![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
While disproportional resources and curbs on civil and political rights clearly matter to electoral authoritarian persistence, long-term acculturation to political norms and modes of governance on the ground in such regimes – of which Singapore and Malaysia are the most durable examples – complicate transformation. A combination of what amounts to classic machine politics with the structural “assist” of sub-par elections renders electoral authoritarianism extraordinarily increasingly resilient over time, not just because it is hard or unlikely for voters to vote in new leaders, but also because the aspiring or elected opposition may end up reproducing rather than subverting key attributes of that regime. Clientelist political praxis may be highly responsive, offer direct accountability, and align with voters’ rational self-interest, at least in the short term. However, its persistence impedes pursuit of new ideological or programmatic objectives, perpetuates piecemeal and inefficient allocation of resources, assumes that most voters should expect little from state policies, and discourages attention to proactive legislation, in favour of a more localized, reactive politics. A machine-oriented political regime, then, is not only exceptionally hard to shake, but suboptimal in the long term.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to the journal’s reviewers, Edward Aspinall, Cheng Chen, Anna Har, Allen Hicken, and audiences at the Institute of Malaysian and International Studies (IKMAS) at the National University of Malaysia and Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore (both of which have also generously hosted me for portions of the research), the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and the Australian National University for helpful feedback on earlier versions of this piece. What faults remain are my own.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes on contributor
Meredith L. Weiss is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University at Albany, SUNY. She is the author of Protest and Possibilities: Civil Society and Coalitions for Political Reform in Malaysia and Student Activism in Malaysia: Crucible, Mirror, Sideshow; and editor most recently of Electoral Dynamics in Malaysia: Findings from the Grassroots and Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Malaysia.
Notes
1. Jayasuriya and Rodan, “Beyond Hybrid Regimes”; George, “Consolidating Authoritarian Rule”; Gerschewski, “Three Pillars.”
2. O’Donnell and Schmitter, Transitions from Authoritarian Rule; Case, “Low-Quality Democracy.”
3. Schmitter and Karl, “What Democracy Is,” 76.
4. Diamond, “Thinking About Hybrid Regimes.”
5. Ibid., 23.
6. Schedler, “Menu of Manipulation,” 25–6.
7. Alagappa, “Bases of Legitimacy.”
8. Diamond, “Thinking About Hybrid Regimes,” 27.
9. See Brownlee, “Portents of Pluralism”; Howard and Roessler, “Liberalizing Electoral Outcomes.”
10. Scott, “Corruption, Machine Politics,” 1144.
11. See Lipscy and Scheiner, “Japan under the DPJ.”
12. A small sample: Greene, Why Dominant Parties Lose; Templeman, “Origins and Decline”; Nelson, “Will Malaysia Follow”; Scheiner, “Electoral System.”
13. A useful exception: Scheiner, Democracy without Competition.
14. Weiss, “Of Inequality and Irritation.”
15. Several meta-analytical discussions survey the landscape: Templeman, “Old Concept, New Cases”; Brownlee, “Low Tide”; Magaloni and Kricheli, “Political Order”; Morse, “Era of Electoral Authoritarianism.”
16. Schedler, “Menu of Manipulation”; Schedler, “Authoritarianism's Last Line.”
17. Greene, “Political Economy.”
18. Levitsky and Way, “Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism.”
19. Slater and Wong, “Strength to Concede”; Nelson, “Will Malaysia Follow”; Schedler, The Politics of Uncertainty.
20. Hussin, Parties and Politics, vi.
21. Alias Mohamed, PAS' Platform; Lee, “Three Approaches.”
22. Ufen, “Transformation of Political Party Opposition”; Wong et al., “Malaysia.”
23. Particularly Chan, “Role of Parliamentary Politicians”; Ong, “Member of Parliament.”
24. Most notably Pye, Asian Power and Politics.
25. Chua, Communitarian Ideology and Democracy; Chan, “Politics in an Administrative State”; Ho, “Political Consolidation in Singapore.”
26. Rodan's work bucks that trend – Rodan, “Civil Society Activism”; Rodan and Jayasuriya, “The Technocratic Politics”; Jayasuriya and Rodan, “Beyond Hybrid Regimes” – as does some of my own work, especially Weiss, Protest and Possibilities, and Giersdorf and Croissant, “Civil Society and Competitive Authoritarianism.”
27. Gomez, “Restricting Free Speech.”
28. George, “Consolidating Authoritarian Rule.”
29. See Tan, “Who's Afraid”; Heng, “Chinese Responses”; Shekhar, “Malay Majoritarianism.”
30. Whiting, “Emerging from Emergency Rule?”
31. Case, “Can the ‘Halfway House’ Stand?”
32. Tan, “Manipulating Electoral Laws”; Hussin, “Constitutional-Electoral Reforms”; Fetzer, “Election Strategy and Ethnic Politics”; Rodan, “Preserving the One-Party State”; Rodan, “New Modes”; Barr, “Bonsai under the Banyan Tree,” especially 32–5.
33. Lim and Ong, “2004 General Election”; Welsh, “Malaysia's Elections”; Lee, “Mal-Apportionment and the Electoral Authoritarian Regime”; Rabushka, “Manipulation of Ethnic Politics.”
34. Gomez's extensive work is especially trenchant, for instance, Money Politics; “Monetizing Politics”; and (with Jomo) Malaysia's Political Economy.
35. Ufen, “Laissez-Faire Versus Strict Control.” Incumbent Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong put it bluntly in his final 2015 campaign speech, recounting the PAP's “report card” and promises of goodies for senior citizens, young couples, the middle class, the poor, and other categories … and asking of the opposition, “What have they done?” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0LLVcLY2yE
36. Jesudason, “Developmental Clientelist State.”
37. Jesudason, “Resilience of One-Party Dominance”; Chua, “Public Housing Residents.”
38. See Chin, “Malaysia”; Mauzy and Milne, Singapore Politics.
39. On the PAP's elite recruitment processes and criteria, see Barr, Ruling Elite of Singapore.
40. Gomez, “Monetizing Politics.”
41. Mauzy is one of few to discuss this value discrepancy, in terms of a broader consideration of “Asian values”: see “Challenge to Democracy.”
42. Pakatan Rakyat has since dissolved and been supplanted by Pakatan Harapan (Coalition of Hope).
43. The programs of Merakyatkan Ekonomi Selangor, Selangor's People-Based Economy, are summarized in Selangor State Government, Governing Selangor, 11–12.
44. Jesudason, “Resilience of One-Party Dominance,” 39.
45. Crouch, Government and Society.
46. Scott, “Corruption, Machine Politics,” 1147.
47. Several such legislators groused in interviews that asked to attend town halls, dialogue sessions, and the like, constituents respond to the effect of, “I voted for you, so you go” or ignore the invitation.
48. Prime Minister Lee mocked these efforts, saying powerless WP representatives referred constituents to the PAP branch secretary for help in opposition wards (9 September 2015 rally speech. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0LLVcLY2yE).
49. Phua. 2012. “S’pore ‘now needs politicians.’” Straits Times, March 31.
50. Scott, “Corruption, Machine Politics,” 1143.
51. Ibid., 1143–4.
52. Ibid., 1145.
53. E.g., Women's Development Collective, Redefining Governance.
54. The WP's Pritam Singh offers a cogent lament in a 5 September 2015 campaign speech: http://www.wp.sg/pritam-singhs-rally-speech-punggol-field-walk-rally-5-sep
55. Tan, “Democracy and the Grassroots Sector.”
56. Kitschelt, “Linkages between Citizens and Politicians.”
57. An early, insightful assessment: Kimball, “Singapore's People's Association”; more recently: Tan, “Democracy and the Grassroots Sector.”
58. Loh. 2014. “Workers' Party sets up community fund for social programmes.” The Online Citizen, June 2. http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2014/06/workers-party-sets-up-community-fund-for-social-programmes
59. Chong Zi Lian. 2016. “Help Scheme in Bishan, Toa Payoh.” Straits Times, January 4. http://www.straitstimes.com/politics/help-scheme-in-bishan-toa-payoh?&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=addtoany
60. Scott, “Corruption, Machine Politics,” 1147.
61. Ibid., 1154.
62. Kitschelt, “Linkages between Citizens and Politicians,” 849.
63. Ibid., 872.
64. Ibid., 851.