Patrimonialism has been a strong feature so Southeast Asian politics. Paul Hutchcroft describes the Philippines ad a “patrimounial state”. In Indonesia, “bapakism” (from the Indonesian word “bapak”, literally “father”), was once used to describe the dense web of patron-client ties that emanated from the top to the bottom of the authoritarian regime, beginning with President Suharto who developed loyalty among key supports by allowing access to state resources, contracts and other material benefits (Jackson, 1978). Many observers of Malaysia’s powerful dominant party, UMNO, have emphasized its use of patron-client ties to maintain and reproduce its political success.
Patron-client ties, or patrimonialism, best explain stability rather than political change. A web of such ties tends to create its own strength, in parallel with formal institutions. Patron-client ties are private and informal; they bypass formal ranks or institutional hierarchies, although they often complement them. Because of their vertical nature, they have often been used to explain why southeast Asian countries have seen fewer large-scale, class-bases, or horizontally organized resistance movements than other regions.