{"title":"Post-democratizing Politics in Southeast and Northeast Asia","authors":"J. I. Chong, Norma Osterberg-Kaufmann","doi":"10.5509/2022953417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A growing global trend towards authoritarianism has left democracy, especially its liberal form, under strain. This has occurred despite earlier promises of democratization between the end of the Cold War and the early twenty-first century. Our essay examines how the dynamics of post-democratization\n politics have played out across several polities in Southeast and Northeast Asia. These regions once included supposed \"third wave\" democracies and polities apparently on the cusp of political liberalization. Such expectations have not panned out. Instead, the region has generally witnessed\n either significant authoritarian resilience or autocratic resurgence following spurts of political openness. We examine how such autocratic dynamics have played out following earlier movements toward democratization. Specifically, we identify three key elements of post- democratization politics\n associated with autocratic success and democratic robustness based on contributions to this special issue, and suggest pathways through which they can a ect political outcomes. Dominant beliefs can prime accommodation with authoritarianism given pervasive acceptance of state-driven\n ideologies while identification with liberal values can drive democratic consolidation and resistance to autocracy, regardless of wealth and education. Ostensibly democratic institutions, such as constitutional courts, can become anti-democratic instruments when the exercise of their independent\n prerogatives means upholding autocratic tendencies that align with their interests and outlooks. Agents and their decisions can both prompt and stymie autocratization, whether intentionally or inadvertently; strategies to consolidate authority can fracture even dominant ruling coalitions.\n Examining the role ideas, institutions, and agents play in post-democratic politics can further e orts at understanding the current authoritarian wave and its limits.","PeriodicalId":47041,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Affairs","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5509/2022953417","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
A growing global trend towards authoritarianism has left democracy, especially its liberal form, under strain. This has occurred despite earlier promises of democratization between the end of the Cold War and the early twenty-first century. Our essay examines how the dynamics of post-democratization
politics have played out across several polities in Southeast and Northeast Asia. These regions once included supposed "third wave" democracies and polities apparently on the cusp of political liberalization. Such expectations have not panned out. Instead, the region has generally witnessed
either significant authoritarian resilience or autocratic resurgence following spurts of political openness. We examine how such autocratic dynamics have played out following earlier movements toward democratization. Specifically, we identify three key elements of post- democratization politics
associated with autocratic success and democratic robustness based on contributions to this special issue, and suggest pathways through which they can a ect political outcomes. Dominant beliefs can prime accommodation with authoritarianism given pervasive acceptance of state-driven
ideologies while identification with liberal values can drive democratic consolidation and resistance to autocracy, regardless of wealth and education. Ostensibly democratic institutions, such as constitutional courts, can become anti-democratic instruments when the exercise of their independent
prerogatives means upholding autocratic tendencies that align with their interests and outlooks. Agents and their decisions can both prompt and stymie autocratization, whether intentionally or inadvertently; strategies to consolidate authority can fracture even dominant ruling coalitions.
Examining the role ideas, institutions, and agents play in post-democratic politics can further e orts at understanding the current authoritarian wave and its limits.
期刊介绍:
Pacific Affairs has, over the years, celebrated and fostered a community of scholars and people active in the life of Asia and the Pacific. It has published scholarly articles of contemporary significance on Asia and the Pacific since 1928. Its initial incarnation from 1926 to 1928 was as a newsletter for the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR), but since May 1928, it has been published continuously as a quarterly under the same name. The IPR was a collaborative organization established in 1925 by leaders from several YMCA branches in the Asia Pacific, to “study the conditions of the Pacific people with a view to the improvement of their mutual relations.”