Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intra-Party Dynamics in the People’s Action Party: Party Structure, Continuity and Hegemony

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Limits of Authoritarian Governance in Singapore’s Developmental State

Abstract

This chapter explores the role of intra-party dynamics within the People’s Action Party (PAP). I argue that the PAP’s closed structure—akin to a cadre party—is an important reason for its political preponderance. The party structure ensures that there has been no major split within the party since independence, and the core ideological predispositions remain unchallenged. Essentially, the party reproduces itself. The choice of a cadre structure was a conscious decision by the party leadership, especially Lee Kuan Yew, following an internal struggle with the leftist faction. This chapter thus interrogates the interaction between institutions (party structures) and agents (personalities), and how one affects the other. At the same time, the chapter investigates the much-touted ‘leftwards’ shift by the party following its dismal showing in the 2011 elections. I contend that the tilt in direction can be more accurately described as a shift in policy focus rather than a significant alteration of PAP core governing ideologies. The party’s closed structure minimises the possibility of radical change in its fundamental underpinnings of governance. The policy shifts should then be considered as pragmatic responses to a declining vote share, rather than a rethinking of the assumptions upon which the party, and the country, are built. The effect of the structure is that the party perpetuates itself, and prospects of significant, rather than cosmetic, change in the party remains unlikely. The PAP case study offers several comparative implications. Firstly, it highlights how personalities—and critical junctures—can have a lasting impact on political institutions and outcomes. Secondly, the case study emphasises the transformative relationship between institutional dominance and ideological hegemony—the party structure being one such institution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a thorough discussion on the internal machinations of the PAP, see (Tan 2015) and (Abdullah 2016a).

  2. 2.

    This has been the case throughout the PAP’s history, with the exception of the first couple of years of Goh Chok Tong’s premiership, when Lee Kuan Yew was still the secretary-general of the party in spite of having stepped down as Prime Minister.

  3. 3.

    Even foreign commentators have tended to believe so. For instance, see The Guardian, 4 April 2015.

  4. 4.

    This is especially true of Anwar Ibrahim, who led the opposition following his sacking from UMNO in 1998. See (Abdullah 2016a).

  5. 5.

    Dhanabalan and Tony Tan would eventually rejoin Goh’s cabinet.

  6. 6.

    This was articulated by Ambassador Bilahari Kausikan, a government stalwart. See Channel NewsAsia 3 November 2015. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong shared Bilahari’s speech on his personal Facebook page, indicating his endorsement of its content.

  7. 7.

    The number increased to seven in 2013, when a by-election was held for one of the PAP-held wards, after the incumbent had resigned due to a sex scandal. WP’s Lee Li Lian won the ensuing contest.

  8. 8.

    Lawrence Wong and Masagos Zulkifli, both Senior Ministers of State at the time, gave the assurance that there would no “OB (out of bounds) markers” or “sacred cows”. See The Strait Times 10 August 2012a.

  9. 9.

    The sentiment was articulated by several PAP Members of Parliament, including the Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam. See The Straits Times 19 April 2013.

  10. 10.

    Lee Kuan Yew’s interview with the International Herald Tribune. See The New York Times 29 August 2007.

Bibliography

  • Abdullah, W. J. (2016a). Assessing Party Structures: Why some Regimes are more Authoritarian than Others. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 70(5), 525−540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdullah, W. J. (2016b). Education as a Non-Issue: Political and Ideological Positioning in GE2015. In T. Lee & K. Y. Tan, (eds.) Change in Voting: Singapore’s 2015 General Election. (pp. 134−145) Singapore: Ethos Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdullah, W. J. (2017). Bringing Ideology in: Differing Oppositional Challenges to Hegemony in Singapore and Malaysia. Government and Opposition. 52(3), 483−510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baber, Z. (2002). Engendering or endangering democracy? The Internet, civil society and the public sphere. Asian Journal of Social Science, 30(2), 287−303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capoccia, G. & Kelemen, R. D. (2007). The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism. World Politics, 59(3), 341−369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Case, W., (1991). Comparative Malaysian Leadership: Tunku Abdul Rahman and Mahathir Mohamad. Asian Survey, 31(5), 456−473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Channel NewsAsia. (2015, November 3). Bilahari Kausikan on ‘The Legacy of LKY’. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/bilahari-kausikan-on-the/2235302.html. Accessed 4 November 2016.

  • Coleman, J. J. (1999). Unified Government, Divided Government, and Party Responsiveness. American Political Science Review, 93(4), 821−835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotton, J. (1993). Political innovation in Singapore: the presidency, the leadership and the party. In G. Rodan, ed. Singapore Changes Guard (pp. 3−13) Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gandhi, J. and Przeworski, A. (2007). Authoritarian institutions and the Survival of Autocrats. Comparative Political Studies, 40(11), 1279−1301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geddes, B. (1999). What Do We Know about Democratization after Twenty Years?. Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 2, 115−144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, C. (2012). Freedom from the Press: Journalism and State Power in Singapore. Singapore: NUS Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • George, C. (2015). Legal Landmines and OB Markers: Survival Strategies of Alternative Media. In T. T. How, A. Mahizhnan & A. P. Hwa, eds. Battle for Hearts and Minds: New Media and Elections in Singapore (pp. 29−48). Singapore: World Scientific.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, L. (1992). Temporality, Events, and Explanation in Historical Sociology: An Introduction. Sociological Methods & Research, 20(4), 403−427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J. C. (2016). Remembering Lee Kuan Yew: politics, heritage and political heritage in Singapore. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22(1), 59−69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, K. L. (2000). Prime ministerial leadership and policy-making style in Singapore: Lee Kuan Yew and Goh Chok Tong compared. Asian Journal of Political Science, 8(1), 91−123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, L. (2002). The Lee Kuan Yew Story as Singapore’s History. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 33(3), 545−557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huxley, T. (1991). Singapore and Malaysia: A Precarious Balance?. The Pacific Review, 4(3), 204−213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink: a Psychological Study Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston: Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. M. and Brown, D. (1994). Singapore and the Myth of the Liberalizing Middle Class. The Pacific Review, 7(1), 79−87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. (2000). Creating Malaysia: Singapore security, the Borneo territories, and the contours of British policy, 1961–63. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 28(2), 85−109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, A. (2005). Nation-Building and the Singapore Story: Some Issues in the Study of Contemporary Singapore History. In G. Wang (ed.) Nation Building: Five Southeast Asian Histories (pp. 221−250). Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. Y. (1998). The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew. Singapore: Singapore Press Holdings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. Y. (2000). From Third World to First: The Singapore Story: 1965–2000. Singapore: Singapore Press Holdings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. (2010). The Media, Cultural Control and Government in Singapore. Abingdon, Oxon & New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, S. and Way, L. A. (2010). Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. (2000). Path Dependence in Historical Sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J. (2002). The Legacies of Liberalism: Path Dependence and Political Regimes in Central America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauzy, D. K. (1993). Leadership Succession in Singapore: The Best Laid Plans…. Asian Survey, 33(12), 1163−1174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mauzy, D. K. and Milne, R. S. (2002). Singapore Politics under the People’s Action Party. London; New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mutalib, H. (2003). Parties and Politics: A Study of Opposition Parties and the PAP in Singapore. Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mutalib, H. (2012). Singapore Malays: Being Ethnic Minority and Muslim in a Global City-State. Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • New Eastern Outlook. (2015, October 21). Singapore’s leftward shift behind ruling party’s stunning electoral comeback. http://journal-neo.org/2015/10/21/singapore-s-leftward-shift-behind-ruling-party-s-stunning-electoral-comeback/. Accessed 4 November 2016.

  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G. and Schmitter, P. C. (1986). Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortmann, S. (2011). Singapore: Authoritarian but Newly Competitive. Journal of Democracy, 22(4), 153−164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortmann, S. (2015). Political Change and Civil Society Coalitions in Singapore. Government and Opposition, 50(1), 119−139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, C. L. (1969). The People’s Action Party, 1954–1963. Journal of Southeast Asian History, 10(1), 142−154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, C. L. (1971). Singapore’s People’s Action Party: its History, Organization and Leadership. Singapore: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251−267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plate, T. (2010). Conversations with Lee Kuan Yew: Citizen Singapore: How to Build a Nation. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinlivan, J. T. (1999). Coup-proofing: Its Practices and Consequences in the Middle East. International Security, 24(2), 131−165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuters. (2015, September 6). Singapore’s rulers hope a nudge to the left will keep voters loyal. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-singapore-election-idUSKCN0R60XS20150906. Accessed 4 November 2016.

  • Rodan, G. (1989). The Political Economy of Singapore’s Industrialization: National State and International Capital. 1st ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, W. H. (1996). Three Temporalities: Toward an Eventful Sociology. In T. J. McDonald, ed. The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences (pp. 262−264). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, B. (2015). Quest for Political Power: Communist Subversion and Militancy in Singapore. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, B. (2016). Singapore’s 2015 General Election: Explaining PAP’s Resounding Win. The Round Table, 105(2), 129−140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, E. K. (2012). Singapore: Transitioning to a “New Normal” in a Post-Lee Kuan Yew Era. Southeast Asian Affairs. Volume 1, 265−282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, K. P. (2008). Meritocracy and Elitism in a Global City: Ideological Shifts in Singapore. International Political Science Review, 29(1), 7−27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, K. P. (2009). Who’s Afraid of Chaterine Lim? The State in Patriarchal Singapore. Asian Studies Review, 33(1), 43−62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, N. (2015). Institutionalized Succession and Hegemonic Party Cohesion in Singapore. In E. Hicken & E. M. Kuhonta, eds. Party System Institutionalization in Asia: Democracies, Autocracies, and the Shadows of the Past (pp. 49−73). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Business Times. (2015, March 5). Moving left? Let’s set the context right. http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/opinion/singapore-budget-2015/moving-left-lets-set-the-context-right. Accessed 4 November 2016.

  • The Economist (2015, March 26). Why Singapore became an economic success. http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/03/economist-explains-23. Accessed 2 November 2016.

  • The Guardian. (2015, April 4). The UK can learn a lot from Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore. https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2015/apr/04/uk-learn-former-colony-singapore-lee-kuan-yew. Accessed 2 November 2016.

  • The New Mandala. (2016, November 2). Confronting ‘Chinese Privilege’ in Singapore. http://www.newmandala.org/brief-history-chinese-privilege-singapore/. Accessed 4 November 2016.

  • The New York Times. (2007, August 29). Excerpts from an interview with Lee Kuan Yew. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/29/world/asia/29iht-lee-excerpts.html. Accessed 8 November 2016.

  • The Straits Times. (2009, December 19). Educate students about politics, says Shanmugam.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Straits Times. (2012a, August 10). No sacred cows in review of policies.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Straits Times. (2012b, September 15). Framing the Singapore Conversation.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Straits Times. (2013, April 19). Cabinet: more left-of-centre now, helping the lower income.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Straits Times. (2015a, January 6). PAP announces Central Executive Committee posts, 3 new faces in lineup. http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/pap-announces-central-executive-committee-posts-3-new-faces-in-lineup. Accessed 2 November 2016.

  • The Straits Times. (2015b, September 12). GE 2015: Strong mandate means MPs must work extra hard to serve. http://www.straitstimes.com/politics/ge2015-strong-mandate-means-mps-must-work-extra-hard-to-serve-says-pm-lee. Accessed 29 January 2018.

  • The Straits Times. (2015c, September 27). They helped six MPs shine online in GE2015. http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/they-helped-six-mps-shine-online-in-ge2015. Accessed 7 November 2015.

  • Tilly, C. (1988). Future History. Theory and Society, 17(5), 703−712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Today. (2013, July 15). Our Singapore Conversation themes identified, dialogue to continue. http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/themes-identified-spore-conversation-could-continue. Accessed 7 November 2016.

  • Weiss, M. L. (2016). Going to the ground (or AstroTurf): a Grassroots View of Regime Resilience. Democratization, 24(2), pp. 1−18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, M. L., Loke, H.-Y. and Chua, L. A. (2016). The 2015 General Election and Singapore’s Political Forecast: White Clouds, Blue Skies. Asian Survey, 56(5), 859−878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthington, R. R. (2003). Governance in Singapore. London: RoutledgeCurzon.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Public Policy and Global Affairs, School of Social Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Walid Jumblatt Abdullah

Authors
  1. Walid Jumblatt Abdullah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Walid Jumblatt Abdullah .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Lily Zubaidah Rahim

  2. College of Business, Government and Law, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Michael D. Barr

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Abdullah, W.J. (2019). Intra-Party Dynamics in the People’s Action Party: Party Structure, Continuity and Hegemony. In: Rahim, L.Z., Barr, M.D. (eds) The Limits of Authoritarian Governance in Singapore’s Developmental State. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1556-5_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation