The autocratic mandate: elections,legitimacy and regime stability in Singapore

This paper explains how authoritarian regimes employ flawed elections to obtain both short-term legitimacy and long-term stability. In conjunction with the use of co-optation and repression, it argues that ruling parties hold de jure competitive elections to claim what is termed autonomous legitimation. This denotes the feigning of conformity to the established rules of the constitution and the shared beliefs of citizens. Regardless of overall turnout and support, ruling parties exploit the normative and symbolic value of elections in order to establish moral grounds for compliance within a dominant-subordinate relationship. In support of this argument, the case of Singapore's People's Action Party (PAP) is analysed in historical and contemporary terms. Since 1959, the PAP has used precisely timed elections to extract one or more mandate types from citizens and, by extension, claim legitimacy. In particular, it has sort a mandate based on its response to an event, execution of a policy and/or collection of a reward. In the long run, autocratic stability has been achieved through a process of reciprocal reinforcement, which has combined autonomous legitimation with targeted co-optation and low intensity coercion. The paper concludes by addressing the generalisability of this finding for other authoritarian regimes in Southeast Asia.     

Human rights and Nubian mobilisation in Egypt: towards recognition of indigeneity

How are global human rights localised in authoritarian societies? How and what human rights discourses are mobilised by indigenous peoples to further their demands? Building upon original fieldwork among Nubian activists in Egypt, this article explores the complexities regarding human rights framing through a discussion of recognition of Nubian indigeneity. The article finds that the history and political experience of Egypt’s Nubians bring about diverging opinions and also limitations as to how, and what, human rights frameworks rights claimants and their supporters are to employ. It argues that Egyptian nationalism not only affects how Nubian activists mobilise in general, but also helps explain the very limited appeals to a global discourse of human rights.     

A Question of Authority: Religion and Cultural Conflict in the 2004 Election

In this study I adopt a view of cultural conflict that extends beyond the usual set of controversial “moral” issues like abortion and gay rights to include symbolic issues related to patriotism and group affect. Using a set of survey items asking about respondents’ preferences in child-rearing, I create a measure of individuals’ orientations toward authority that proves to be a potent predictor of attitudes on cultural issues, affect toward social groups, party identification, and vote choice. This authority effect persists even in the presence of extensive multivariate controls for demographic and religious variables. I find that both authority measures and religion measures shape political attitudes, suggesting the need for a multi-faceted approach to understanding cultural conflict.

Timing is everything: a quantitative study of presidentialist regime dynamics in Eurasia, 1992–2016

Why do some countries with presidentialist constitutions feature more political closure than others at a given time? A quantitative study of post-Soviet countries since independence finds that much of the observed variation in political closure reflects timing, or the particular point at which a country happens to be within a regime cycle, rather than structural or other factors usually cited to explain regime change. Specifically, how much time a president has had to coordinate rivalrous networks around his or her authority is at least as strong a predictor of the level of regime closure as are economic development, economic growth, resource rents, proximity to Europe, and key cultural factors, even when controlling for the level of closure in the preceding year. This pattern is not found among countries with divided-executive constitutions, indicating it is related to the constitution rather than a general phenomenon.     

Everyday authoritarianism: a political anthropology of Singapore

Observers of Singapore agree that its state is authoritarian. Complicating such accounts of Singaporean authoritarianism, this paper shows authoritarianism is not simply state-driven or top-down as commonly assumed but involves diffuse governing processes. The paper describes a recent high-profile case involving Amos Yee, an eighteen-year-old blogger who made a video mocking Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s founding prime minister, shortly after Lee’s death in 2015. The teenager was incarcerated for the video, but only after ordinary citizens filed police reports and subjected him to online and physical abuse, suggesting that the people were acting as the state’s partners in punishment. Yee’s case shows that authoritarianism can have an everyday dimension and that it can be reproduced by ordinary citizens who punish fellow citizens perceived to be acting in adversarial manners towards the nation-state. The everyday authoritarianism of recent years is a reassertion of patriotism – a response to the insecurities caused by the rapid movement of people, capital, and ideas in the neoliberal economy. Everyday authoritarianism helps explain the longevity of Singaporean state authoritarianism, how it has managed to withstand multiple democratic challenges, and why it may survive long after Lee Kuan Yew, its chief architect, is dead.     

Anatomy of creeping authoritarianism in Bangladesh: a historical analysis of some events that shaped the present state of Bangladesh’s culture and politics

ABSTRACT

This paper offers a critical analysis of creeping authoritarianism in Bangladesh’s culture and politics. Political events since the 1940s that have shaped the presently unstable state of Bangladesh’s society are interpreted specifically in terms of their cultural and political significance. One important aspect of this unstable political state is the ongoing search for Bangladeshi national identity. Accordingly, the paper seeks to answer the questions of why and how the present sociocultural and political divisions in Bangladesh have emerged from the fundamental debate over whether (1) Bengali ethnicity, language, culture, and secularism, (2) Muslim nationalism or (3) a combination of both should become the marker of Bangladesh’s national identity to secure social and political stability. Furthermore, recent social, religious and political developments across the Muslim world suggest that attempts to introduce ultra-secularism in some Muslim-majority countries since the 1950s have led to authoritarianism, a movement which has ultimately ended or will soon end through popular Islamic upsurges. Bangladesh seems to be moving toward such social and political change, as the people have become restless in their desire to remove creeping authoritarian, the mark of a repressive regime that has emerged since the early 1970s. The key lesson that can be drawn from the extant literature on this issue in the context of Bangladesh is that the extreme form of secularism or ultra-secularism, which the present ruling Awami League and its left-communist allies continue to advance and impose from above, is neither desirable nor acceptable to Bangladeshi Muslims whilst there is clear movement away from ultra-secularism by other Muslim-majority countries. This paper draws the conclusion that since neither assertive secularism nor theocratic Islamism can flourish in Bangladesh, a competitive democratic political order that accommodates aspects of both secularism and Islamic ethical-moral codes could be a feasible model for the achievement of social, cultural and political stability that is so fundamental to the promotion of steady economic growth and social justice.     

Authoritarianism and Virtual Regionalism: The Gulf Cooperation Council during Arab Uprisings

In spite of the inability of Gulf countries to develop a successful collective security strategy as asserted by the existing literature, the study contends that they have exceptionally adopted it toward their domestic uprisings. Based on the security regime theory, this study argues that threats of revolutionary sociopolitical change incentivize authoritarian regimes, such as Gulf countries, to formulate a collective security strategy within multilateral instances. By relying on a critical discourse analysis, the study traces Gulf countries’ perception of the different uprisings as reported by different national newspapers from December 2010 till March 2018.     

When the center can hold: The primacy of politics in shaping Russian democracy

Violations of rights, a weak Duma, political parties dominated by bureaucrats, and corrupt privatization are ordinarily taken as signs or even causes of the failure of democracy in Russia or at best as normal traits of electoral politics in a middle-income state. Yet all of these are natural consequences of introducing democracy in a country with the Russian electorate’s distinctive recent experience of a loss of a third of the state’s territory and half its population. In such a democracy only a centrist, not a liberal, strategy can block a return to authoritarianism, and such a strategy in Russia will subordinate rights to the task of privatization that a Duma weakened by ideological, demographic and geographic impediments to party development cannot conduct. Consequently what are taken as signs or causes of democratic failure in Russia are instead necessary effects of introducing democracy in Russia’s special circumstances.     

Neo-patrimonial practices and sustainability of authoritarian regimes in Eurasia

The article analyzes authoritarian regimes within the post-Soviet territory in terms of informal practices (clannishness, clientelism and patronage) and their characteristics used by political leaders to form a power coalition. It has been argued that any of these informal practices determine a power coalition of a certain size, which is consequential for regime sustainability. Power coalitions formed on the basis of a clan-like nature is the least effective way to retain power and generally leads to regime destabilization. Clientelism, which allows for forming a power coalition on a wider basis, is a more effective strategy in terms of regime sustainability. Maximum regime sustainability is reached when patronage practices are used, which require more material resources and are only accessible to a limited number of wealthy states.     

Democratic and Revolutionary Traditions in Latin America

This article seeks to identify and explain the historical links between democracy and revolution in Latin America. It first defines and analyses 'democratic' and 'revolutionary' traditions in the continent. It notes the precocity of nineteenth-century Latin American liberalism which, stimulated by the independence struggles, carried implications for the subsequent onset of democracy in the twentieth century. It then presents a typology of five twentieth-century political permutations (social democracy, revolutionary populism, statist populism, socialist revolution, and authoritarian reaction), seeking to tease out the corresponding relationships between the two 'traditions'. It concludes ( inter alia ) that the current triumph of liberal democracy in Latin America, while in part attributable to historical precedent, is also significantly contingent, and dependent on the apparent exhaustion of the revolutionary tradition.