The book description text is repeated (2 times, one after the other). Rather than you reading through the description to determine where the repeat starts, please replace the description with the following: Around the globe, populists have used the decline of established political parties and widespread societal fears of globalization to launch increasingly successful electoral campaigns. Indonesia is no exception. In the 2014 presidential elections, two populists even competed against each other--albeit with vastly different concepts of populism. Prabowo Subianto, the wealthy former son-in-law of ex-autocrat Suharto, offered a classic populist paradigm based on anti-foreign rhetoric, condemnation of the status quo, appeal to the poor, and neo-authoritarian reform plans. By contrast, his opponent, the down-to-earth former carpenter and Jakarta governor, Joko Widodo ("Jokowi"), advanced a new form of technocratic populism that was inclusive, nonconfrontational, and primarily focused on improving the quality of public service delivery. This study explores the dynamics of the electoral contest between Prabowo and Jokowi, and analyzes what they tell us about the conditions under which populist campaigns are launched and succeed or fail. It shows that Prabowo's campaign was ultimately defeated because Indonesia's post-Suharto democracy was not in a state of acute, life-threatening crisis. However, the issue also illuminates Jokowi's struggle to establish his populist rule after his inauguration as president, with oligarchic forces and other members of the old elite forcefully trying to intrude into his new government.

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.

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.

Democracy in Southeast Asia has been explained using a number of factors including historical legacies, social structures, developmental levels, transitional processes, and institutional designs while other elements, such as elite-level relations and social coalitions, have been overlooked. This book offers a new explanation for democracy’s collapse or persistence in Southeast Asia today. Focusing on Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia — the three countries in the region with the most democratic experience — William Case shows that existing accounts based on contextual factors are by themselves incomplete. Hence, they lead us wrongly to anticipate democracy’s persistence in Thailand and its collapse in Indonesia. They more accurately, though only partially, correlate with democracy’s fluctuations in the Philippines. Advancing a new argument, Case shows that democracy’s fate is determined instead by the opportunities that contextual factors can provide for populist mobilization. His model enables us better to understand democracy’s breakdown in Thailand, its survival in Indonesia, and its slippage in the Philippines. Presenting research into vital questions over democratic durability and authoritarian backlash, this book will be of interest to scholars in the field of comparative politics, specifically comparative democratization and Southeast Asian politics.

The Oxford Handbook of Populism presents the state of the art of research on populism from the perspective of Political Science. The book features work from the leading experts in the field, and synthesizes the main strands of research in four compact sections: concepts, issues, regions, and normative debates. Due to its breath, The Oxford Handbook of Populism is an invaluable resource for those interested in the study of populism, but also forexperts in each of the topics discussed, who will benefit from accounts of current discussions and research gaps, as well as a map of new directions in the study of populism.

This handbook brings national and thematic case studies together to examine a variety of populist politics from local and comparative perspectives in the Asia Pacific. The chapters consider key and cross cutting themes such as populism and nationalism, religion, ethnicity and gender, as well as authoritarianism. They show how populist politics alters the way governments mediate state-society relations. The essays in this volume consider: • diverse approaches in populist politics, for example, post-colonial, strategic vs ideational, growth and redistribution, leadership styles, and in what ways they are similar to, or different from, populist discourses in Europe and the United States; • under what social, political, economic and structural conditions populist politics has emerged in the Asia-Pacific region; • national case studies drawn from South, East and Southeast Asia as well as the Pacific analyzing themes such as media, religion, gender, medical populism, corruption and cronyism, and inclusive vs exclusive forms of populist politics; • modes and techniques of social and political mobilization that populist politicians employ to influence people and their impact on the way democracy is conceived and practiced in the Asia Pacific. As a systematic account of populist ideologies, strategies, leaders and trends in the Asia Pacific, this handbook is essential reading for scholars of area studies, especially in the Asia Pacific, politics and international relations, and political and social theory.

Drawing on evidence from eight case studies from across three Asian subregions, this volume highlights the distinctive features of Asian populism in comparison with Western experiences. In contrast to the latter, populist practices in Asia tend to exhibit an ambiguous nature, often characterized by ad hoc and mixed ideological add-ons. The case studies shed light on the cultural dimension of populism, an aspect that has been largely overlooked in Western contexts. Empirical evidence shows that political culture and identity politics exert an influence on populist practices in Asia. In the meantime, populist attitudes towards the role of politicians, the popular will and the relationship between the elite and the people can serve as an explanatory variable for political outcomes. The relationship between populism and democracy in Asia is observed to be more intricate than that in Western contexts. Populism is not necessarily endogenous to democracy, and thus its emergence may not solely be a response to the crisis of democracy. The book presents a valuable resource for scholars and students of Asian politics and those looking at the phenomenon of populism through a comparative lens.