Does Landholding Inequality Block Democratization?: A Test of the “Bread and Democracy” Thesis and the Case of Prussia
Abstract
Recent cross-national studies have returned their attention to the structural determinants of political regimes, highlighting in particular the factor of “landholding inequality” as a decisive barrier to democratization. This article provides thefirstsystematic test of such hypotheses at the microlevel and proposes a new account of authoritarianism's durability by examining the crucial case of pre-World War I Prussia. The article analyzes the results of a roll-call vote on a watershed piece of legislation that was defeated on the eve of World War I-legislation that would have democratized suffrage rules in Germany's largest state. When examined systematically, this historically and theoretically important vote reveals two surprising lessons: first, landholding inequality undercuts the prospects of democratization even holding income inequality constant. Second, the nature of elite competition and electoral considerations, shaped by the institutional configuration of nondemocratic regimes, can also thwart democratization, even when socioeconomic conditions may appear to make a society ripe for regime change.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In US states, landholding inequality is highly significant and exerts a negative impact on the secret ballot.
“Yet, landholding inequality is highly signi…cant and exerts a negative impact on the secret ballot.”
From From Open to Secret Ballot: Vote Buying and Modernization (2012) · cites this paper as Ziblatt (2008)
Cites
Hartley, J. (2004) · Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research · doi:10.4135/9781446280119.n26 · Cited by 15,461 · see citing works
Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research
King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994) · Princeton University Press · doi:10.1515/9781400821211 · Cited by 7,225 · see citing works
Boix, C. (2003) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804960 · Cited by 2,211 · see citing works
Modernization: Theories and Facts
Przeworski, A., & Limongi, F. (1997) · World Politics · doi:10.1353/wp.1997.0004 · Cited by 1,983 · see citing works
Authoritarianism in an Age of Democratization
Brownlee, J. (2007) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511802348 · Cited by 1,070 · see citing works
Luebbert, G. M. (1991) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195066104.001.0001 · Cited by 491 · see citing works
Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards
(2010) · doi:10.5040/9798216385530 · Cited by 405 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
From Open to Secret Ballot: Vote Buying and Modernization
Aidt, T. S., & Jensen, P. S. (2012) · Faculty of Economics · doi:10.17863/cam.1045 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ziblatt, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Konstanz (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Ziblatt, Daniel
- ORCID
- Ziblatt, Daniel
- Venue
- World Politics
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2008-07
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 610-641
- ISSN
- 0043-8871 (ISSN-L)
- 1086-3338
- OpenAlex
- W2150498058
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 17.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- World Politics (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Cambridge
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Keywords
- democratization, authoritarianism, Prussia, suffrage reform, roll-call voting, elite competition, electoral competition, income inequality, regime change, pre-World War I Germany
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review