From protest to power: Co-optation, patronage, and the institutional transformation of 1998 reform activists in post-reform Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33474/jisop.v8i1.24332Keywords:
activist 1998, political co-optation, patronage, political behaviorAbstract
This study examines changes in the political behavior of former 1998 activists in post-Reform Indonesia, particularly their integration into formal power structures during 2014–2024. While previous studies have emphasized structural and institutional dimensions, limited attention has been given to the interaction between political opportunities and activists’ motives. This research analyzes the forms of political affiliation adopted by former activists, the factors driving behavioral change, and the implications for democracy. Using a qualitative case study approach, the study analyzes secondary data from 47 online media articles published between 2019 and 2024. Data were collected through documentation and analyzed through coding, categorization, and interpretation. The analysis integrates theories of political behavior, patronage, and co-optation. The findings reveal three patterns. First, former activists increasingly entered formal political institutions through executive positions, political party networks, and appointments as commissioners of state-owned enterprises, indicating the institutionalization of activism. Second, changes in political behavior were driven by political incentives, patronage networks, economic access, and regulatory pressures that constrained extra-parliamentary activism. Third, this integration produced ambivalent consequences for democracy by expanding political representation while weakening the critical capacity of civil society. The study argues that activism in post-authoritarian contexts results from the interaction of actor rationality, institutional pressures, and political opportunity structures. The findings underscore the importance of strengthening political accountability and safeguarding civil society independence.
References
Aspinall, E. (2013). A nation in fragments: Patronage and neoliberalism in contemporary Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 45(1), 27–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2013.758820
Aspinall, E. (2020). Indonesian protests point to old patterns. Newmandala.Org. https://www.newmandala.org/indonesian-protests-point-to-old-patterns/
Boudreau, V. (1999). Diffusing democracy? People power in Indonesia and the Philippines. Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 31(4), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.1999.10415762
Choir, M. (2022). Rights to free from corruption: A vernacular mobilization of anti-corruption movement in Indonesia. Simulacra, 5(2), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.21107/sml.v5i2.17088
Feillard, G. (2004). Adapting to reformasi: Democracy, human rights, and civil society in the Indonesian Islamist Discourse. Université de Provence, 17. https://doi.org/10.4000/moussons.2461
Haryanto, Samadhi, W. P., Juru, I. J., Rahmawati, D., & Wardhani, I. S. (2023). Does institutional activism strengthen democracy? a case study of agrarian and anticorruption movements in Indonesia. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 45(1), 82–110. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs45-1d
Hutchcroft, P. D. (2014). Linking capital and countryside: patronage and clientelism in Japan, Thailand, and the Philippines. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Jasko, K. (2023). Political behavior from the perspective of the goal systems theory. In Goal Systems Theory: Psychological Processes and Applications (pp. 257-C12P129). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197687468.003.0013
Koo, S. (2021). Does policy motivation drive party activism? A study of party activists in three Asian democracies. Party Politics, 27(1), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068820908021
Laebens, M. G., & Lührmann, A. (2021). What halts democratic erosion? The changing role of accountability. Democratization, 28(5), 908–928. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2021.1897109
Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2002). The rise of competitive authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2002.0026
Madrid, R. (2019). Islamic students in the Indonesian student movement, 1998–1999: Forces for moderation. Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 31(3), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.1999.10415752
Marcus, G. E., Neuman, W. R., & MacKuen, M. (2000). Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment. University of Chicago Press.
Menozzi, A., Urtiaga, M. G., & Vannoni, D. (2012). Board composition, political connections, and performance in state-owned enterprises. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(3), 671–698. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtr055
Mietzner, M. (2013). Fighting the hellhounds: Pro-democracy activists and party politics in post-Suharto Indonesia. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 43(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2012.735919
Mudhoffir, A. M. (2023). The limits of civil society activism in Indonesia: The case of the weakening of the KPK. Critical Asian Studies, 55(1), 62–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2022.2123019
Selznick, P. (1966). TVA and the grass roots: A study in the sociology of formal organization. Harper & Row.
Setiawan, K. M. P., & Tomsa, D. (2023). Defending a vulnerable yet resilient democracy: civil society activism in Jokowi’s Indonesia. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 42(3), 350–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034231209058
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Fatturrahman Fatturrahman, Yahdi Qolbi, Alberto N Patty, Mujiburrahman Mujiburrahman

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
.
_-_Copy.jpg)




