Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2021)
Kinship Politics in the 2020 Regional Head Elections in Indonesia

Articles

Discourse Analysis: Kinship Politics in the 2020 Regional Head Election

https://doi.org/10.53013/bestuurskunde.1.1.29-40

Published 2021-05-31

  • Moch Edward Trias Pahlevi
    • ,
  • Azka Abdi Amrurobbi
    • ,
  • Muhammad Iqbal Khatami
    • ,
  • Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo

Moch Edward Trias Pahlevi
Komite Independen Sadar Pemilu

Azka Abdi Amrurobbi
Universitas Gadjah Mada

Muhammad Iqbal Khatami
Komite Independen Sadar Pemilu

Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo
Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

Abstract

After the issuance of the Constitutional Court Decision No.33 / PUU-Xlll / 2015 as the cancellation of the ban on dynastic politics, a number of candidates from the incumbent's relatives advanced in the direct Pilkada and mushroomed up to the 2020 regional elections. The occurrence of kinship politics is not only seen in terms of regulation, but the rise of kinship politics is also due to problems in political parties in carrying out the political recruitment function. This study seeks to analyze the findings of the online media reported in Kompas and Tempo. This study uses qualitative methods and uses Nvivo 12 Plus in processing data. In this study, it is explained that the factors for the formation of dynastic politics from online media coverage of Kompas dominantly explains the recruitment of political parties which are less democratic, while Tempo online media dominantly explains that the supporting factors for the formation of kinship politics are party recruitment, family support, and weak legal rules. In addition, the impact of kinship politics from the analysis of Kompas online media reports is the creation of corrupt behaviour and damaging the bureaucratic order. Meanwhile, the impact of kinship politics from the analysis of Tempo online media is the decline in the quality of democracy and damage to the structure of the party. This type of research used in this research is qualitative research. The analysis used in this paper is descriptive analysis. Analysis was performed using the Nvivo 12 plus software.

Keywords

discourse analysis, kinship politics, online media, simultaneous regional elections 2020

PDF

Author Biography

Moch Edward Trias Pahlevi

Moch Edward Trias Pahlevi is the General Coordinator of the Independent Election Awareness Committee and also an alumnus of the Masters in Government Science at the Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta. The author has an interest in studying democracy, local politics, and elections.

Azka Abdi Amrurobbi

Azka Abdi Amrurobbi adalah mahasiswa Magister Politik Pemerintahan Universitas Gadjah Mada dan Sekretaris Jendral Komite Independen Sadar Pemilu. Penulis memiliki ketertarikan studi terkait dengan tema demokrasi, tata kelola pemilu, kelompok marjinal, dan politik lokal.

Muhammad Iqbal Khatami

Muhammad Iqbal Khatami is the Coordinator of the Media and Digital Democracy Division of the Independent Election Awareness Committee and an alumnus of Communication Studies at the Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta. The author has an interest in studying politics, media, and democracy.

Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo

Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo is a Lecturer in Government Science at the Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta. The author has an interest in studies related to politics, democracy, elections, and social movements.

References

  1. Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt183pnr2
  2. Andryanto, D. (2017, January 3). Ajaib! Nyaris 20 Tahun, 2 Pasang Suami-Istri Kuasai Klaten. Tempo.Co. https://nasional.tempo.co/read/832220/ajaib-nyaris-20-tahun-2-pasang-suami-istri-kuasai-klaten
  3. Anggariani, D. (2013). Politik Kekerabatan. Jurnal Politik Profetik, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.24252/profetik.v1i2a4
  4. Bathoro, A. (2011). Perangkap Dinasti Politik dalam Konsolidasi Demokrasi. Jurnal FISIP UMRAH, 2(2), 115–125.
  5. Bragança, A., Ferraz, C., & P. J. Rios. (2015). Political Dynasties and the Quality of Government.
  6. Brandão, C. (2015). P. Bazeley and K. Jackson, Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo (2nd ed.). Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(4), 492–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2014.992750
  7. Chang, Y., Margaret. (1993). A study of political literacy of women group members in community development service in Hong Kong (pp. 991015489499703400, b31977273) [Master of Social Sciences, The University of Hong Kong]. https://doi.org/10.5353/th_b3197727
  8. Djati, W. R. (2015). Revivalisme Kekuatan Familisme dalam Demokrasi: Dinasti Politik di Aras Lokal. MASYARAKAT: Jurnal Sosiologi, 18(2), 203–231. https://doi.org/10.7454/mjs.v18i2.3726
  9. Fitriyah. (2020). Partai Politik, Rekrutmen Politik dan Pembentukan Dinasti Politik pada Pemilihan Kepala Daerah (Pilkada). Politika: Jurnal Ilmu Politik, 11(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.14710/politika.11.1.2020.1-17
  10. Hadiz, V. R. (2005). Dinamika Kekuasaan: Ekonomi Politik Indonesia Pasca-Soeharto. LP3ES.
  11. Harjanto, N. (2011). Politik Kekerabatan dan Institusionalisasi Partai Politik di Indonesia. Analisis CSIS, 40(2), 138–159.
  12. Hess, S. (2016). America’s Political Dynasties: From Adams to Clinton. Brookings Institution Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7864/j.ctt15hvr69
  13. Hilal, A. H., & Alabri, S. S. (2013). Using Nvivo for Data Analysis in Qualitative Research. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 1(1032), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.12816/0002914
  14. Katz, R. S. (1997). Democracy and Elections. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195044294.001.0001
  15. Katz, R. S. (2001). The Problem of Candidate Selection and Models of Party Democracy. Party Politics, 7(3), 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068801007003002
  16. Katz, R. S., & Mair, P. (1995). Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party. Party Politics, 1(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001001001
  17. Kurtz, D. M. (1989). The Political Family: A Contemporary View. Sociological Perspectives, 32(3), 331–352. https://doi.org/10.2307/1389121
  18. Levitsky, S. (1998). Institutionalization and Peronism: The Concept, the Case and the Case for Unpacking the Concept. Party Politics, 4(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068898004001004
  19. Mietzner, M. (2008). Comparing Indonesia’s party systems of the 1950s and the post-Suharto era: From centrifugal to centripetal inter-party competition. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 39(3), 431–453. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022463408000337
  20. Mietzner, M. (2010). Indonesia in 2009: Electoral Contestation and Economic Resilience. Asian Survey, 50(1), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2010.50.1.185
  21. Moleong, L. J. (2012). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
  22. Norris, P. (2012). Making Democratic Governance Work: How Regimes Shape Prosperity, Welfare, and Peace. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139061902
  23. Norris, P., & Lovenduski, J. (1995). Political Recruitment: Gender, Race and Class in the British Parliament. Cambridge University Press.
  24. O’Dwyer, C. (2006). Runaway State-Building: Patronage Politics and Democratic Development. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  25. Purbolaksono, A. (2015, July 13). Dampak Negatif Politik Kekerabatan. The Indonesian Institute. https://www.theindonesianinstitute.com/dampak-negatif-politik-kekerabatan/
  26. Purdey, J., Tadem, T. S. E., & Tadem, E. C. (2016). Political dynasties in the Philippines: Persistent patterns, perennial problems. South East Asia Research, 24(3), 328–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0967828X16659730
  27. Purwaningsih, T. (2015). Politik Kekerabatan dan Kualitas Kandidat di Sulawesi Selatan. Jurnal Politik, 1(1), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v1i1.10
  28. Querubin, P. (2016). Family and Politics: Dynastic Persistence in the Philippines. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 11(2), 151–181. https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00014182
  29. Ramadhan, A. (2020, September 10). Kasus Suap Bupati, KPK Panggil Anggota DPRD Kutai Timur. KOMPAS.com. https://nasional.kompas.com/read/2020/09/10/11445481/kasus-suap-bupati-kpk-panggil-anggota-dprd-kutai-timur
  30. rumahpemilu.org. (2020, August 4). Politik Kekerabatan Problem Struktural di Pilkada Serentak. Rumah Pemilu. https://rumahpemilu.org/politik-kekerabatan-problem-struktural-di-pilkada-serentak/
  31. Saptowalyono, A., Susilo, N., & Dundu, P. E. (2011, September 5). Jalan Berliku dalam Pilkada Banten. KOMPAS.com. https://bogor.kompas.com/read/2011/09/06/03124244/jalan.berliku.dalam.Pilkada.banten
  32. Sugiyono. (2011). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R & D. Alfabeta.
  33. Tempo.co. (2017). Korupsi Dinasti Atut. Tempo.Co. https://www.tempo.co/tag/korupsi-dinasti-atut
  34. Winters, J. A. (2011). Oligarchy. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511793806

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...