Attachment to political leaders, political belief systems, and political participation: A study of personality politics in Indonesia, the Philippines, and United States
Moh Abdul Hakim
“…people don’t believe in ideas, they believe in people who believe ideas” (Zeev W. Mankowitz)
The successes of popular political leaders like the Philippine’s Rodrigo Duterte and Indonesia’s Joko Widodo are thought to be a prominent feature of contemporary politics in emerging democracies (Karvonen, 2010; Mietzner, 2014; Sakwa, 2008). Characterized by having a relatively arbitrary and superficial affiliation with an established political party, these political personalities have been able to gain massive voting support from emotionally attached voters across …show more content…
Originally, the concept of attachment was used to conceptualize child-parent relationships (Ainsworth, 1991; Bowlby 1982). In such relationships, the child occupies the role of the needy, dependent relationship partner and the parents occupy the role that Bowlby (1969/1982) called a stronger and wiser caregiver or attachment figure. Bowlby claimed, however, that attachment theory and the concept of attachment are relevant to social-relational behavior across the life span. In fact, following Bowlby’s (1969/1982) lead, other scholars (e.g. Ainsworth, 1991; Hazan & Zeifman, 1994) have argued that attachment theory can be applied to any adult relationship that fulfill three criteria: the provision of safe haven, the provision of secure base, and the maintenance of proximity. Research have shown that close friendships and romantic relationships during late adolescence and adulthood often fulfill these three criteria (Dolherty & Feeney, 2004; Feeney, 2004; Fraley & Davis, …show more content…
Given that political leadership at the national level operates in broad social contexts, the proximal interaction between leaders and their followers is very unlikely to occur. In political settings, the distance between the leaders and their followers is required to enable their personality to be perceived as political symbols or meaning where the followers can draw inspirations and aspirations from (e.g. Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, see Liu & Khan, 2014; Hakim, et al., 2015, Mayseless & Popper, 2007; Sears, 1993). However, some senses of proximity needs to be nurtured to allow for attachment to operate (Mayseless & Popper, 2007). In the dynamic of political leader-follower attachment, this sense of proximity are nurtured through symbolic actions and interactions which are broadcasted through various mass media (e.g. TV, Radio, Social Media, Newspapers), such as visit to traditional markets and talk with ordinary people (Curtice & Lobo, 2014; Girza, 2015). The arguments pertaining why people form an attachment relationship to a political leader then can be summarized as follow:
Hypothesis 1: Attachment to a political leader is formed when the leader is perceived to be able to provide a sense of security and safety in political settings.
Hypothesis 2: The interactions between a
Moh Abdul Hakim
“…people don’t believe in ideas, they believe in people who believe ideas” (Zeev W. Mankowitz)
The successes of popular political leaders like the Philippine’s Rodrigo Duterte and Indonesia’s Joko Widodo are thought to be a prominent feature of contemporary politics in emerging democracies (Karvonen, 2010; Mietzner, 2014; Sakwa, 2008). Characterized by having a relatively arbitrary and superficial affiliation with an established political party, these political personalities have been able to gain massive voting support from emotionally attached voters across …show more content…
Originally, the concept of attachment was used to conceptualize child-parent relationships (Ainsworth, 1991; Bowlby 1982). In such relationships, the child occupies the role of the needy, dependent relationship partner and the parents occupy the role that Bowlby (1969/1982) called a stronger and wiser caregiver or attachment figure. Bowlby claimed, however, that attachment theory and the concept of attachment are relevant to social-relational behavior across the life span. In fact, following Bowlby’s (1969/1982) lead, other scholars (e.g. Ainsworth, 1991; Hazan & Zeifman, 1994) have argued that attachment theory can be applied to any adult relationship that fulfill three criteria: the provision of safe haven, the provision of secure base, and the maintenance of proximity. Research have shown that close friendships and romantic relationships during late adolescence and adulthood often fulfill these three criteria (Dolherty & Feeney, 2004; Feeney, 2004; Fraley & Davis, …show more content…
Given that political leadership at the national level operates in broad social contexts, the proximal interaction between leaders and their followers is very unlikely to occur. In political settings, the distance between the leaders and their followers is required to enable their personality to be perceived as political symbols or meaning where the followers can draw inspirations and aspirations from (e.g. Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, see Liu & Khan, 2014; Hakim, et al., 2015, Mayseless & Popper, 2007; Sears, 1993). However, some senses of proximity needs to be nurtured to allow for attachment to operate (Mayseless & Popper, 2007). In the dynamic of political leader-follower attachment, this sense of proximity are nurtured through symbolic actions and interactions which are broadcasted through various mass media (e.g. TV, Radio, Social Media, Newspapers), such as visit to traditional markets and talk with ordinary people (Curtice & Lobo, 2014; Girza, 2015). The arguments pertaining why people form an attachment relationship to a political leader then can be summarized as follow:
Hypothesis 1: Attachment to a political leader is formed when the leader is perceived to be able to provide a sense of security and safety in political settings.
Hypothesis 2: The interactions between a