(Not) democratising through strength: core beliefs and the institutions of Singapore’s People’s Action Party

Abstract

ABSTRACT How and under what conditions do autocratic parties democratise through strength'? Prior scholarship suggests that authoritarian parties embrace political liberalisation when there are warnings of their decline. However, Singapore's People's Action Party (PAP) has not ‘conceded-to-thrive’ despite seemingly waning dominance. This paper explains why autocratic parties resist democratisation. Drawing from historical and sociological institutionalism, we examine how established ideas, serving as cognitive filters through which governing elites interpret their environment, become codified in formal institutions. Specifically, we argue how governments respond to political challenges depend on the ‘stickiness’ of the normative foundations of authoritarianism and their manifestations in state institutions. We uncover the ideational and historical contexts of authoritarian institutions and show how they are translated into laws, policies and practices. Using the case of PAP, we consider the microlevel origins and institutional persistence of oneparty dominance and explain how these normative foundations and its subsequent institutionalisation impede political change.