Political scientists and sociologis

Political scientists and sociologists have long suggested that economic development produces vast transformations that lead to democracy. Countries in the region cast some doubt that this proposition yields strong predictive results. On the contrary, some wealthy countries such as Malaysia and Singapore maintained stable authoritarian regimes despite decades of economic transformation, while some relatively poorer countries such as the Philippines maintained some form of democratic rule. Nevertheless, while other factors might have interfered and prevented democratization in some cases, economic development has produced change in the region and, certainly, the lack of it has been associated with continued authoritarian rule.
The absence of economic development, on the other hand, has been associated with authoritarian rule. State-socialist experiments in the region largely failed to produce economic development. While they managed to raise living standards for some of the poorest peasants, failure to raise agricultural output or to create strong industrial sectors contributed to broad poverty overall. Of course, even within state-socialist economies there were vast differences. The Khmer Rouge destroyed Cambodia’s economy with very harsh and radical policies. The Ne Win regime in its early days contributed to impoverishing Burma as it cut off some of its most productive sectors as well as links to markets abroad. In Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia after 1979, communist regimes implemented collectivization and other state-directed socialist practices more cautiously and pragmatically. Nevertheless, they also remained for the most part poorer than other countries in the region. Overall, the poorest countries in the region – Cambodia, Laos, Burma and Vietnam - also remained mostly authoritarian.