Element contents
Populism in Southeast Asia
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 November 2018
Summary
Conceiving of populism as the charismatic mobilization of a mass movement in pursuit of political power, this Element theorizes that populists thrive where ties between voters and either bureaucratic or clientelistic parties do not exist or have decayed. This is because populists' ability to mobilize electoral support directly is made much more likely by voters not being deeply embedded in existing party networks. This model is used to explain the prevalence of populism across the major states in post-authoritarian Southeast Asia: the Philippines, Indonesia, and Thailand. It extracts lessons from these Southeast Asian cases for the study of populism.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781108563772Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 29 November 2018
References
Abinales, P. N. (2003). Progressive-machine conflict in early-twentieth century U.S. politics and colonial state building in the Philippines. In The American Colonial State in the Philippines: Global Perspectives, Go, J. and Foster, A. L. (eds.). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Achen, C. H. and Bartels, L. M. (2016). Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akkerman, A., Mudde, C. and Zaslove, A. (2013). “How populist are the people? Measuring populist attitudes in voters.” Comparative Political Studies 47(9): 1324–1353.Google Scholar
Allred, N., Hawkins, K. A. and Ruth, S. P. (2015). The Impact of Populism on Liberal Democracy. Paper presented at the 8th Congreso de la Asociación Latinoamericana de Ciencia Política. Lima, Peru.Google Scholar
Arghiros, D. (2001). Democracy, Development and Decentralization in Provincial Thailand. Richmond: Curzon.Google Scholar
Aspinall, E. (2005). “Elections and the normalization of politics in Indonesia.” South East Asia Research 13(2): 117–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspinall, E. (2013a). How Indonesia survived: Comparative perspectives on state disintegration and endurance. In Democracy and Islam in Indonesia., Stepan, A. and Kunkler, M. (eds.). New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 126–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspinall, E. (2013b). “The triumph of capital? Class politics and Indonesian Democratisation.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 43(2): 226–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspinall, E. (2014b). “When brokers betray: Clientelism, social networks, and electoral politics in Indonesia.” Critical Asian Studies 46(4): 545–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspinall, E. (2015). “Oligarchic populism: Prabowo Subianto’s challenge to Indonesian democracy.” Indonesia 99(1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspinall, E. and Berenschot, W. (forthcoming). Democracy for Sale: Elections, Clientelism, and the State in Indonesia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aspinall, E., Davidson, M., Hicken, A. and Weiss, M. (2016). “Local machines and vote brokerage in the Philippines.” Contemporary Southeast Asia 38(2): 191–196.Google Scholar
Aspinall, E., Davidson, M., Hicken, A. and Weiss, M. (2015). Inducement or Entry Ticket? Broker Networks and Vote Buying in Indonesia. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Aspinall, E. and Mietzner, M. (2014). “Indonesian politics in 2014: Democracy’s close call.” Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 50(3): 347–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Autor, D., Dorn, D., Hanson, G. and Majlesi, K. (2016). Importing Political Polarization? Unpublished manuscript, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Baker, C. J. and Phongpaichit, P. (2014). A History of Thailand. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, B. N., Rooduijn, M. and Schumacher, G. (2016). “The psychological roots of populist voting: Evidence from the United States, the Netherlands and Germany.” European Journal of Political Research 55(2): 302–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, R. R. (2009). “Populists, outsiders and anti-establishment politics.” Party Politics 15(1): 29–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benoit, K., Conway, D., Lauderdale, B. E., Laver, M. and Mikhaylov, S. (2016). “Crowd-sourced text analysis: Reproducible and agile production of political data.” American Political Science Review 110(2): 278–295.Google Scholar
Bensman, J. and Givant, M. (1975). “Charisma and modernity: The use and abuse of a concept.” Social Research 42(4): 570–614.Google Scholar
Berenschot, W. (2010). “Everyday mediation: The politics of public service delivery in Gujarat, India.” Development and Change 41(5): 883–905.Google Scholar
Boix, C. (1999). “Setting the rules of the game: the choice of electoral systems in advanced democracies.” American Political Science Review 93(03): 609–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolongaita, E. P. (1999). “The Philippines: Consolidating democracy in difficult times.” Southeast Asian Affairs: 237–252.Google Scholar
Booth, A. (1999). “Initial conditions and miraculous growth: Why is South East Asia different from Taiwan and South Korea?” World Development 27(2): 301–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, A. (2014). Before the “big bang”: Decentralization debates and practice in Indonesia, 1949–99. In Regional Dynamics in a Decentralized Indonesia, Hill, H. (ed.). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 25–44.Google Scholar
Booth, A. (2016). Economic Change in Modern Indonesia: Colonial and Post-Colonial Comparisons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bornschier, S. (2010). Cleavage Politics and the Populist Right: The New Cultural Conflict in Western Europe. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Brands, H. W. (1992). Bound to Empire: the United States and the Philippines. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Buehler, M. (2010). Decentralisation and local democracy in Indonesia: the marginalisation of the public sphere. In Problems of Democratisation in Indonesia: Elections, Institutions, and Society, Aspinall, E. and Mietzner, M. (eds.). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 267–285.Google Scholar
Buehler, M. (2014). Elite competition and changing state–society relations: Shari’a policymaking in Indonesia. In Beyond Oligarchy: Wealth, Power, and Contemporary Indonesian Politics, Ford, M. and Pepinsky, T. (eds.). Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program Publications, pp. 157–176.Google Scholar
Calimbahin, C. (2009). The Promise and Pathology of Democracy: The Commission on Elections of the Philippines. PhD Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Callahan, W. A. and McCargo, D. (1996). “Vote-buying in Thailand’s northeast: The July 1995 general election.” Asian Survey 36(4): 376–392.Google Scholar
Canovan, M. (1999). “Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy.” Political Studies 47(1): 2–16.Google Scholar
Caramani, D. (2004). The Nationalization of Politics: The Formation of National Electorates and Party Systems in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carnegie, P. J. (2008). “Democratization and decentralization in post-Soeharto Indonesia: Understanding transition dynamics.” Pacific Affairs 81(4): 515–525.Google Scholar
Case, W. (2017). Populist Threats and Democracy’s Fate in Southeast Asia: Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Casiple, R. C. (2016). “The Duterte presidency as a phenomenon.” Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs 38(2): 179–184.Google Scholar
Chambers, P. (2008). “Factions, parties and the durability of parliaments, coalitions and cabinets: The case of Thailand (1979 – 2001).” Party Politics 14(3): 299–323.Google Scholar
Chandra, K. (2004). Why Ethnic Parties Succeed: Patronage and Ethnic Head Counts in India. New York, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Co, E. E. A., Tigno, J. V., Lao, M. E. J., and Sayo, M. A. (2005). Philippine Democracy Assessment: Free and Fair Elections and the Democratic Role of Political Parties. Metro Manila: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung and National College of Public Administration and Governance, University of the Philippines.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. L. (2003). “Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85(5): 808–822.Google Scholar
Collier, R. B. and Collier, D. (2002). Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. South Bend, IN: Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Connors, M. K. and Hewison, K. (2008). “Introduction: Thailand and the “good coup.”” Journal of Contemporary Asia 38(1): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Constantino, R. and Constantino, L. R. (1975). A History of the Philippines: From the Spanish Colonization to the Second World War. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
Crouch, H. (1985). Economic Change, Social Structure and the Political System in Southeast Asia: Philippine Development Compared with the Other ASEAN Countries. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
Cullather, N. (1993). “America’s boy? Ramon Magsaysay and the illusion of influence.” Pacific Historical Review 62(3): 305–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullinane, M. (1989). Ilustrado Politics: Filipino Elite Responses to American Rule, 1898–1908, Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
Curato, N. (2017). “Flirting with authoritarian fantasies? Rodrigo Duterte and the new terms of Philippine populism.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 47(1): 142–153.Google Scholar
Cusack, T. R., Iversen, T. and Soskice, D. (2007). “Economic interests and the origins of electoral systems.” American Political Science Review 101(3): 373–391.Google Scholar
Dagg, C. J. (2007). “The 2004 elections in Indonesia: Political reform and democratisation.” Asia Pacific Viewpoint 48(1): 47–59.Google Scholar
Dalton, R. J., Farrell, D. M. and McAllister, I. (2011). Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, R. J. and Wattenberg, M. P. (2000). Parties without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Castro, R. C. (2007). “The 1997 Asian financial crisis and the revival of populism/neo-populism in 21st century Philippine politics.” Asian Survey 47(6): 930–951.Google Scholar
Di Tella, T. (1965). Populism and reform in Latin America. In Obstacles to Change in Latin America, Veliz, C. (ed.). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Doner, R. F. (2009). The Politics of Uneven Development: Thailand’s Economic Growth in Comparative Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Doyle, D. (2011). “The legitimacy of political institutions.” Comparative Political Studies 44(11): 1447–1473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dustmann, C., Eichengreen, B., Otten, S., Sapir, A., Tabellini, G. and Zoega, G. (2017). Europe’s Trust Deficit: Causes and Remedies. London: CEPR Press.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, S. N. (1973). Traditional Patrimonialism and Modern Neopatrimonialism. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, S. N. and Roniger, L. (1980). “Patron-client relations as a model of structuring social exchange.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 22(1): 42–77.Google Scholar
Evans, G. and Chzhen, K. (2013). “Explaining voters’ defection from Labour over the 2005–10 electoral cycle: Leadership, economics and the rising importance of ommigration.” Political Studies 61(1 suppl): 138–157.Google Scholar
Fawcett, E. (2014). Liberalism: The Life of an Idea. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Feith, H. (2007 [1962]). The Decline of Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia. Jakarta: Equinox Pub.Google Scholar
Feith, H. and Castles, L. (1970). Indonesian Political Thinking: 1945–1965. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Fukuoka, Y. (2013). “Indonesia’s ‘democratic transition’ revisited: A clientelist model of political transition.” Democratization 20(6): 991–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukuoka, Y. and na Thalang, C. (2014). “The legislative and presidential elections in Indonesia in 2014.” Electoral Studies 36: 230–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrido, M. (2013). “The ideology of the dual city: The modernist ethic in the corporate development of Makati City, Metro Manila.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37(1): 165–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germani, G. (1978). Authoritarianism, Fascism, and National Populism. New Brunswick, NJ, Transaction Books.Google Scholar
Green, D. P., Palmquist, B. and Schickler, E. (2002). Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hadiz, V. R. (2010). Localising Power in Post-Authoritarian Indonesia: A Southeast Asia Perspective. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Hadiz, V. R. (2016). Islamic Populism in Indonesia and the Middle East. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, D. V. (1953). “Magsaysay: Philippine candidate.” Far Eastern Survey 22(6): 67–70.Google Scholar
Hawkins, K. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2018). Introduction – Concept, theory, and method. In The Ideational Approach to Populism: Concept, Theory, and Analysis, Hawkins, K., Carlin, R. E., Littvay, L. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (eds.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hawkins, K. and Selway, J. (2017). “Thaksin the Populist?” Chinese Political Science Review 2(3): 372–394.Google Scholar
Hedman, E.-L. E. (2001). “The spectre of populism in Philippine politics and society: Artista, masa, Eraption!” South East Asia Research 9(1): 5–44.Google Scholar
Hellmann, O. (2017). Populism in East Asia. In The Oxford Handbook of Populism, Rovira Kaltwasser, C. B., Taggart, P. A., Ochoa Espejo, P. and Ostiguy, P. (eds.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hewison, K. (2000). “Resisting globalization: A study of localism in Thailand.” The Pacific Review 13(2): 279–296.Google Scholar
Hicken, A. (2002). The market for votes in Thailand. Paper presented at the international conference, Trading Political Rights: The Comparative Politics of Vote Buying. Center for International Studies, MIT.Google Scholar
Hicken, A. (2006a). “Party fabrication: Constitutional reform and the rise of Thai Rak Thai.” Journal of East Asian Studies 6(3): 381–407.Google Scholar
Hicken, A. (2006b). “Stuck in the mud: Parties and party systems in democratic Southeast Asia.” Taiwan Journal of Democracy 2(2): 23–46.Google Scholar
Hicken, A. (2009). Building Party Systems in Developing Democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hicken, A. and Kuhonta, E. M., Eds. (2014). Party System Institutionalization in Southeast Asia. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hoffer, E. (1951). The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Holmes, R. (2016). “The Dark Side of Electoralism: Opinion Polls and Voting in the 2016 Philippine Presidential Election.” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 35(3): 15–38.Google Scholar
Honna, J. (2012). “Inside the Democrat Party: Power, politics and conflict in Indonesia’s presidential party.” South East Asia Research 20(4): 473–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houle, C. and Kenny, P. D. (2018). “The political and economic consequences of populist rule in Latin America.” Government and Opposition 53(2): 256–287.Google Scholar
Huber, R. A. and Schimpf, C. H. (2015). “Friend or Foe? Testing the Influence of Populism on Democratic Quality in Latin America.” Political Studies 64(4): 872–889.Google Scholar
Huntington, S. P. (2006). Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchcroft, P. D. (1991). “Oligarchs and cronies in the Philippine state the politics of patrimonial plunder.” World Politics 43(3): 414–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchcroft, P. D. (1998). Booty Capitalism: The Politics of banking in the Philippines. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchcroft, P. D. (1999). “After the fall: Prospects for political and institutional reform in post‐crisis Thailand and the Philippines.” Government and Opposition 34(4): 473–497.Google Scholar
Hutchcroft, P. D. (2014). Linking capital and the countryside: Patronage and clientelism in Japan, Thailand, and the Philippines. In Clientelism, Social Policy, and the Quality of Democracy, Abente Brun, D. and Diamond, L. J. (eds.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 174–203.Google Scholar
Hutchcroft, P. D. and Rocamora, J. (2003). “Strong demands and weak institutions: The origins and evolution of the democratic deficit in the Philippines.” Journal of East Asian Studies 3: 259–292.Google Scholar
Hynd, E. (2017). Patterns of Political Party Competition, Dominance and Institutionalism: The Case of Timor-Leste. PhD Dissertation, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Inglehart, R. and Norris, P. (2017). “Trump and the populist authoritarian parties: The silent revolution in reverse.” Perspectives on Politics 15(2): 443–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ionescu, G. and Gellner, E., Eds. (1969). Populism: Its Meaning and National Characteristics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. W. (2016). Democracy for Hire: A History of American Political Consulting. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judis, J. B. (2016). The Populist Explosion: How the Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics. New York: Columbia Global Reports.Google Scholar
Karnow, S. (1990). In Our Image: America’s Empire in the Philippines. New York: Century.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, E. (2017). “Levels or changes?: Ethnic context, immigration and the UK Independence Party vote.” Electoral Studies 48: 57–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, P. D. (2015a). “Colonial rule, decolonisation, and corruption in India.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 53(4): 401–427.Google Scholar
Kenny, P. D. (2015b). “The origins of patronage democracy: State building, centrifugalism, and decolonization.” British Journal of Political Science 45(1): 141–171.Google Scholar
Kenny, P. D. (2017). Populism and Patronage: Why Populists Win Elections in India, Asia, and Beyond. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kenny, P. D. (2018). “The Enemy of the People”: Populists and Press Freedom. Unpublished manuscript, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Kenny, P. D. and Holmes, R. (2018). A New Penal Populism? Rodrigo Duterte and the War on Drugs in the Philippines. Paper presented at the World Congress of the International Political Science Association. Brisbane.Google Scholar
Kerkvliet, B. J. (1977). The Huk Rebellion: A study of Peasant Revolt in the Philippines. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, D. R. and Kalmoe, N. P. (2017). Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, H. (2000). “Linkages between citizens and politicians in democratic polities.” Comparative Political Studies 33(6–7): 845–879.Google Scholar
Krastev, I. (2007). “The strange death of the liberal consensus.” Journal of Democracy 18(4): 56–63.Google Scholar
Kuo, D. (2018). Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy: The Rise of Programmatic Politics in the United States and Britain. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landé, C. (1968). “Parties and politics in the Philippines.” Asian Survey 8(9): 725–747.Google Scholar
Liddle, R. W. and Mujani, S. (2007). “Leadership, party, and religion: Explaining voting behavior in Indonesia.” Comparative Political Studies 40(7): 832–857.Google Scholar
Lipset, S. M. and Rokkan, S. (1967). Party Systems and Voter Alignments: CrossNnational Perspectives. New York; Free Press.Google Scholar
Lupu, N. (2016). Party Brands in Crisis: Partisanship, Brand Dilution, and the Breakdown of Political Parties in Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, A. J. (1991). Business and Politics in Indonesia. North Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
McCargo, D. (1997). Thailand’s political parties: Real, authentic, and actual. In Political Change in Thailand: Democracy and Participation, Hewison, K. (ed.). London; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McCargo, D. (2005). “Network monarchy and legitimacy crises in Thailand.” The Pacific Review 18(4): 499–519.Google Scholar
McCargo, D. and Patthamānan, U. (2005). The Thaksinization of Thailand. Copenhagen: NIAS Press.Google Scholar
McCoy, A. W. (1981). The Philippines: Independence without decolonization. In Asia: The Winning of Independence, Jeffrey, R. (ed.). New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
McCoy, A. W. (1989). Quezon’s commonwealth: The emergence of Philippine authoritarianism. In Philippine Colonial Democracy, Paredes, R. R. (ed.). Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
McCoy, A. W. (2009a). Preface: The Philippine oligarchy at the turn of the twenty-first century. In An Anarchy of Families: State and Family in the Philippines. McCoy, A. W. (ed.). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. xi–xxxii.Google Scholar
McCoy, A. W. (2009b). “An anarchy of families”: The historiography of state and family in the Philippines. In An Anarchy of Families: State and Family in the Philippines, McCoy, A. W. (ed.). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
McCoy, A. W. (2017). “Global populism: A lineage of Filipino strongmen from Quezon to Marcos and Duterte.” Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies 32(1–2): 7–54.Google Scholar
McVey, R. T. (1965). The Rise of Indonesian Communism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Mietzner, M. (2013). Money, Power and Ideology: Political Parties in Post-Authoritarian Indonesia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
Mietzner, M. (2014a). “How Jokowi won and democracy survived.” journal of Democracy 25(4): 111–125.Google Scholar
Mietzner, M. (2014b). Indonesia’s decentralization: The rise of local identities and the survival of the nation-state. In Regional Dynamics in a Decentralized Indonesia, Hill, H. (ed.). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 45–67.Google Scholar
Mietzner, M. (2015). Reinventing Asian populism: Jokowi’s rise, democracy, and political contestation in Indonesia. Policy Studies 72. Honolulu: East-West Center.Google Scholar
Mietzner, M. (2018). “Fighting illiberalism with illiberalism: Islamist populism and democratic deconsolidation in Indonesia.” Pacific Affairs 91(2): 261–282.Google Scholar
Mietzner, M. and Muhtadi, B. (2018). “Explaining the 2016 Islamist mobilisation in Indonesia: Religious intolerance, militant groups and the politics of accommodation.” Asian Studies Review: 1–19.Google Scholar
Miller, J. (2018). Duterte Harry: Fire and Fury in the Philippines. Melbourne and London: Scribe.Google Scholar
Moffitt, B. (2015). Contemporary populism and “The People” in the Asia-Pacific: Thaksin Shinawatra and Pauline Hanson. In The Promise and Perils of Populism: Global Perspectives, de La Torre, C. (ed.). Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, pp. 293–316.Google Scholar
Moffitt, B. (2016). The Global Rise of Populism: Performance, Political Style, and Representation. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Mouffe, C. (2005). The “end of politics” and the challenge of right-wing populism. In Populism and the Mirror of Democracy, Panizza, F. (ed.). New York: Verso, pp. 50–71.Google Scholar
Mouzelis, N. (1985). “On the concept of populism: Populist and clientelist modes of incorporation in semiperipheral polities.” Politics & Society 14(3): 329–348.Google Scholar
Mudde, C. (1999). “The single‐issue party thesis: Extreme right parties and the immigration issue.” West European Politics 22(3): 182–197.Google Scholar
Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2018). “Studying populism in comparative perspective: Reflections on the contemporary and future research agenda.” Comparative Political Studies. doi: 0010414018789490.Google Scholar
Muhtadi, B. (2018). Buying Votes In Indonesia: Partisans, Personal Networks, and Winning Margins. PhD Dissertation, Australian National University.Google Scholar
Mujani, S., Liddle, R. W. and Ambardi, K. (2018). Voting Behavior in Indonesia since Democratization: Critical Democrats. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Murray, D. (1996). “The 1995 National Elections in Thailand: A Step Backward for Democracy?” Asian Survey 36(4): 361–375.Google Scholar
Nelson, M. H. (2001). “Thailand’s House Elections of 6 January 2001: Thaksin’s Landslide Victory and Subsequent Narrow Escape.” In Thailand’s New Politics: KPI Yearbook, Nelson, H. H. (ed.). Nonthaburi and Bangkok: King Praadhipok’s Institute and White Lotus Press, pp. 283–441.Google Scholar
Nishizaki, Y. (2011). Political Authority and Provincial Identity in Thailand: The Making of Banharn-buri. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Southeast Asia Program.Google Scholar
North, D. C., Wallis, J. J., Webb, S. B. and Weingast, B. R. (2012). Limited access orders. In In the Shadow of Violence: Politics, Economics, and the Problem of Development, North, D. C., Wallis, J. J., Webb, S. B. and Weingast, B. R. (eds.). New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–23.Google Scholar
Novaes, L. (2017). “Disloyal brokers and weak parties.” American Journal of Political Science 62(1): 84–98.Google Scholar
Ockey, J. (1994). “Political parties, factions, and corruption in Thailand.” Modern Asian Studies 28(02): 251–277.Google Scholar
Ockey, J. (2003). “Change and continuity in the Thai political party system.” Asian Survey 43(4): 663–680.Google Scholar
Ostiguy, P. (2009). The high and the low in politics: A two-dimensional political space for comparative analysis and electoral studies. Kellog Institute Working Paper, 360, University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Panebianco, A. (1988). Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pepinsky, T. (2017). “Southeast Asia: Voting against disorder.” Journal of Democracy 28(2): 120–131.Google Scholar
Phongpaichit, P. and Baker, C. (1995). Thailand: Economy and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Phongpaichit, P. and Baker, C. (2008). “Thaksin’s populism.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 38(1): 62–83.Google Scholar
Phongpaichit, P. and Baker, C. (2009). Thaksin. Second edn. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.Google Scholar
Pratt, J. (2007). Penal Populism: Key Ideas in Criminology. London; New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Prizzia, R. (1985). Thailand in Transition: The Role of Oppositional Forces. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Przeworski, A. (2004). “Institutions matter? 1.” Government and Opposition 39(4): 527–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qodari, M. (2010). The professionalisation of politics: the growing role of political consultants and polling organisations. In Problems of Democratisation in Indonesia: Elections, Institutions, and Society, Aspinall, E. and Mietzner, M. (eds.). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 122–140.Google Scholar
Roberts, K. M. (2014a). Party Systems in Latin America’s Neoliberal Era. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, K. M. (2014b). Populism, political mobilizations, and crises of political representation. In The Promise and Perils of Populism: Global Perspectives, de la Torre, C. (ed.). Lexington, University Press of Kentucky, pp. 140–158.Google Scholar
Robertson, P. S. (1996). “The rise of the rural network politician: Will Thailand’s new elite endure?” Asian Survey 36(9): 924–941.Google Scholar
Rooduijn, M., van der Brug, W. and de Lange, S. L. (2016). “Expressing or fuelling discontent? The relationship between populist voting and political discontent.” Electoral Studies 43: 32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rueschemeyer, D., Huber, E. and Stephens, J. D. (1992). Capitalist Development and Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ruth, S. P. (2015). “Populism and the erosion of horizontal accountability in Latin America.” Political Studies 66(2): 256-375.Google Scholar
Rydgren, J. (2008). “Immigration sceptics, xenophobes or racists? Radical right‐wing voting in six West European countries.” European Journal of Political Research 47(6): 737–765.Google Scholar
Sartori, G. (1976). Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, S. W., Scott, J. C., Landé, C. H. and Guasti, L., Eds. (1977). Friends, Followers, and Factions: A Reader in Political Clientelism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. (1969). “Corruption, machine politics, and political change.” The American Political Science Review 63(4): 1142–1158.Google Scholar
Scott, J. C. (1972). “Patron-client politics and political change in Southeast Asia.” The American Political Science Review 66(1): 91–113.Google Scholar
Shefter, M. (1994). Political Parties and the State: The American Historical Experience. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sidel, J. T. (1997). “Philippine politics in town, district, and province: bossism in Cavite and Cebu.” Journal of Asian Studies 56(4): 947–966.Google Scholar
Simbulan, R. G. (2007). “Contemporary politics in the Philippines: The configuration of post-EDSA I political parties.” In Oligarchic Politics: Elections and the Party List System in the Philippines, Tuazon, B. M. (ed.). Quezon City: CenPeg Books, pp. 22–46.Google Scholar
Slater, D. (2010). Ordering Power: Contentious Politics and Authoritarian Leviathans in Southeast Asia. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stanley, B. (2011). “Populism, nationalism, or national populism? An analysis of Slovak voting behaviour at the 2010 parliamentary election.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 44(4): 257–270.Google Scholar
Starner, F. L. (1961). Magsaysay and the Philippine Peasantry: The Agrarian Impact on Philippine Politics, 1953–1956. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Steinberg, D. J. (1967). Philippine Collaboration in World War II. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Stokes, S. C., Dunning, T., Nazareno, M. and Brusco, V. (2013). Brokers, Voters, and Clientelism: The Puzzle of Distributive Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sukma, R. (2009). “Indonesian politics in 2009: defective elections, resilient democracy.” Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 45(3): 317–336.Google Scholar
Swamy, A. (2013). “Sources of “Sandwich Coalitions”: Distributive Strategies and Democratic Politics in India, Thailand, and the Philippines.” Asia-Pacific Social Science Review 13(1): 50–56.Google Scholar
Tan, P. J. (2012). Anti-party attitudes in Southeast Asia. In Party Politics in Southeast Asia: Clientelism and Electoral Competition in Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines, Tomsa, D. and Ufen, A. (eds.). London: Routledge, pp. 80–100.Google Scholar
Tapsell, R. (2015). “Indonesia’s Media Oligarchy and the Jokowi Phenomenon.”Indonesia 99(1): 29–50.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. R. (2010). “Reformism vs. populism in the Philippines.” Journal of Democracy 21(4): 154–168.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. R. (2016a). “Bloodied democracy: Duterte and the death of liberal reformism in the Philippines.” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs 35(3): 39–68.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. R. (2016b). “The moral economy of electoralism and the rise of populism in the Philippines and Thailand.” Journal of Developing Societies 32(3): 246–269.Google Scholar
Tilly, C. and Wood, L. J. (2013). Social Movements, 1768–2012. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
Tomsa, D. (2010). The Indonesian party system after the 2009 elections: Towards stability? In Problems of Democratisation in Indonesia, Aspinall, E. and Mietzner, M. (eds.). Singapore, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 141–159.Google Scholar
Tomsa, D. (2014). “Party system fragmentation in Indonesia: The subnational dimension.” Journal of East Asian Studies 14(2): 249.Google Scholar
Ungpakorn, J. (2007). A Coup for the Rich? Thailand’s Political Crisis. Bangkok: Workers Democracy Publishing.Google Scholar
Urbinati, N. (2015). “A revolt against intermediary bodies.” Constellations 22(4): 477–486.Google Scholar
van Niekerk, A. E. (1974). Populism and Political Development in Latin America. Rotterdam: Rotterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Vickers, A. (2005). A History of Modern Indonesia. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walker, A. (2012). Thailand’s Political Peasants: Power in the Modern Rural Economy. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Walker, A. (2015). “From legibility to eligibility: Politics, subsidy and productivity in rural Asia.” TRaNS: Trans-Regional and-National Studies of Southeast Asia 3(1): 45–71.Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, M. L. and Hassan, S. (2003). Introduction: From moral communitites to NGOs. In Social Movements in Malaysia: From Moral Communities to NGOs, Weiss, M. L. and Hassan, S. (eds.). London; New York: RoutledgeCurzon, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Weyland, K. (2001). “Clarifying a contested concept: Populism in the study of Latin American politics.” Comparative Politics 34(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Weyland, K. (2006). The rise and decline of Fujimori’s neopopulist leadership. In The Fujimori Legacy: The Rise of Electoral Authoritarianism in Peru, Carrión, J. (eds.). University Park, Pa., Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 13–38.Google Scholar
Weyland, K. (2017). Populism: A political-strategic approach. The Oxford Handbook of Populism. Rovira Kaltwasser, C., Taggart, P., Ochoa Espejo, P. and Ostiguy, P. (eds.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wiles, P. (1969). A syndrome not a doctrine. In Populism: Its Meaning and National Characteristics, Ionescu, G. and Gellner, E. (eds.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wilkin, S. (2018). History Repeating: Why Populists Rise and Governments Fall. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
Willner, A. R. (1984). The Spellbinders: Charismatic Political Leadership. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ziblatt, D. (2017). Conservative Political Parties and the Birth of Modern Democracy in Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- 24
- Cited by