Hambatan Institusionalisasi Sistem Kepartaian di Indonesia pasca Suharto dan Filipina pasca Marcos

HESTUTOMO R KUNCORO, Dr. Eric Hiariej, M.Phil

2015 | Skripsi | S1 ILMU HUBUNGAN INTERNASIONAL

Demokrasi di Filipina dan Indoensia masih memiliki masalah dalam konsolidasi demokrasi di sana berupa hambatan institusionalisasi sistem kepartaian yang terindikasi keletupan elektoral yang tinggi di kedua negara. Tingginya keletupan elektoral disebabkan oleh dominasi Populisme dan Klientelisme di Indonesia dan Filipina dengan membuat hubungan elit-konstituen yang buruk dan intensitas perubahan komposisi partai yang tinggi. Dominasi Populisme dan Klientelisme disebabkan oleh tipe transisi demokrasi di Indonesia dan Filipina yang walaupun dimulai dari akar rumput namun dalam prosesnya didominasi oleh elit. Populisme dan klientelisme dapat dominan sebab sistem politik yang terbentuk dari proses transisi demokrasi adalah sistem demokrasi yang elitis dengan civil society yang lemah. Tidak adanya desentralisasi ekonomi juga membuat civil society lemah. Lemahnya civil society membuat hubungan antara elit dengan konstituen renggang sehingga sulit bagi masyarakat untuk bisa punya pengaruh dalam proses politik yang terjadi di kedua negara. Selain itu, aktor baru juga sulit masuk ke dalam politik Indonesia dan Filipina. Dalam situasi seperti ini, klientelisme dan populisme menjadi satu-satunya alternatif cara yang efektif bagi elit untuk bisa memenangkan pemilu.

Since their democratic transition, Indonesia and Philippines were relatively more democratic than other states in the region. Indonesia and Philippines however, still suffered from stagnancy in their party system institutionalization indicated by high electoral volatility in both states. This research was done to explain this stagnancy. The factors contributing to the stagnancy were clientelism and populism. Populism and clientelism in Indonesia and Philippines rendered the elite-constituents relationship weak and also contributed to the high intensity of changes in political parties compositions. These factors ultimately led to the stagnancy of party system institutionalization. The persistence of populism and clientelism in post-Suharto Indonesia and post-Marcos Philippines was due to the type of democratic transitions in both states. The democratic transition in Indonesia and Philippines was the one that even though started as popular demand, in the process ended up being dominated by elites. This type of democratic transition resulted in a democratic system where clientelism and populism were very dominant. Elections in the years following the democratic transition in Indonesia and Philippines showed that the winning parties or candidates were the ones using clientelism and populism in their campaign. Populism and clientelism persisted because the democratic system in Indonesia and Philippines were very elitist while the civil societies were weak. Weak civil societies led to weak elite-constituent relationship resulting in people's inability to influence the political processes in both states. Weak civil society also hindered new actors from entering politics. In such situations, clientelism and populism were the only effective way for elites to win elections.

Kata Kunci : party system institutionalization, democratic transition, clientelism, populism