Southeast Asia: Sources of Regime Support

Abstract

The authors’ empirical analysis shows both commonalities and variations in the sources of regime support in Southeast Asian countries. Most regimes in the region draw political legitimacy from perceptions that their governance is effective and marked by integrity. These findings lend support to the argument that regime legitimacy—when it is won and when it is lost—is rooted in the output side of the political system. Yet delivering economic prosperity alone will not suffice. In order for political regimes in Southeast Asia to win over their people, they must control corruption, respect the rule of law, treat all citizens fairly and equally, expand public services, and be responsive to what the people need. The region’s young democracies are not exempt from these requirements.

Fostering support for non-democratic rule?

“…Some, however, have reported empirical evidence that points to the existence of such an effect. Both Chu et al (2013) and Chang et al (2013) find that political value orientations are more important in more authoritarian regimes. Yet, Ma and Yang (2014) state that the influence of what they term as "authoritarian value orientations" -a mixture of political and societal value orientationson regime support is independent of the actual democratic performance of the regime in question.…”

“…With regard to the sources of regime support in nondemocracies, two individual-level explanatory approaches that draw on the classical explanations developed for democracies have dominated the literature thus far: a culturalist tradition focuses on traditional societal and anti-democratic political value orientations as bases of support for non-democratic regimes (e. g., Dalton and Ong 2005;Ma and Yang 2014;Shi 2001), while a rational-choice tradition emphasizes the role of economic and administrative performance evaluations (e. g., Thompson 2004;Zhong and Chen 2013). 1 The empirical evidence, albeit collected exclusively within East Asia, lends ample support to both of these propositions: one, individuals committed to traditional societal and anti-democratic political value orientations are more supportive of their non-democratic regimes than those with more modern and pro-democratic outlooks (Chang et al 2013;Chen and Dickson 2008;Chu 2011;Chu et al 2013;Lewis-Beck et al 2014;Shi 2001;Wang and Tan 2013;Yang and Tang 2010;Zhong and Chen 2013; for a more differentiated account, see Park 2013); two, individuals viewing their political system's economic and administrative performance more favorably express more support for that system than those critical of its performance (Chang et al 2013;Chen and Dickson 2008;Chen et al 1997;Chu 2011;Chu et al 2013;Wang and Tan 2013;Zhong and Chen 2013). A third, less frequently cited explanation points to indoctrination as a source of political support in non-democratic regimes: because citizens are exposed to information that is primarily controlled and regulated by the regime, they should adopt the media's favorable depiction of the political system.…”

Democracy and Development in Southeast Asia: A Critical Comparison

“…The effort of government to ban various prodemocracy forces from open political contestation also appears in Vietnam 18 . In this region, all authoritarian regimes rely on their legitimacy and resilience from their ability to emphasize free and open political contestation and instill a non-democratic belief in their citizens 19 .…”

A Costly Affirmation: Exploring Malaysia's One-Sided Domestic Security Dilemma

“…23 Not surprisingly, ethnic minorities tend to be more critical of the regime particularly with respect to issues concerning fair and equal treatment than do most Malay bumiputras, and therefore, show less support for the ruling BN coalition. 24 Some scholars have even argued that regime hard-liners in Malaysia, 'fan nationalistic fervour and ethnic tensions in order to hold on to power.' 25 Meanwhile, the violation of fundamental rights -suppression of free expression, free assembly and religious freedom -remain a serious threat to Malaysia's pluralistic society.…”