This paper argues that the impact of “Islam” on the Indonesian political system is worth studying on three different levels: 1. society’s political divisions; 2. the party system 3. parliamentary politics. I contend that there is a specifically Indonesian “consensus-oriented” democracy model involved in the process—which is not, however, without Western predecessors—wherein political Islam and Islamist parties act not as destabilising factors but rather as “Muslim democratic” forces that strengthen democratic consensus in a manner similar to some “Western” Christian democratic parties. This research is based partly on a historical and, implicitly, comparative approach. It builds strongly on the theoretical framework and methodology of Sartori’s classic party system typology, Lijphardt’s “majoritarian” and “consensus-based” democracy model, and the so-called neo-institutionalist debate on the possible advantages and disadvantages of parliamentary and presidential governments.

The growth of social media in Indonesia has contributed to the increasing number of online political participation by the public. This phenomenon has brought forward the discussion regarding the pros and cons of online political participation, related to the participants’ identity. The lack of traceability regarding the participants’ identity has posed some questions, some of which are the accountability and legitimacy of opinions that are found on online political discussions.This research seeks to achieve comprehensive understanding on anonymity in political participation. By applying the theory of online disinhibition effect, this research attempts to explain the dynamic of anonymity, its implication towards political participation in social media, and to examine the consequences of anonymity towards the quality of digital democracy. Through survey, focus group discussions, and in depth interviews, this research address to achieve a comprehensive understanding towards the issues. The research findings show that the varied degrees of anonymity employed by citizens affect their social media usage and political participation. In addition, anonymity can be understood as the citizens’ coping mechanism from various possible consequences, such as legal and social retribution for both personal and professional context.

This article explains the emergence of civil society movements around deforestation issue in Indonesia as contestation over knowledge claims that defines ‘deforestation’ as a political term. The term ‘deforestation’, which is translated into ‘perusakan hutan’ in Indonesian forestry laws and regulation, is a product of political epistemology that serve the needs to sustain state-reinforced developmentalism. It is imposed by valorization of modern scientific and technocratic values as well as bureaucratization of the forestry sector. Engaging with critical political ecology literatures, this study unpacks the constitutive interactions among various ways of seeing that redefine state forestry and its implications to the reproduction of political order. ‘Perusakan hutan’ is continuously re-negotiated in the relations between the state and its formative societal elements. Knowledge on addressing deforestation is organized around three contesting epistemologies: conservation, redistribution, and indigeneity. Each epistemology seeks to claim political space in the institutionalization of knowledge that fortifies state’s policies in the forestry sector. Politics of knowledge co-production operates at two levels: between hegemonic knowledge construct and its counter knowledge formation, and within the formation of counter-knowledge through alternative epistemologies.

This article seeks to expose incumbents' tendencies and strategies in using charitable alms (zakat) in regional elections in two areas. Strategies identified include determining binding regulations regarding the use of zakat money, as well as the positioning of persons considered loyal and strategic to incumbents within the leadership structures of zakat institutions. Meanwhile, incumbents worked to integrate and interconnect government programmes with local zakat distribution agencies and attracting public sympathies through the sharing of zakat funds. Incumbents benefit from their power and legitimacy, and can thus easily use zakat funds as an economic resource for gathering the support of zakat recipients (mustahiq[1]). With their power and legitimacy, incumbents are able to claim credit and thus enjoy greater popularity in their re-election campaigns. This power and legitimacy, as well as its benefits, are managed strategically and intelligently to avoid giving the impression of illegality and ease social acceptance. The findings of this research are opposite to those of Samantha May; where May has found that state dominance and control of zakat has met widespread resistance, this research has found that state dominance and control of zakat has not only been well-received by society, but has also had implications for politicians' role in zakat management and distribution. This research, conducted through observation and interviews with zakat distributors/recipients, indicates how clientelism is formed through the government zakat distribution agency (Badan Amil Zakat, 'Zakat Distribution Agency'), the structural/instrumental approaches used by incumbents, and the response of zakat recipients. This article takes two elections in two regions as case studies: Kulon Progo in the 2017 regional election and Magelang Regency in the 2013 regional election.

This article discusses the narratives of Sedulur Sikep on their recent movement in rejecting cement companies in Central Java. Sedulur Sikep with their culturally-district traits through their spirituality, human-nature relationship, as well as to the authority, has strongly permeated on the contemporary anti-cement movement. This study then perceives Sedulur Sikep as peasant community that treat land and resources as their medium in expressing spirituality as well as in perpetuating their resistance to the authority. Therefore, the respective Kendeng Mountains plays important role in building the narratives of anti-cement movement that is strongly influenced by Sikep doctrines, and conversely building the meaning behind Sedulur Sikep’s environmental movement that is actually struggling for free access to and utilization of common resources.

Much has been written about mining projects and the contestation of these project development in the literature. The different perspectives that are employed to analyze this issue to some extent are enriching the academic debates but at the same time also increases the difficulty of understanding the problem. As a result, navigating the overall academic discussion in the subject matter is not an easy task. Instead of outlining the overall landscape of mining contestation in the literature, choosing a particular approach and being consistent with this choice is a strategic decision that may result in a high-quality academic work. Following this recipe, Ardianto chose the constructivist approach by employing Laclau and Mouffe’s discourse analysis to understand the mining project contestation in Rembang, Central Java, Indonesia. This paper aims to review a book by Ardianto, entitled "Mitos Tambang untuk Kesejahteraan: Pertarungan Wacana Kesejahteraan dalam Kebijakan Pertambangan" (The Myth of Mining for Welfare: The Welfare Discourses Struggle in Mining Policy).

This article will review a sample of published material on conflict and violence in Indonesia, written or co-authored by Indonesian authors. This selective approach will limit the literature reviewed whilst highlighting the significant contribution made to the literature by Indonesian scholars, researchers, and journalists. Much of the literature on conflict and violence in Indonesia that has been published during the last decade was written by non-Indonesian scholars and researchers. The particularistic approach adopted in this article will provide an opportunity for reviewing the state of conflict studies by Indonesian writers and scholars.

This article is a book review of Rethinking Popular Representation (2009). The book has a concern in the quality of democratic practices in the world of democracies, in particular democracies of the 'Global South'. It focuses on the concept of representation. It also surveys many cases which promise detailed accounts of each case. Despite its achievements, this review also shows that the book has some pitfalls.

This article summarises and reflects a more extensive analysis about the experiences of attemps to develop and apply analytical tools to comprehend the transformation of Indonesian democracy over 15 years. Such attempts can be retrospectively classified into four phases: (1) conducted in the mid-1990s to the fall of Soeharto in May 1998 by focusing on the anti-Soeharto democracy actors; (2) participatory case studies of the post-Soeharto democracy movement; (3) the development of an alternative framework for national surveys of the problems and options of democratisation from below that began in 2003; (4) institutionalisation of the previous surveys and case studies of power and democracy. These prolonged experiences have opened up the possibilities for academics and practitioners to develop and apply an alternative framework for a less elitist and more inclusive model of democracy in Indonesia.