Socio-economic and political issues are dealt with selectively within a chronological historical framework, covering the dramatic colonial impact of 1940-60 until the present day. The state is examined from the point of view of social class as well as communalism, to explain the dominance of the ruling coalition over the 37 years since independence. The author argues that authoritarian-populism is the concept that best fits the apparent paradox of an enduring regime via the ballot box, and the extensive restrictions on the scope of democracy, particularly through the repressive apparatus of detention without trial. The underlying theme is a critique and explanation of Malaysia's human rights record.

This book rejects the notion that the 1997-98 Asian economic crisis was further evidence that ultimately capitalism can only develop within liberal social and political institutions.

This Element offers a way to understand the evolution of authoritarian rule in Southeast Asia. The theoretical framework is based on a set of indicators (judged for their known advantages and mimicry of democratic attributes) as well as a typology (conceptualized as two discreet categories of 'retrograde' and 'sophisticated' authoritarianism). Working with an original dataset, the empirical results reveal vast differences within and across authoritarian regimes in Southeast Asia, but also a discernible shift towards sophisticated authoritarianism over time. The Element concludes with a reflection of its contribution and a statement on its generalizability.

A timely and incisive assessment of what the success of populism means for democracy. Populist movements have recently appeared in nearly every democracy around the world. Yet our grasp of this disruptive political phenomenon remains woefully inadequate. Politicians of all stripes appeal to the interests of the people, and every opposition party campaigns against the current establishment. What, then, distinguishes populism from run-of-the-mill democratic politics? And why should we be concerned by its rise? In Me the People, Nadia Urbinati argues that populism should be regarded as a new form of representative government, one based on a direct relationship between the leader and those the leader defines as the “good” or “right” people. Populist leaders claim to speak to and for the people without the need for intermediaries—in particular, political parties and independent media—whom they blame for betraying the interests of the ordinary many. Urbinati shows that, while populist governments remain importantly distinct from dictatorial or fascist regimes, their dependence on the will of the leader, along with their willingness to exclude the interests of those deemed outside the bounds of the “good” or “right” people, stretches constitutional democracy to its limits and opens a pathway to authoritarianism. Weaving together theoretical analysis, the history of political thought, and current affairs, Me the People presents an original and illuminating account of populism and its relation to democracy.

A combination of economic transformation, political transitions and changes in media have substantially, if incrementally, altered the terrain for political participation globally, particularly in Asia, home to several of the most dramatic such shifts over the past two decades. This book explores political participation in Asia and how democracy and authoritarianism function under neoliberal economic relations. It examines changes that coincide seemingly perversely with a participation explosion: with mass street protests and ‘occupations’, energetic online contention, movements of students and workers, mobilization for and against democracy and more. Organized thematically in three parts – political participation in a ‘post-democratic’ context, changes in the scope and character of political space and the policing of that space – this book analyzes economic, regime and media shifts and how they function in tandem and both within and across states. Closely integrated, comparative and theoretically driven, this book will be of interest to scholars and practitioners in the fields of civil society, contentious politics or social movements, democratization, political economy/development, media and communications, political geography, sociology, comparative politics and Asian politics.

Across Asia, "populist" leaders emerged on an unprecedented scale around the start of the 21st century. Populism in Asia is the first book to examine this phenomenon. The 1997 Asian financial crisis undermined established political leaders and stirred popular discontent. Voters in East Asia responded by electing maverick politicians who promised to target corruption and establish fresh agendas. In Southeast Asia, populist leaders based their appeal on the frustrations and aspirations of groups excluded from political power. Leaders who came to office during this period include Thaksin Shinawatra in Thailand, Joseph 'Erap' Estrada in the Philippines, Roo Moo-hyun in South Korea, Chen Shui-bian in Taiwan and Jun'ichiro Koizumi in Japan. Local politicians in Indonesia likewise adopted a populist stance, as did Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in Malaysia. In the present volume, leading Asian scholars consider the many faces of contemporary populism in the region, analyzing the phenomenon through case studies of political leaders with populist credentials and using these accounts to evaluate the achievements and failings of democracy. Benedict Anderson provides a reflective afterword. Despite its allure, populism has not been a success in Asia. Populist leaders are in retreat across the region and their fall can be spectacular, as in the Philippines and Thailand. However, the editors of this collection argue that populism will recur because Asia's oligarchic political systems do not fulfill the imagined role of the state as a provider of well-being, citizenship rights and equality.

Editorial 7 Part One: World Situations Populism and Religion in Bosnia and Herzegovina 14 MILE BABIĆ Populism and Religious Nationalism in India 26 FRANCIS GONSALVES The Nationalisation of the Central Islamic Reference Point: Islam and Populism in the History of Turkey 37 DILEK SARMIS Part Two: Analyses Religious Populism: the New Avatar of Political Crisis 50 FRANÇOIS MABILLE Masculinist Populism and Toxic Christianity in the United States 61 SUSAN ABRAHAM Part Three: Challenging populism by theology The 'People' of God and its Idols in the 'One and Other' Testaments: How Sacred Scripture Challenges Populist Rhetoric 74 MARIDA NICOLACI 'Bridges not Barriers': The Potential of Christian Hope to Counter Right-Wing Populism 89 ANDREAS LOB-HÜDEPOHL Right-wing Populism and Catholicity: An Ecclesiological Reflection 101 FRANZ GMAINER-PRANZEL The Paradoxes of Populism and the Church's Contribution to Democracy: Some Hypotheses 111 CARMELO DOTOLO Part Four: Theological Forum Summer of Shame: American Catholics and the Latest Wave of the Abuse Crisis 124 CATHLEEN KAVENY Listening to the Conversation: After the Synod of Bishops Meeting on Young People, the Faith and Vocational Discernment 130 BRUNO CADORÉ Contributors 136

Across the West, hard-right leaders are surging to power on platforms of ethno-economic nationalism, Christianity, and traditional family values. Is this phenomenon the end of neoliberalism or its monstrous offspring? In the Ruins of Neoliberalism casts the hard-right turn as animated by socioeconomically aggrieved white working- and middle-class populations but contoured by neoliberalism’s multipronged assault on democratic values. From its inception, neoliberalism flirted with authoritarian liberalism as it warred against robust democracy. It repelled social-justice claims through appeals to market freedom and morality. It sought to de-democratize the state, economy, and society and re-secure the patriarchal family. In key works of the founding neoliberal intellectuals, Wendy Brown traces the ambition to replace democratic orders with ones disciplined by markets and traditional morality and democratic states with technocratic ones. Yet plutocracy, white supremacy, politicized mass affect, indifference to truth, and extreme social disinhibition were no part of the neoliberal vision. Brown theorizes their unintentional spurring by neoliberal reason, from its attack on the value of society and its fetish of individual freedom to its legitimation of inequality. Above all, she argues, neoliberalism’s intensification of nihilism coupled with its accidental wounding of white male supremacy generates an apocalyptic populism willing to destroy the world rather than endure a future in which this supremacy disappears.

Uiteenzetting over de opkomst van het populisme en het gevaar daarvan voor de democratie.