The year 2014 has been a historical turning point for Indonesia’s democracy since 1999. First, it marked the end of the 10-year reign of President Yudhoyono, who was Indonesia’s first directly elected president and also the first to be democratically reelected (Aspinall and Mietzner 347). But most importantly, it was the year when Indonesia’s democracy had narrowly escaped from possible reversal to the repressive Suharto’s New Order regime. Two populist candidates, Jokowi and Prabowo, competed against each other in the 2014 presidential election; Jokowi represented the continuity of Indonesian democracy, whereas Prabowo, a former general under Suharto, promoted authoritarian-populist message suggesting recentralization of power and dismantling
…show more content…
As the party elites are more focused on building coalitions to maximize their power by gaining cabinet positions, they rarely compete to serve and represent their constituents. As the political process is dominated by the elites, this has also significantly marginalized ethnic minorities from actively participating in the political process. First, I will examine the success and the irony of Indonesia’s democracy. Second, I will explain Indonesia’s promiscuous power sharing in more detail and how it leads to the problems of democratization in Indonesia. I will expound how promiscuous power sharing generates elite (and class) politics and political corruption, party cartelization, marginalization of ethnic minorities, and voter dealignment, Third, I will examine the three elections – 2004, 2009 and 2014 – and their outcomes to explain how promiscuous power sharing has jeopardized democratization in Indonesia. Finally, the paper concludes by summarizing how Indonesia’s promiscuous power sharing has severely undermined the country’s democratic
As the party elites are more focused on building coalitions to maximize their power by gaining cabinet positions, they rarely compete to serve and represent their constituents. As the political process is dominated by the elites, this has also significantly marginalized ethnic minorities from actively participating in the political process. First, I will examine the success and the irony of Indonesia’s democracy. Second, I will explain Indonesia’s promiscuous power sharing in more detail and how it leads to the problems of democratization in Indonesia. I will expound how promiscuous power sharing generates elite (and class) politics and political corruption, party cartelization, marginalization of ethnic minorities, and voter dealignment, Third, I will examine the three elections – 2004, 2009 and 2014 – and their outcomes to explain how promiscuous power sharing has jeopardized democratization in Indonesia. Finally, the paper concludes by summarizing how Indonesia’s promiscuous power sharing has severely undermined the country’s democratic