Delivering growth, jobs and housing gave governments strong legitimacy. Economic failure often brought rulers down.
Singapore's PAP built its legitimacy on results. Public housing, jobs from foreign investment, and clean, efficient government won steady support. By 1990 most Singaporeans lived in government-built flats.
Suharto's New Order also rested on performance. The economy grew by about 7 per cent a year, and Indonesia became self-sufficient in rice by 1984. Official poverty fell from about 40 per cent of the population in 1976 to about 11 per cent in 1996.
In Malaysia, the New Economic Policy from 1971 cut poverty from about 49 per cent in 1970 to about 17 per cent in 1990. This supported the Barisan Nasional's hold on power.
Failure was dangerous. Under Sukarno, inflation passed 600 per cent in 1965-1966, which weakened his position. Under Marcos, debt and corruption led to a severe economic crisis in 1984-1985. In Burma, Ne Win cancelled most banknotes in 1987, wiping out savings, which helped spark the uprising of 1988.
The Asian Financial Crisis of 1997-1998 destroyed Suharto's claim to good performance. Prices rose, the rupiah collapsed, and he resigned in May 1998.
- Indonesian poverty
- About 40% (1976) to about 11% (1996).
- Malaysian poverty
- About 49% (1970) to about 17% (1990).
- Burma 1987
- Banknotes cancelled; savings wiped out.
Worked example: Testing performance legitimacy
How far did performance keep governments in power?
- Success: Singapore, Malaysia and Suharto's Indonesia for decades.
- Failure: Sukarno in 1965-1966, Marcos in 1984-1986, Ne Win in 1987-1988.
- Risk: performance legitimacy can collapse in a crisis, as in 1998.
- Judgement: a strong source, but a fragile one.
Watch out for this
Good economic performance guaranteed a government's survival.
Performance legitimacy was strong but fragile. Suharto delivered growth for thirty years but fell within months when the Asian Financial Crisis struck.
Check your understanding
Why did the Asian Financial Crisis threaten Suharto?
- It destroyed his main claim to legitimacy, economic success.
- It led to a communist invasion.
- It ended the monarchy.