University student voters’ resistance to money politics
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The practice of money politics damages the essence of fairness in democracy. It can encourage abnormalities in democracy if its practice is seen as acceptable by young voters. The perceptions and reactions of young voters about money politics can influence the implementation of democracy and fair state politics. This study aimed to examine the practice of money politics among young student voters in Surabaya and their resistance to it. This study also attempted to respond to a gap in the literature regarding resistance to money politics among young voters. The research method consisted of two stages; first, exploring the responses of young voters about money politics through focus group discussions, and second, specifically using the phenomenological method with various empirical experiences and individual awareness regarding various actions and responses to the practice of money politics. This study found that young student voters carried out acts of resistance to money politics but not with real resistance. Instead, they showed silent resistance. The resistance was shown through taking the act of not voting in the election as a form of distrust toward the candidates, and other actions such as taking counter-adaptive actions by accepting the money given but not choosing candidates who carried out money politics. The rationality of novice voters in rejecting money politics was driven by good political values but their lack of ability to put up a fight encouraged silent resistance.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Abdi, A. P. (2018). Hasil survei LIPI: 40 persen suara di Pemilu didominasi milenial. Tirto. https://tirto.id/hasil-survei-lipi-40-persen-suara-di-pemilu-didominasi-milenial-dbGF
Aspinall, E. (2014). When brokers betray: Clientelism, social networks, and electoral politics in Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 46(4), 545–570. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2014.960706
Aspinall, E., & Berenschot, W. (2019). Democracy for sale: Pemilihan umum, klientelisme, dan negara di Indonesia. Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.
Aspinall, E., & Sukmajati, M. (2015). Politik uang di Indonesia: Patronase dan klientelisme pada pemilu legislatif 2014. Research Centre for Politics and Government.
Azmi, F. (2020). Gerakan millenial kompak tolak hoaks dan politik uang di 19 Pilkada Jatim. Detik News. https://news.detik.com/berita-jawa-timur/d-5286069/gerakan-millenial-kompak-tolak-hoaks-dan-politik-uang-di-19-pilkada-jatim
Canare, T. A., Mendoza, R. U., & Lopez, M. A. (2018). An empirical analysis of vote buying among the poor: Evidence from elections in the Philippines. South East Asia Research, 26(1), 58–84. https://doi.org/An empirical analysis of vote buying among the poor: Evidence from elections in the Philippines
Dalton, R. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: The erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies.
Fitriyah, M. A. (2012). Fenomena politik uang dalam Pilkada. Politika: Jurnal Ilmu Politik, 3(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.14710/politika.3.1.2012.5-14
Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality, Vol 1: An introduction (Robert Hurley (trans) (ed.)). Vintage.
Gunn, P. (2014). Democracy and epistocracy. Critical Review, 26(1–2), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2014.907041
Kaase, M. (1999). Interpersonal trust, political trust and non‐institutionalised political participation in Western Europe. West European Politics, 22(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402389908425313
Karim, A. G. (2020). Menegosiasi ulang Indonesia. IRCiSoD.
Kitschelt, H., & Wilkinson, S. I. (2007). Citizen-politician linkages: an introduction. Patrons, Clients, and Policies: Patterns of Democratic Accountability and Political Competition, 2007, 1–49.
Kurniawan, D. (2020). Komunitas kita Arek Surabaya deklarasi tolak politik uang pada Pilkada Surabaya 2020. Liputan 6. https://www.liputan6.com/surabaya/read/4426845/komunitas-kita-arek-surabaya-deklarasi-tolak-politik-uang-pada-pilkada-surabaya-2020
Lilja, M. (2022). The definition of resistance. Journal of Political Power, 15(2), 202–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2022.2061127
Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some social requisites of democracy: economic development and political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69–105. https://doi.org/10.2307/1951731
Loader, I., & Walker, N. (2007). Civilizing security. Cambridge University Press.
Muhtadi, B. (2019). Vote buying in Indonesia: The mechanics of electoral bribery. Springer Nature.
Norris, P. (1999). Critical citizens: Global support for democratic government. OUP Oxford.
Okthariza, N. (2019). Petahana, patronase, dan politik uang di Jawa. Centre for Strategic and International Studies, 1–10.
Purnamasari, D. M. (2019). Survei LIPI: Masyarakat Memandang Politik Uang Bagian dari Pemilu,Tidak Dilarang. Kompas.Com.
Rahmat, B., & Esther, E. (2016). Perilaku pemilih pemula dalam pilkada serentak di Kecamatan Ciomas Kabupaten Serang tahun 2015. Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan Widya Praja, 42(2), 25. https://doi.org/10.33701/jipwp.v42i2.148
Salabi, A. (2020). Orang kuat daerah dan dinasti politik di pilkada paslon tunggal. Rumah Pemilu.
Schaffer, F. C., & Schedler, A. (2007). What is vote buying. In Elections for sale: The causes and consequences of vote buying (pp. 17–30). Lynne Rienner Boulder, CO.
Sloam, J. (2013). ‘Voice and equality’: Young people’s politics in the European Union. West European Politics, 36(4), 836–858.
Spanring, M. (2008). Homosexuality in modern media: a comparison of Queer as Folk and the L Word/vorgelegt von Marion Spanring [University of Graz]. https://unipub.uni-graz.at/obvugrhs/232140
Strauss, A. (2013). Dasar-dasar penelitian kualitatif: tatalangkah dan teknik-teknik teoriritisasi data.
van Klinken, G. A. (2007). Perang kota kecil: kekerasan komunal dan demokratisasi di Indonesia. Yayasan Obor Indonesia.
Winters, J. A. (2011). Oligarchy. Cambridge University Press.