Development, Civil Society and Democracy in New Order Indonesia
Otter, Mark Damien (2006). Development, Civil Society and Democracy in New Order Indonesia PhD Thesis, School of Political Science and International Studies, University of Queensland.
Development, Civil Society and Democracy in New Order Indonesia
School, Centre or Institute
School of Political Science and International Studies
Institution
University of Queensland
Publication date
2006
Thesis type
PhD Thesis
Supervisor(s)
Assoc. Prof Gillian Whitehouse
Abstract/Summary
This thesis examines whether economic development can deliver democracy. It specifically examines the case of one Asian country, Indonesia, in one historical period the New Order from 1966 to 1998. Indonesia during the New Order appears to contradict the conventional wisdom that economic growth triggers a transition to democracy in that it was a time when considerable economic development took place and yet the country remained under an authoritarian dictatorship. The thesis traces the rise of a number of middle class civil society organisations and movements which came about as a result of increased economic development and observes whether there was an increase in democratic activism within those organisations and movements. It finds some evidence of the expected economic developmentdemocratisation pathways, yet there was no democratic transition, at least not for many years. There is a number of interrelated reasons why this transition did not occur. First, although the middle class did grow, its size was not as great as in some comparable developing countries. Second, the middle class did not deliver the sufficient number of political activists to mobilise the wider population that the theory of democratising civil society would suggest. Third, political manipulation by the regime and its agents was sufficiently strong to deter or undermine the forces of democratisation. Finally, although there were serious divisions within the government at various stages (which is often a catalyst for regime change), they were not sufficiently strong to result in its collapse. The conclusion is that economic development is a powerful contributor to democratisation but, by itself, it is not a sufficiently strong force to result in democratic transition. Economic development is mediated by particular political, cultural and historical influences in a dynamic mix affecting the process of democratisation.
n01front-Otter-mark.pdf