The Rise of Personalistic Rule: Marcos and Suharto

Active learning works well for this topic because students often assume authoritarianism arises only from brute force, but the reality is more nuanced. Role-playing and structured discussions help them see how leaders like Marcos and Suharto blended coercion with persuasion, using legitimacy claims that resonated with different social groups.

• JC 1
• History
• 3 activities
• 25 min–50 min

Learning Objectives

1. Analyze the socio-economic and political conditions in post-independence Philippines and Indonesia that facilitated the rise of Ferdinand Marcos and Suharto.
2. Explain the specific strategies and institutional mechanisms employed by Marcos and Suharto to centralize power and suppress opposition.
3. Compare and contrast the methods used by Marcos and Suharto to legitimize their personalistic rule, such as propaganda, patronage, and military control.
4. Evaluate the stated benefits of authoritarian stability under Marcos and Suharto against the documented long-term costs to civil liberties and democratic institutions.
5. Critique the role of external actors, such as the United States, in supporting or challenging the personalistic regimes of Marcos and Suharto.

Simulation Game

⏱ 50 min·Whole Class

Simulation Game: The Collapse of Democracy

Students act as members of a fictional parliament facing hyperinflation, a separatist rebellion, and a military coup threat. They must try to pass laws to solve the crisis, illustrating the 'gridlock' that often preceded authoritarian takeovers.

Prepare & details

Analyze the conditions that led to the rise of personalistic rule in the Philippines and Indonesia.

Facilitation Tip: During the Simulation: The Collapse of Democracy, assign roles that reflect real class and regional divisions, such as urban elites, rural peasants, and military officers, to highlight how support for strongmen often came from unlikely groups.

Setup: Flexible space for group stations

Materials: Role cards with goals/resources, Game currency or tokens, Round tracker

• Apply
• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Social Awareness
• Decision-Making

Think-Pair-Share

⏱ 25 min·Pairs

Think-Pair-Share: The Strongman's Justification

Students read excerpts from speeches by Marcos or Suharto. They discuss in pairs whether the trade-off of 'liberty for stability' was a convincing argument for the population at the time.

Prepare & details

Explain the mechanisms used by Marcos and Suharto to consolidate and maintain power.

Facilitation Tip: For the Think-Pair-Share: The Strongman's Justification, provide each pair with a short speech excerpt from one of the leaders and ask them to identify the specific promises made about stability or development.

Setup: Standard classroom seating; students turn to a neighbor

Materials: Discussion prompt (projected or printed), Optional: recording sheet for pairs

• Understand
• Apply
• Analyze
• Self-Awareness
• Relationship Skills

Inquiry Circle

⏱ 45 min·Small Groups

Inquiry Circle: The Military in Politics

Groups research the 'dual function' (dwifungsi) of the Indonesian military or the role of the Thai army in coups, identifying how these institutions became permanent features of the political landscape.

Prepare & details

Evaluate the short-term benefits and long-term costs of authoritarian stability.

Facilitation Tip: In Collaborative Investigation: The Military in Politics, have groups map out the military’s institutional interests in each country, such as control over state-owned enterprises, to show how personalistic rule often served institutional goals as much as individual ambitions.

Setup: Groups at tables with access to source materials

Materials: Source material collection, Inquiry cycle worksheet, Question generation protocol, Findings presentation template

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Self-Management
• Self-Awareness

Teaching This Topic

Experienced teachers approach this topic by focusing first on the fragility of early democracies—not just their failures but the real economic and social pressures they faced. Avoid presenting Marcos and Suharto as mere villains; instead, have students interrogate the trade-offs people perceived in giving up democratic freedoms for stability. Research suggests that highlighting middle-class complicity, not just military coercion, leads to deeper engagement and more nuanced student arguments.

What to Expect

Successful learning looks like students explaining how economic instability and elite divisions created openings for personalistic rule, not just listing dates or leaders. They should also compare the justifications used by Marcos, Suharto, and Sarit, showing how these differed by context. The goal is for them to move beyond stereotypes to analyze the interplay of structure and agency in political change.

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

Common Misconception

During the Simulation: The Collapse of Democracy, watch for students assuming strongmen seized power entirely through violence.

What to Teach Instead

Use the simulation’s debrief to emphasize how role-played middle-class and business leaders often voted to suspend democracy for the sake of 'order,' prompting students to reflect on why these groups supported authoritarianism despite its costs.

Common Misconception

During Collaborative Investigation: The Military in Politics, watch for students generalizing that all authoritarian regimes in Southeast Asia operated the same way.

What to Teach Instead

Have groups present their findings on a large shared chart with columns for 'Indonesia (Suharto),' 'Philippines (Marcos),' and 'Thailand (Sarit),' then ask them to identify one unique feature from each column to highlight the diversity in methods and goals.

Assessment Ideas

Discussion Prompt

After the Simulation: The Collapse of Democracy, pose the question: 'Which was a more significant factor in the rise of personalistic rule in the Philippines and Indonesia: internal weaknesses of early democracies or external geopolitical influences?' Facilitate a debate where students must cite specific historical evidence from the period to support their arguments.

Quick Check

During Collaborative Investigation: The Military in Politics, present students with a list of actions (e.g., 'suspending elections,' 'controlling media,' 'using military force,' 'implementing land reform,' 'forming alliances with foreign powers'). Ask them to categorize each action as a 'mechanism for consolidating power' or a 'potential benefit of stability' under Marcos or Suharto, explaining their reasoning for one example.

Exit Ticket

After Think-Pair-Share: The Strongman's Justification, ask students to write two sentences identifying one key difference in the methods used by Marcos and Suharto to maintain power, and one sentence explaining a shared long-term cost of their respective regimes.

Extensions & Scaffolding

• Challenge students who finish early to research how anti-corruption movements in the Philippines and Indonesia framed their opposition to Marcos and Suharto, then present how these movements used symbols from the earlier regimes against them.
• For students who struggle, provide a partially completed Venn diagram comparing the three leaders’ methods and outcomes, with key terms like 'martial law,' 'neo-patrimonialism,' and 'economic nationalism' missing for them to fill in.
• Deeper exploration: Have students analyze primary sources from international observers (e.g., World Bank reports, U.S. diplomatic cables) to assess how external actors enabled or constrained these regimes’ consolidation of power.

Key Vocabulary

Personalistic Rule	A system of governance where political power and decision-making are concentrated in the hands of an individual leader, often characterized by informal networks and loyalty to the leader rather than institutions.
Authoritarianism	A form of government characterized by strong central power and limited political freedoms, often suppressing opposition and dissent through various control mechanisms.
New Society (Bagong Lipunan)	The political and social order established by Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines after declaring martial law, emphasizing order, development, and national discipline.
New Order (Orde Baru)	The political and economic system implemented by Suharto in Indonesia following the events of 1965, characterized by military dominance, centralized control, and economic development focused on stability.
Military Juntas	A government run by a committee of military leaders, often seizing power through a coup d'état and maintaining control through military force and influence.