brought about economic crisis. Second, the banding together of econonic elites excluded from the regime enriched the opposition with strong leadership, funding, and credibility as a viable political alternative. Third, the ahenation of the people due to economic crisis led to widespread withdraw of popular support for the regime. Finally, the development of the economic crisis into a social and political crisis undermined support for the regime both by international investors and the United States, which had both financial and
national security interests at stake in the countly.
Because of the Philippines dependent economic structure and its dependency on the United States for its national security, the re-evaluation of the country's economic and political situation by the international community caused a rift in tlle governing regime. In the end, this fundamentally altered the political relationship between the regime and the opposition, and subsequent strategic political maneuvering among key social, economic, and political groups enabled the Filipinos to re-institute a democratic government for the first time in 14 years since it was lost in 1972.
The possibility for democratization of an authoritarian regime is a function of the strength of the regime in question and the environment in which its strength is manifested. In the case of the Philippines, the economic situation of the country, and in particular the existence of an economic crisis, is thought to have been a critical factor in propelling regime change in 1986.
The export-oriented economic policies adopted by the Marcos regime to support the government created a number of internal and external pressures. The governments failure to resolve these pressures had four major consequences. First, the emergence of acute cronyism between the Marcos regime and the Philippine business community distorted the economy and ultimately brought about economic crisis. Second, the banding together of econonic elites excluded from the regime enriched the opposition with strong leadership, funding, and credibility as a viable political alternative. Third, the ahenation of the people due to economic crisis led to widespread withdraw of popular support for the regime. Finally, the development of the economic crisis into a social and political crisis undermined support for the regime both by international investors and the United States, which had both financial and
national security interests at stake in the countly.
Because of the Philippines dependent economic structure and its dependency on the United States for its national security, the re-evaluation of the country's economic and political situation by the international community caused a rift in tlle governing regime. In the end, this fundamentally altered the political relationship between the regime and the opposition, and subsequent strategic political maneuvering among key social, economic, and political groups enabled the Filipinos to re-institute a democratic government for the first time in 14 years since it was lost in 1972.
목차
1. 서론 : 문제의 제기
2. 경제환경과 정치체제 민주화의 이론적 논의
3. 권위주의체제 등장의 정치경제적 배경
4. 권위주의체제 하의 정치경제구조와 경제위기
5. 경제위기의 정치적 효과: 부문간 및 부문 내 균열
6. 정치위기와 체제전환: 민주화
7. 결론
참고문헌
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
ADAPTIVE PROCESS OF THE NORTH KOREAN POLITICAL SYSTEM IN TIMES OF REGIME CRISIS
International Journal of Korean Unification Studies
1997 .01
-
신민주체제의 경제개혁과 민주주의 : 브라질과 아르헨티나의 사례
라틴아메리카연구
2006 .06
-
A comparison between the international and United States funds for oil pollution compensation
법학논집
2003 .01
-
A Comparative Study of the Relationship between Production Regimes and Workers’ Commitment
한국사회학
2011 .06
-
‘한국사회체제논쟁’ 재론: 97년체제의 ‘이중성’과 08년체제하에서의 ‘헤게모니적 전략’에 대한 고민
민주사회와 정책연구
2010 .01
-
Причины экономического кризиса в Корее и пути его преодоления
로고스경영연구
2004 .05
-
Authoritarianism and Aid : Regime Stability and External Relief in China and Myanmar
한국국제정치학회 학술대회 발표논문집
2010 .08
-
Pattern Change in Emerging Market under Regime Switching After Financial Crisis
한국경영과학회 학술대회논문집
2015 .04
-
87년 체제와 시민사회 이데올로기-가치들의 변화 : 촛불혁명과 사회체제 전환의 전망
경제와사회
2018 .03
-
“The Political Consequences of North Korea’s Economic Crisis”
한반도선진화재단 기타 단행본
2013 .01
-
The Finance-led Growth Regime in the United States: a Fundamental Dilemma in Causation
사회경제평론
2011 .01
-
국제레짐이론 : 개념논쟁
국제정치연구
2001 .06
-
An Interpretation of the North Korean Regime
Korea and the World Economy
2001 .03
-
신자유주의 국제레짐 이론에 관한 고찰
사회과학연구
2006 .02
-
Theory and Empirics of the Institutional Evolution of Economic Development: An Application to Korean Economy
Seoul Journal of Economics
2020 .01
-
Assessing the effectiveness of marine environmental regimes in East Asia
사회과학연구논총
2015 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-340-013796227