This study argues that systemic approaches to authoritarianism do not offer a complete explanation of why authoritarian regimes collapse. A more satisfying explanation for why authoritarian regimes fall takes into account historical, international, and individual factors. This study focuses on the third factor, analyzing how the behavior of the leader will influence his tenure. The example of the Marcos regime in the Philippines is used to support the inclusion of individual factors in explaining regime collapse. This study shows that Marcos used two strategies to build his regime: centralization of political institutions and creation of a new political coalition. However, these strategies were unsuccessful in maintaining him in power; rather, they contributed to mass disaffection and the collapse of his regime. This study is based on fieldwork carried out in Manila from October 1983 to June 1984. Six case studies were chosen from three issue areas: appropriations, political reorganization, and the coconut industry. Seventy-one assemblymen and forty-one bureaucrats involved in the six cases were interviewed. Primary and secondary documents, including drafts of the bills and minutes from committee meetings and floor discussions were also consulted.Ph.D.Political scienceUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/161636/1/8801292.pd
