Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2019, Brookings
Indonesia is indeed a deeply unequal country. Since the early 2000s, inequality has grown faster here than in any other country in Southeast Asia. Such stark socio-economic disparities have become fodder for populists in recent elections, including this year’s presidential election. Divisive, and often sectarianized, political narratives about inequality have polarized public opinion and contributed to Indonesia’s current moment of democratic decline.
Pacific Affairs
Inequality and democratic support in Indonesia2020 •
Indonesia is a country of significant inequalities, but we know little about how Indonesians feel about the gap between rich and poor. Comparative research suggests that negative perceptions of inequality can erode public support for democratic institutions. Using survey data, we explore the relationship between inequality and support for democracy in Indonesia. We find Indonesians are divided in their beliefs about income distribution. But this variation is not determined by actual levels of inequality around the country, nor by people's own economic situation; instead, political preferences and partisan biases are what matter most. Beliefs about inequality in Indonesia have become increasingly partisan over the course of the Jokowi presidency: supporters of the political opposition are far more likely to view the income gap as unfair, while supporters of the incumbent president tend to disagree—but they disagree much more when prompted by partisan cues. We also find that Indonesians who believe socio-economic inequality is unjust are more likely to hold negative attitudes toward democracy. We trace both trends back to populist campaigns and the increasingly polarized ideological competition that marked the country's recent elections. The shift toward more partisan politics in contemporary Indonesia has, we argue, consequences for how voters perceive inequality and how they feel about the democratic status quo.
2019 •
Socio-economic inequality is a contentious issue in Indonesia, one that gets mobilised in election campaigns. Yet we know very little about how Indonesians actually feel about income and wealth distribution. This paper draws upon data from an original, nationally representative survey to understand Indonesians' perceptions of income inequality. We find that Indonesians generally feel better about inequality now than they did five years ago at the end of President Yudhoyono's decade in office. However, we also find that people's perceptions of inequality are closely associated with their political preferences and are divided along partisan lines.
Third World Quarterly
When does class matter? Unequal representation in Indonesian legislatures2021 •
Around the world, legislatures are dominated by politicians who are wealthier and more educated than their constituents. This is particularly so in developing democracies, where clientelist politics and wealth inequalities make it difficult for lower-class citizens to run for office. We contribute to scholarly debates about the substantive consequences of descriptive inequality by analysing a new and important case –Indonesia, the world’s third most populous democracy. Indonesian politicians have much higher levels of education and income than citizens, and they are more likely to have professional backgrounds. To explore the implications of these inequalities, we survey and compare politicians’ and voters’ positions on a range of economic policy issues. We find the views of Indonesian politicians are generally more congruent with those of upper-class voters. However, we also find variation across policy areas. There is much cross-class agreement on statist interventions like price controls – in part reflecting politicians’ dependence upon the state; however, the gap between voters and politicians widens substantially on the issue of economic redistribution. Upper-class biases within Indonesian legislatures thus obscure a large lower-class constituency in favour of a more redistributive economic regime, a constituency largely unrepresented by Indonesia’s parties.
2021 •
Journal of Southeast Asian Economies
Inequality and Exclusion in Indonesia Political Economic Developments in the Post-Soeharto Era2019 •
Economics and Finance in Indonesia
Middle Class and Democracy: An Assessment on the 2014 Indonesian’s Presidential Election2016 •
This paper aims to assess the role of middle class in Indonesia’s democracy, with the particular focus of the last Indonesian Presidential election. This study uses econometric analyses to assess preferences of middle class in presidential election by exploring data at district/city and provincial. The main finding in this study strongly suggests that religious and personality are still important elements under the race of Indonesia president. This study also found that different group of middle class has different attitudes in selecting the presidential candidate and the upper group of middle class is more likely to select Joko Widodo. Finally, a fragile middle class and a relatively high number of abstainers could be a barrier toward more substantive democracy.AbstrakMakalah ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis peran kelompok kelas menengah dalam proses demokrasi di Indonesia, secara khusus peran mereka difokuskan pada hasil pemilihan presiden yang terakhir. Studi ini menggunakan pend...
The current wave of democratization has been taking place in Indonesia since 1998. Some democratization agendas have been implemented, such as free general elections in 1999, the improvement of the legislative bodies, and the decentralization agenda. Some believe that, to some extent, Indonesian democracy is on the right track as can be seen from the lack of territorial disintegration threats and the success stories of direct election for the local leaders (at the Regency and Provincial Levels) as well as for the presidential election since 2005. However, patronage and clientelism are also found at the local and national levels, in which elites or patrons become dominant actors who have the power to define and decide public affairs. Even though the legislative body exists at the local level, it only plays a supporter role for the patron or even becoming the patron itself. This means that people's representative function which is embedded in the legislative body has been abused and is under the elite's monopoly. Therefore, Indonesian democracy is considered to be elitist, since the power is being monopolized by the elite and public affairs have been depoliticized. In this regard, some believe that democracy has been implemented without carefully considering the relations among actors, power and social and political context. This is what is called as the depolitization of democracy, which occurs when control and political equality of all people are not properly in place and people pay attention mostly on regular elections. Politicizing democracy eventually becomes an alternative to achieve transformative democracy. It includes primarily changing the power relations within the society by improving cooperation between democracy activists and academic scholars. Secondly, improving people's education and modernization. These will provide a chance to promote the democracy values of equality and liberty, as an entrance for promoting a control over public affairs, and as a basis for deepening democracy in Indonesia.
Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik
Polarization of Indonesian Society during 2014-2020: Causes and Its Impacts toward Democracy2022 •
Polarization was widely used in a large number of publications on Indonesian political studies from 2014 to 2020. This term particularly refers to the divisive society condition because of different political preferences. Previously, polarization is rare to use to frame Indonesian electoral competition since both parties and candidates counted on ideological spectrum. Since the personalization of politics have been flourishing recently, it drives identity to be marker when it comes to evaluating the candidates. This condition, consequently, makes the election is not merely political competition for power but emotional competition for lives. For the last six years, there were three major elections, including the 2014 Presidential Election, 2017 Jakarta Gubernatorial Election, and 2019 Presidential Election. These three elections had a significant factor in polarizing society at that given time. They specifically referred to the two leading figures that represented the two stark political identity symbols. However, after 2018, the polarization of society itself seemed under control since the ruling regime coalitions and their social groups and allies worked together. It was meant to manage the effect of polarization and also to corner the opposition groups. While the clashes of views still exist, the situation would be worse if the 3 elections had not happened.
isara solutions
India s $5 Trillion Economy: Mission & VisionVetus Testamentum
New Directions for Thinking about the Bible and Nonhuman Animals: A Review of Works by Peter Atkins, Dong Hyeon Jeong, and Saul Olyan2024 •
Loving the Unloveable
LOVING THE UNLOVABLE: A BIBLICAL APPROACH FOR THE LOCAL CHURCH TO HOMOSEXUALITY IN A MORALLY DECLINING SOCIETY2020 •
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems
Indoor GNSS Signal Acquisition Performance using a Synthetic Antenna Array2011 •
international food research journal
Physical properties and glycaemic response of tapioca noodles fortified with herb mixture2023 •
Journal of Crohn's and Colitis
P746 Prevalence, features and outcomes of splachnic vein thrombosis in inflammatory bowel disease. A nationwide, retrospective study from the ENEIDA registry2020 •