Popular perceptions of political regimes in East and Southeast Asia

Abstract

Political regimes in East and Southeast Asia run the full spectrum from liberal democracy through various hybrid democratic-authoritarian types and on to full-blown authoritarianism and totalitarianism. While political scientists have invested much effort and ingenuity in creating typologies of regimes to better understand the empirical diversity of political structures and processes, much less attention has been paid to what the citizens think. How do people in East and Southeast Asian countries perceive their own institutions and performance of governance? This article uses public opinion data derived from the AsiaBarometer 2006 and 2007 Surveys of 12 East and Southeast Asian countries to map what citizens actually think about their structures, processes, and outcomes of governance and compare these with the regime classifications of political scientists. The results revealed universal commitment to elections but disillusionment with political practice, positive estimations of the institutions of governance in Southeast Asia but much less enthusiasm in East Asia, and a preference for moderate opinions. There is no clear overall correlation between regime type and popular perception.

Keywords:

• East and Southeast Asia
• democracy
• authoritarianism
• totalitarianism
• political structures
• political processes
• AsiaBarometer
• citizens
• elections
• regime

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Takashi Inoguchi of Chou University for use of the AsiaBarometer Surveys.

Notes

Collier and Levitsky, ‘Democracy with Adjectives’.

For more information, see http://www.asiabarometer.org.

Lawson, ‘Conceptual Issues in the Comparative Study’.

Fishman, ‘Rethinking State and Regime’.

Blondel, Comparative Government; Krasner, ‘Structural Causes and Regime Consequences’.

Fishman, ‘Rethinking State and Regime’.

Lawson, ‘Conceptual Issues in the Comparative Study’, 187.

Ibid.

Diamond, ‘Thinking About Hybrid Regimes’.

Huntington, Third Wave of Democratization.

Diamond, ‘Thinking About Hybrid Regimes’.

Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 26.

Levitsky and Way, ‘The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism’, 52.

Diamond, ‘Thinking About Hybrid Regimes’.

Ibid., 26.

Almond and Verba, The Civic Culture.

Ibid., 20–35.

Inglehart, ‘How Solid is Mass Support for Democracy’, 51–7.

Welzel and Klingemann, ‘Understanding Democratic Congruence’.

Diamond, ‘Thinking About Hybrid Regimes’.

Franco, ‘The Philippines’.

Diamond, ‘Thinking About Hybrid Regimes’.

Webber, ‘A Consolidated Patrimonial Democracy?’

Banno, Establishment of the Japanese Constitutional System.

Saich, Governance and Politics of China, 80.

In Thailand, the ‘trust a lot rating’ was very low at 8.6%, bringing the overall trust rating significantly below those in the other countries although still in positive territory (63.4%). This lower rating probably relates to the suspension of democratic politics by the military when the survey was undertaken.

The exceptions here may include Malaysia, Japan, and Singapore. It is also the case that the meanings of army may differ considerably across the surveyed countries. The Japanese word for army used in the survey is actually ‘self-defence forces’ (jieitai). In Singapore, as in other Asian countries, the military (Singapore Armed Forces) is not composed fully of regular soldiers, but relies heavily on conscripted soldiers; military service is mandatory for all men over the age of 18 who have not deferred due to educational reasons.

This contrasts with the Indonesian situation, where the electoral legislation ensures that parties must have national coverage through branches across the country. But this did not stop a high negative perception of them in Indonesia.

Stoker, Why Politics Matters; Dalton, ‘Political Support in Advanced Industrial Democracies’.

Turner, ‘Authoritarian Rule’.

According to the Carter Center, village elections take place in about 650,000 villages and include 75% of China's population. However, it is not clear from the China survey how many respondents live in a village as the lowest geographical unit is the county level. See http://www.cartercenter.org.

Typically this is enforced through fines and possible disenfranchisement. Since the late 1970s, turnout has been around 95% in both presidential and parliamentary elections. Information on turnout is available at http://www.idea.int/vt/. Some of the differences between actual and self-reported turnout can be attributed to how election officials do their calculations (e.g. including only those who are registered).