June Paolo C.

Saguran
BAPS-IV
POSC305
Mr. Joseph Ian Sabado

Southeast Asia's Democratic Moment: Thinkpiece

The central argument to the discussion of Amitav Acharya was viewing the
distinctiveness on what form of government should the Southeast Asian nation should have
followed and adopted, in the terms of facilitating the framework of economic cooperation and
development of a certain country, would it be the democratic government or the authoritarian
perspective. Thus, in extracting the factors that would able to let us comprehend on who really
leads on the top spot, the article cited a key analysis on how we will be able to see its features,
thus by classifying their combination of domestic, intraregional and pressures that is induced by
the economic crisis that put both of the forms into defensive and empowered forces in Southeast
Asia. With these specifications, we will able to learn on how the Democracy had given a
powerful impact to the various nations in Asia.

The argument was made through the formulation of the different principle and perception
from the different leaders in Southeast Asian nation. Apparently, in the article, there are pro and
anti-democratic, we really could have seen the positive and negative aspect to both forms of the
government. Thus, leaders from Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia advocates authoritarianism,
Lee Kuan Yew had stated that in the authoritarian type of government, people are all well-
disciplined, they give respect to the law on what had the country had imposed and implemented.
In order for the country to be developed, strict implementations of economic order and discipline
must be recognized. Thus, this was contended by the Pro-Democratic forces just like Philippines,
Thailand, South Korea, that authoritarianism is seemingly like provides an impartial system of
governance, such that, how could they create and implement a law that was based solely for
from their prescribed notions and could merely make them or enjoy to what had they had settle.
Thus, for them, in forms of deciding, people should also know their rights in giving such law a
significant critique, people might not have the common perceptions and principles, some might
agree, and some perhaps opposes.

Furthermore, the article brought a good and bad impression to how the authoritarian and
democratic form of government creates a bright effect in handling each of their economic
conditions. Some gives critiques that in democracy government mostly all were corrupt minded
persons, while in the authoritarian government mostly succeed in handling its economic and
political conditions. This really makes the reading to be persuasive since that we able to
scrutinize each of the forms distinct features. It could really make the reader to open its mind and
give critiques to what form of government should their country have recognized and adopted.

Henceforth, the implication to the article of Amitav Acharya is by about seeing the
comparison of authoritarianism and the democracy. How this forms brought pressures to
domestic, intraregional and external affairs. We could simply understood Southeast Asian
countries towards the backgrounds and their perception regarding with each type of government.