From Development to Democracy: The Transformations of Modern Asia

by Dan Slater, Joseph Wong

Why some of Asia’s authoritarian regimes have democratized as they have grown richer―and why others haven’t

Over the past century, Asia has been transformed by rapid economic growth, industrialization, and urbanization―a spectacular record of development that has turned one of the world’s poorest regions into one of its richest. Yet Asia’s record of democratization has been much more uneven, despite the global correlation between development and democracy. Why have some Asian countries become more democratic as they have grown richer, while others―most notably China―haven’t? In From Development to Democracy , Dan Slater and Joseph Wong offer a sweeping and original answer to this crucial question.

Slater and Wong demonstrate that Asia defies the conventional expectation that authoritarian regimes concede democratization only as a last resort, during times of weakness. Instead, Asian dictators have pursued democratic reforms as a proactive strategy to revitalize their power from a position of strength. Of central importance is whether authoritarians are confident of victory and stability. In Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan these factors fostered democracy through strength, while democratic experiments in Indonesia, Thailand, and Myanmar were less successful and more reversible. At the same time, resistance to democratic reforms has proven intractable in Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, China, Vietnam, and Cambodia. Reconsidering China’s 1989 crackdown, Slater and Wong argue that it was the action of a regime too weak to concede, not too strong to fail, and they explain why China can allow democracy without inviting instability.

The result is a comprehensive regional history that offers important new insights about when and how democratic transitions happen―and what the future of Asia might be.

Genres: Asia, Politics, Nonfiction, History, China, Economics

368 pages, Hardcover

Published September 6, 2022

Reviews

[Ashley Combs · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s a 3.5 but I’ll round up because it covers 12 different countries. Overall idea and argument is pretty solid, but I thought it was lacking in information and story for certain countries. You could definitely tell where the author felt more confident in the country’s history. I also felt that, like many political science books, it repeated its argument too much rather than just letting the history and information speak for itself. But would recommend if you’re looking for a solid understanding of democracy and development in Asia

[Sadie Forsythe]

The breadth of this research is a little staggering, though entirely secondary and apparently limited to English-language. It's also a little convenient that the developmental clusters break neatly into four groups of three each. But all in all, interesting and convincing (at least to this non-economist, baby political scientist).

[Dylan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some very interesting ideas. However, as a work of political science I found some of the arguments made were not very compelling. Every general principle or category the authors tried to construct seemed to be more exception than rule. As a work of history, the book suffered from a general lack of primary sources.

[Major Kusanagi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Study on the origins of democracy across east and southeast Asia, dividing countries into loose 'clusters': the democratizers (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan), the developmental militarists (Indonesia, Thailand, Myanmar), those with a legacy of British colonialism (Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong), and the developmental socialists (China, Cambodia, Vietnam).

Authors suggest two broad paths of how non-democratic regimes become democratic: either when the non-democratic system breaks down, or when ruling parties or elites are confident enough they can retain power or continue to hold influence after democratization.

[Jeany Lin · Rating 3 out of 5]

這本原作是2022年出版，春山2024年五月出版。資料和研究還蠻新的，所以我蠻有興趣的。

然後他比《比較的幽靈》好讀一百倍！就是一個正常的美國研究型書籍會有的樣子！把結論先寫出來給你，再舉例說明，比歐洲學者喜歡纏纏繞繞的風格真是簡明易懂多了。

不過要說到他的分析，我覺得他有他的道理，但是台灣部分超級不行，日本也沒有說服我。東南亞不熟無法判斷，中國、越南、新加坡有道理。

[Daniel Mcintyre · Rating 5 out of 5]

A truly spectacular piece of political science scholarship, crisply written and goes on not a page too long.