Abstract

Reconstituting the disarticulated political space of authoritarian breakdown is anything but straightforward. Distinct trade-offs and ambiguous outcomes are all too familiar. This is in no small part because political change involves compromise with an authoritarian past. The very fact of this transition dynamic leaves us with more questions than answers about the process of democratization. In particular, it is important to ask how we go about interpreting ambiguity in the study of democratization. The following article argues that the way we frame democratization is struggling to come to terms with the ambiguity of contemporary political change. Taking Indonesia as an example, the article maps a tension between authoritarianism and subsequent democratization. The story here is not merely one of opening, breakthrough, and consolidation but also (re-)negotiation. There is also an unfolding at the interstices of culture and politics and of that between discourse and practice. Unfortunately, the insight gained will not lessen some of the more undesirable aspects of Indonesia’s post-authoritarian outcome but it does afford us a more fine-grained reading of the reconfigured patterns of politics that are emerging. It may even generate discussion on how we interpret democratization and its dynamics of change.

Highlights

  • It is all too easy to assume that when a country undergoes a transition from authoritarian rule it is inextricably moving towards democracy

  • The following article argues that the way we frame democratization is struggling to come to terms with the ambiguity of contemporary political change

  • Taking Indonesia as an example, the article maps a tension between authoritarianism and subsequent democratization

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is all too easy to assume that when a country undergoes a transition from authoritarian rule it is inextricably moving towards democracy. From Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan in the Caspian Sea Basin to Cambodia in Southeast Asia and Nigeria in West Africa, a major feature of this current ‘wave’ of democratization is ambiguity. This seems to rest on the fact that during democratization the preferences and capacities of actors reflect past developmental patterns and underlying societal conventions. Whilst not wanting to sound too pessimistic, this reality can constrain even the best of intentions It certainly introduces a high level of contingency into our understandings of democratization. Vol 8, No 13; 2012 these readily recognizable aspects of Indonesian history but relating their narrative threads to the process does provide a basis from which to trace a pattern of political compromise and ambiguity

Disjunctive Dynamics
Indonesian Nationalism
Pancasila and Socialization
Suharto and the Rise of the New Order
Patrimonial Political Economy
Repressive Development and Decline
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call