Though most all of the world’s communist regimes have been toppled, a few remnants persist. However, what we have noticed is that very often, the last stage of Communism before it’s death is usually nationalism. In fact, not only communism but most isms end like this. Fascism is slightly diferent insofar as it usually contains a strong nationalist sentiment. Note the difference though, fascism has an ideology whereas an authoritarian government doesn’t necesarily. Even the ideology of democracy has failed, see the Weimar Republic.
I also freely admit that there are flaws to the model as it is tends to represent a more vertical and causal development excluding horizontal factors. Therefore the idea is to try and map the vertical development and use that to see how and where we can use horizontal factors to influence where “the ball drops” (looking at the model).
The following models are works in progress and I therefore invite all the constructive criticsm you can muster in the hope of creating an even more accurate model. This is meant as a starting point.

That was the basic model.
Note first that during the nationalism stage, the ideology is slowly dropped for nationalism and thus the ism because run of the mill authoritarianism. I often use “collapse” as a general term which could mean literal collapse or revolution (violent or nonviolent). The point is what happens, not as much the how it happens. You’ll also see on the bottom right “WAR.” Here we’re speaking usually of a war between states, though a civil war or breakup is also possible such as the USSR had though the emphasis is that it is usually violent.
Here is the same model with examples ( The colored balls represent about where the given country is):

Just as no plan ever survives its first contact with reality, neither do isms. Keep also in mind that I use “transition” in a broad sense. It could be a “revolution” like in Georgia or a more subtle political one like in England or Spain where monarchies peacefully became constitutional monarchies. The emphasis here is that it’s a peaceful one. In addition, you’ll note Yugoslavia splinters into different lines. These of course represent the paths of some of its different successor states.
In addition to how several famous communist regimes collapsed, I made a separate chart of how various pieces of the USSR collapsed.

You’ll first notice in the second graphic with individual former USSR republics, the nationalism staged is skipped as on a USSR-wide scale it had already happened. They begin with ideology changing to authoritarianism.
These charts help us to see where other countries have gone and at what stage some are currently at so that we can better understand why certain countries went one path and where others could go. Their ultimate goal is clear though: liberal democracy.

Comments to this entry
Curzon
May 4, 2005
10:50 pm
Nathan
May 4, 2005
11:31 pm
Daniel Starr
May 5, 2005
12:17 am
Of course, the world's future dictatorships won't be Communist. But I think we'd best be prepared for the "coming anarchy" of new dictators rising whether they're communist or not.
All the big countries of South America were democracies in 1947; by 1977, all of them except Venezuela had been taken over by autocrats or military juntas of one kind or another. By the 90s all were democracies again -- now Chavez looks to be establishing autocracy in Venezuela.
Pakistan has gone several times to democracy only to slip back into dictatorship; Russia was briefly a democracy between the fall of the czars and the success of the communists; Germany was a democracy under the Weimar Republic until the Great Depression created the political climate for the rise of Hitler.
If we can complement your roads-to-democracy chart with a roads-from-democracy chart, I think that would make a wonderful "road map" to show people.
Simon
May 5, 2005
1:19 am
The idea that such ideologies collapse into democracy is probably true in the long run, but I imagine economics has far more to do with it. So in effect where you have democracy you are actually talking about "market" democracies.
Simon World
May 5, 2005
1:31 am
Today is 05/05/05. In case you miss it, you only need to wait until 06/06/06. Spirit fingers is documenting the after effects of kissing Tom Cruise. ESWN notes another Hong Kong mainstream media outlet trivialising blogs. Self-criticism in modern time...
Dan
May 5, 2005
2:07 am
mark safranski
May 5, 2005
2:13 am
I'll let Nathan critique the national pathways and reserve my comments for structure and theory:
I think you should consider adding diverging boxes for Stagnation or Economic growth from the Authoritarian Stability Box instead of just " Transition". Singapore and 1970's Chile, South Korea and Taiwan differ too greatly in potential outcomes from Brezhnev's USSR.
Secondly, there remains the potential for Illiberal Democracy with plebisicitary strongmen - Napoleon was the originator here - as well as Oligarchical democracies.
Lastly, I think you might enjoy perusing *Polybius* on his "Cycle of Constitutions":http://dhm.best.vwh.net/archives/polybios.html
Chirol
May 5, 2005
10:17 am
The other thing I agree is problematic is that there are certain phases that countries can get stuck between and bounce back and forth as many people mentioned, namely from dictator to dictator before it finally breaks down.
The other issue is where to put the nationalism box because as people mentioned, it can sometimes come before the disconnectedness. But I would argue that even N. Korea where nationalism developed earlier was still disconnected then and has stayed that way, it's just become more extreme. Perhaps Disconnectedness and nationalism should overlap. This could be a more accurate picture.
Simon: Freely electing members of a communist party is very different from living under communist rule and therefore I don't see it as relevant. A few members in government is different from them controlling the government.
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » Breakdown of Isms II
May 5, 2005
2:13 pm
Gabriel Mihalache
May 5, 2005
4:04 pm