Challenges to Democracy in Indonesia

democracy in indonesia

The political system in indonesia is a mix of presidential and parliamentary components. Its structure is a result of constitutional amendments enacted after the 1998 riots that tore through the country and ushered in sweeping reforms of executive, legislative, and judicial authority.

The legal framework governing elections is generally democratic and electoral authorities are seen as impartial. The right to organize political parties is recognized and the system features competition among several major parties. Four new parties contested the 2019 elections, including two led by children of former president Suharto.

Indonesian voters are presented with a narrow bandwidth of candidate quality, but they consistently reward competent leaders and punish non-performing ones, throwing out four in ten incumbents running for reelection. This shows that Indonesians have the capacity to identify and support effective political leadership, even without the full set of civil requirements for consolidated democracy—such as a robust political party system, credible ideological platforms, and active civic participation.

A key challenge is the capacity of Indonesian civil society to translate their demands into a viable electoral alternative to the established parties. They must also develop the skills needed to build a committed base of supporters. Otherwise, Indonesians will continue to rely on spontaneous mass protests, which can have only limited success at bringing about change against a government that appears uninterested in public opinion and adept at inhibiting dissent.

Laws on blasphemy, defamation, and other sensitive topics sometimes inhibit the expression of views by individuals and groups. The 2020 enactment of Ministerial Regulation 5—which requires private digital services and platforms to register with the government or risk being blocked—also raises concerns about the government’s ability to restrict online speech, potentially limiting freedom of association.

Despite the many challenges to democracy, there are encouraging signs that the Indonesian people are increasingly open to dialogue with their governments. Public debate has become more tolerant of criticism of the ruling party and the government, and some of the more liberal elements in the opposition have made serious proposals for reforms.

The long-term health of democracy in indonesia will depend on whether the government can implement reforms to strengthen civil institutions and create a more genuinely inclusive political culture. It will also require that Indonesians accept a more diverse and complex polity, with more regionally rooted political forces competing against each other for representation in national and local politics. If the country can achieve these goals, its democracy will remain robust for years to come. In the short term, however, it is likely that Indonesia will experience periods of uncertainty and volatility. The nation’s history demonstrates that the path to sustainable democracy is not always an easy one. But the road to a more resilient Indonesian democracy will be worth the effort.

The Basics of Democracy


Democracy is a political system where people are represented in the government, and their opinions are listened to. It is the best system of governance, as it guarantees freedom to all and does not allow one person or group of people to monopolize power. It also prevents discrimination against anyone, and encourages cooperation among the different governments.

Democracy can be divided into two main categories: direct democracy and indirect democracy. In direct democracy, a majority of the people determines the policies of the government through vote or other expressions of preference. In indirect democracy, citizens have several ways of participating in the process, such as joining organizations or protesting.

The most obvious way to participate in a democracy is to vote. However, this may be only the tip of the iceberg in terms of democratic participation.

In many countries, only a small percentage of the population takes part in politics and elections. This lack of involvement can have a negative impact on the functioning of democracy.

This may be because of the inefficiency of democratic processes, such as long debates and discussions. It also can result in gridlock and slow decisions.

Another problem with indirect democracy is that it is hard to ensure that everyone who participates in it has a voice. This can be problematic for those who are not particularly well informed about the issues they are voting on, and can lead to ineffective government.

A third concern with indirect democracy is that it is often dominated by capitalists, who use money to influence the election process. This is called plutocracy and can be dangerous to the democratic process, as it undermines the basic principles of democracy.

Indirect Democracy

The most important thing to consider when determining whether a country is democratic or not is its people. Democracy is not about being voted on by an outsider; it is about how the government functions and how it treats its citizens.

Besides the political aspects, it is also important to look at how much a country has improved its economic and social conditions. Generally, democracies tend to be more prosperous than autocracies.

These differences are due to the fact that a government based on democracy is more concerned with addressing its citizens’ needs than an autocratic one is. For example, in the case of a poor country, the state would be expected to deal with issues such as corruption and poverty rather than trying to create wealth for its elites.

In addition, a state run by democracy should also be more responsible for social welfare. The state should not neglect its citizens’ education, medical care and housing.

It should also pay more attention to environmental sustainability and public health. These are the key areas where a government can improve its performance, which will help to enhance its reputation in the international community and contribute to its development.

A major challenge in introducing democracy into a poor country is the cultural change that must take place to achieve it. This requires a willingness to compromise and a common identity, which is often difficult to find in societies that have historically transitioned from one form of power to another through violence.

Challenges to Democracy in America

democracy in america

Democracy is an essential part of the US national interest, a vital element in the country’s security and stability, a key component of its international responsibilities and a core value in American life. It is also a source of many positive outcomes, including improved health and education standards; increased economic opportunities; greater access to public goods; and fewer wars and conflicts.

Nevertheless, the American model of democracy is not always working as intended. As political polarization and identity politics continue to erode its effectiveness, the country faces serious challenges in upholding democratic practices.

As a consequence, the United States and its allies around the world are increasingly viewed as dysfunctional democracies. Various polls suggest that only 16% of Americans believe that their democracy is working well or extremely well; 38% say it is only partly working and 45% think it does not work at all.

One major blot on democracy in the US is racism, which has remained unchanged since the founding of the nation and still persists today. Although the nation’s founders supposedly advocated “all men are created equal,” white supremacy and other forms of discrimination against Black Americans, Latinos and Asians remain an indelible stain on the fabric of American society and political culture.

Another problem with American democracy is money politics, which has become a permanent fixture in the political process and which undermines the principle of a representative government. A small group of wealthy people and other vested interests control the elections and legislation in the US, while ordinary citizens have limited rights to political participation.

A third issue that is a serious threat to the foundation of democracy in the US is the increasing gap between rich and poor. This gap has caused inequality in the distribution of wealth, income and other benefits.

The resulting disparity in wealth has led to growing social and economic divisions, increasing racial tensions and political conflict. It has also fuelled the growth of identity politics, whose purpose is to promote and defend a specific set of beliefs and values.

There are also a number of other factors that have contributed to the deterioration of American democracy. These include the emergence of political parties, which have a greater tendency to wrest power from the elected official, thereby weakening the democratic structure; and the increasing polarization between the two main political parties in the US.

In addition, American democracy has become a platform for the promotion of various political extremisms and ideologies, which have become increasingly entrenched in the country’s political landscape. For example, the neo-Nazi movement has been gaining strength in the US, and its popularity is causing significant damage to the country’s political system.

While it is important to support American democracy, there are several problems that need to be addressed in order for the US to be able to continue being a great nation with a strong democracy. First, the US must improve its own political processes. Second, it must make a commitment to global responsibility and expand its public goods, as well as reorient its foreign policy to focus more on international rather than domestic issues. Finally, it must strengthen its alliances with countries that share its democratic traditions.

What Is Freedom?

Freedom is the state of being able to do or say what you want without any restrictions. In the United States, it’s usually considered a right or a privilege that everyone has.

The concept of freedom has been around for a long time, and there are many different interpretations of it. Some people see it as the ability to vote or choose who represents them in government; others think of it in terms of financial freedom.

To some, the word “freedom” is a positive idea. It’s about having control over your own actions and achieving personal goals.

Defining freedom, in this way, has been an ongoing debate among philosophers and theologians. It’s an important discussion that often has a political element to it, as well.

The negative conception of freedom, on the other hand, is often associated with enslavement. The negative theory of freedom posits that people have the option to be free or not, but do not necessarily have to be.

A person’s ability to act freely depends on both the physical and psychological aspects of their life. If someone is able to control their own emotions, they are more likely to act in ways that are in line with what they truly want to do.

Another view of freedom, however, is that it is a push on a fence that limits what you can do. This push comes from gaining new skills, like learning Spanish or playing the violin.

As you learn these new skills, you push the fence further and further away from your dot on the page, allowing you to gain more freedom as time goes by. A person who is a great violinist will have a bigger bulge of freedom than one who can only play the piano.

To be free means to be able to do things that are right or morally good. It’s the ability to do what’s good and resist what’s bad.

The positive concept of freedom is an important part of a democratic society, where the individual is able to be involved in making decisions about their own lives. It can also be an important part of a religious community, where an individual may have freedom to worship as they see fit.

If a society is infringing on your freedom, you have to fight back. You can do this through the courts, by protesting in your community, or by changing your own beliefs.

In a democracy, the idea of freedom can be seen in the protection of rights that guarantee certain freedoms, such as the right to express yourself. This includes freedom of speech, the press and association. It also includes the right to assembly and petition. These are all essential to the functioning of a society, and without them, other basic rights would not exist.

The Importance of a Degree in Law

Law is a system of principles that determines what the government, private actors, and citizens can and cannot do. The system ensures that all people have equal access to justice and that everyone’s rights are protected.

The rules of law are fixed by statutes, regulations, and customary law (administered through courts and judicial decisions). They also set forth general principles to guide legal practitioners and judges to avoid arbitrary, biased, or dishonest judgments.

Throughout history, the rule of law has evolved as people sought ways to protect themselves from injustice. It provides a foundation for human rights, civil and individual liberties, property and contract rights, and the fair and efficient delivery of justice.

It helps to ensure that the government is not abusing its power or causing harm by exercising it improperly and that it has sufficient resources to carry out its duties. It also gives an incentive to those charged with enforcing the law to make their cases in a fair and impartial manner.

First-year law students typically take courses in the basic topics of administrative law, litigation, civil law, corporate and transactional law, evidence, family law, professional responsibility, and taxation. Most law schools also offer additional courses in international and environmental law, and some offer clinical opportunities where you learn to practice law through real-life experiences.

Studying law can be an invaluable experience for developing your critical thinking, analytical skills, and communication skills. You’ll learn how to identify and resolve complex problems, conduct legal research, analyze and cite sources, write effectively, and collaborate with colleagues.

Moreover, you’ll be exposed to different cultures and societies. Most large law firms work with clients from around the world, and you’ll have the opportunity to travel while in the workplace.

Law is a discipline that demands a lot of dedication and hard work, but it can be rewarding in the end. It can allow you to advance in your career, develop a broad understanding of the world, and help others achieve their goals.

In addition, a degree in law can open doors to many other fields and careers that you might not have considered before. For example, you may be able to use your legal knowledge and skills to become a judge or an attorney, or even venture into the finance sector.

A law degree is highly respected and regarded in society. It can give you the opportunity to do things like change the constitution for the betterment of the people.

Having a law degree can also help you to build a stronger and more unified legal community in your organisation. You’ll be able to discuss and solve legal issues with your staff, senior management, and external providers.

If you want to become a lawyer, it is best to get as much experience as possible. This can be achieved through working in a law firm or taking secondments into other departments. It can also be done through internships and other forms of work experience.

The Challenges of Democracy in Indonesia

Indonesia is a country where political parties and individuals compete in parliamentary and presidential elections every five years. Since the fall of the New Order under Suharto in 1998, Indonesia has experienced a period of liberalization and democratization known as reformasi (literally: “reform” or “reformulation”).

During this period, the government has allowed greater freedom of speech and a more open political-social environment. However, despite these improvements, a number of challenges remain.

First, vertical accountability mechanisms are still relatively weak, which makes it difficult to punish or oust an unpopular president. Moreover, candidates have to compete to burnish their track records and prove themselves worthy of the presidency. This has made it more difficult for voters to choose competent leaders who have a genuine desire to improve their communities.

Second, horizontal accountability mechanisms are also weakened, which is problematic because they prevent the government from acting unilaterally against its citizens’ preferences. Consequently, a president may exercise executive power in ways that conflict with what the people want. This could be a sign of corruption or the misuse of state resources.

Third, the purely utilitarian view of elections articulated by government and party officials privileges bureaucratic efficiency over citizens’ rights. This is particularly true at the lower levels of government where local governments are often dominated by vested interests and ineffective institutions.

Fourth, money-politics is common in Indonesia, which is not free of corrupt practices or nepotism. For example, poorer Indonesians may be “encouraged” to vote for a specific candidate by handing them small amounts of money on election day.

Fifth, the state’s ability to investigate and prosecute abuses remains limited. Although the national human rights commission has been created, it does not have the formal powers of investigation or subpoena power that are essential for effective judicial action.

Six-in-ten or more Indonesians say they are likely to take political action on a range of issues, but only a small share have actually done so. Majorities have not attended an election campaign event or voted in a past election, and few are prepared to participate in political protests.

Seven-in-ten or more Indonesians would also be likely to post their thoughts about politics or social issues on a social media platform. The only exception is voting: a majority of Indonesians surveyed have voted in the past year or more, and a similar share said they would be likely to vote in the future.

Civil society actors can play a critical role in defending and implementing Indonesia’s democratic gains, but they face a government that is increasingly uninterested in heeding public opinion and a state that remains adept at inhibiting dissent. They are also hampered by an ineffective judiciary that has yet to bring credible charges against the country’s most prominent figures.

The upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections in 2019 represent an opportunity to renew Indonesia’s commitment to a democracy based on the rule of law. But if the current administration continues to backtrack on governance reform and hobbles the independent Anti-Corruption Commission, Indonesia’s democratic gains are likely to be undermined further.

Epistemic Justifications For Democracy


Democracy is a process of collective decision-making in which people have a say and can hold their government to account. It is the only form of governance that is consistent with human rights. It allows women and men to enjoy equality, freedom, security and development.

The concept of democracy originated with the Enlightenment philosophers who argued that all people deserve to be masters of their own lives. In order to achieve this, citizens must have a voice in the larger social, legal and cultural environment.

This right is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) as Article 21: “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government”. It is also a core principle of the United Nations.

Many people believe that democracy has a positive effect on the character of its citizens. It makes them stand up for their interests more than other forms of rule do and cultivates them into autonomous, active citizens.

It involves a public debate about the needs and problems of the common good that uncovers biases and fallibilities among political actors, and it helps to correct these biases and fallibilities. This type of collective decision-making is unique to democracy and it is necessary to realize public equality in a political society.

One of the epistemic justifications for democracy is that it tends to produce better decisions than other forms of rule do, in part because voters bring a wide range of diverse opinions to the political table and because they approach issues from different points of view and with different degrees of knowledge about them. However, the evidence that this is true has remained weak for long enough to make this idea vulnerable to critique.

Another common epistemic justification for democracy is that it makes the best possible use of the talents of citizens. This may be because citizens have a greater stake in the outcome of politics than they do in other types of economic activity, and this increases their commitment to democracy.

In addition, democratic decision-making tends to be more informed than other forms of rule about the interests and causal mechanisms that are necessary to advance those interests. This is because voters have a greater stake in the outcome of their own elections than they do in other types of elections and because their decisions often reflect the interests that they are most closely associated with, rather than those that they are least familiar with.

A third commonly-held epistemic justification for democracy is that the process of forming and governing government provides opportunities to promote social cohesion, tolerance and understanding among citizens. This is because the decision-making process involves an element of competition and a process that requires citizens to engage with each other in a way that they may not do otherwise, and it also means that citizens must learn to tolerate dissent.

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Democracy

democracy in america

Democracy is a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them. A democratic government requires that the people have the right to vote on major issues, and that elections are free and fair.

Some of the major benefits of democracy include preventing monopoly of power, having a representative government and protecting the rights of all citizens. However, there are some drawbacks of democracy that need to be considered carefully before deciding whether it is the best option for a country.

One of the main problems in a democratic government is that it may not be able to serve its people well. The government can take too long to make important decisions, and it might be dominated by irresponsible or incompetent leaders.

Another issue with a democratic government is that it might not provide enough resources. The government might not be able to give everyone the same access to things like health care, education or even employment.

There are also many different opinions about the way that a country should be run. Some people think that a democratic government is best, while others believe that an autocratic one is better. It is important to understand that there are some downsides to all types of political systems.

A democratic government should be able to protect the rights of all people, and it should be able to give them what they need. This includes basic human rights, such as freedom of speech, expression and the press.

It should be able to protect the rights of minorities, too, and it should be able to allow these groups to live their lives without interference from the government. It should also be able to ensure that all people have equal opportunities, especially when it comes to health and education.

If a democracy is based on a system of checks and balances, it can prevent corruption from taking place in the government. This is because there are laws that limit how the government can exercise power and what can be done in the name of democracy.

A good example of a democratic government is the United States of America. The US was able to develop its own version of democracy because it had a rich history and a lot of experience in developing the system.

In the US, democracy has been weakened by money politics and lobby groups that are restricting access to information for ordinary Americans. The main source of political donations in the US is a small group of extremely rich people, and these people have a lot of influence over the way that the government works.

When you have this type of system, it can be easy to see why some people think that the US is not a good example of democracy. It is difficult to have a good understanding of what democracy is, and how it can be beneficial to the citizens of a nation.

Freedom Review – An App That Helps You Stay Focused


Freedom is a powerful app that allows you to control your time and stay focused. You can set up recurring blocks to build habits and increase your productivity. The app also includes a handy feature that lets you lock your schedules and timers so they can’t be altered once they begin.

It’s a free download that works on both computers and mobile devices (both iOS and Android). After logging in, you can configure the settings through their dashboard.

You can block websites with preset categories such as news and social media or create an unlimited number of customized blocks. You can even sync your blocks across all of your devices so they don’t interfere with each other.

There are also a variety of other features that you can use to improve your focus and productivity, including a browser extension and a way to block notifications from apps. These are great options for people who are trying to get more done on their laptops or desktops without getting distracted by their smartphones.

Distractions are a major culprit when it comes to staying productive. Whether you’re trying to work on your computer, a tablet, or an iPad, distractions are everywhere. Fortunately, Freedom has a feature that can help you get back on track by blocking all internet access and network connectivity for the duration of your blocking session.

To activate this feature, go to the Sessions menu and tap Install App Blocker. This will automatically install a VPN profile that can help you block certain apps from your device. Once it’s installed, you can select a custom list of apps and websites to block with the click of a button.

This can be an excellent tool for people who struggle with digital addictions to social media, gambling, porn, and procrastination. Once you’re finished with your blocking session, this will ensure that you won’t be able to access those sites again!

The dashboard is intuitive and easy to use. You can set up a session immediately, or you can schedule it to start at a specific time. Afterward, you can view your stats via the session history tab.

Aside from these features, you can even create a list of websites you don’t want to be blocked, as long as they’re not on the default list. The dashboard is available on the desktop and mobile versions of the app, so it’s always up to date.

You can also disable all network connectivity and internet access for a specified period of time, so you can work on your task at hand without getting distracted by the world around you. You can even set a timer that automatically starts and stops as you work, so you won’t have to worry about missing out on important projects.

It’s an easy, yet powerful, tool that can help you stay focused and achieve your goals! It’s also affordable and has a free trial offer.

You can choose from a variety of subscription options, including monthly, yearly, or forever. The one-time fee for the ‘Forever’ option is a bit steep, but if you’re looking for an app that will be with you for life, this might be worth the money.

Democracy and Civil-Military Relations in Indonesia

democracy in indonesia

When Indonesia’s New Order regime collapsed in 1998, it looked as though the country would undergo a dramatic democratic transformation. President Suharto, who had ruled for more than 30 years, stepped down after an anti-government protest swept across the country. His successors, former vice president Megawati Sukarnoputri and retired general Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, continued to push for sweeping reforms.

Democracy and Civil-Military Relations

After Suharto’s resignation, a number of trends have led to a slow but steady deterioration of Indonesia’s democratic credentials. These include broader ambivalence towards liberal norms among Indonesians and high levels of trust in an older, more familiar institution. In addition, some of the civil-military currents that have developed in the post-New Order period have rolled back much of what had been achieved through the transition to democracy.

This is in part a result of the fact that Indonesia’s civil-military relationship has often been a source of power for the ruling elite, and that its members have also enjoyed privileged access to government resources. In addition, the military has played a vital role in the country’s ongoing struggle against terrorism and other armed threats.

These factors have weakened the democratic character of Indonesia’s civil-military relations, and they are now playing an important role in the reversal of the country’s democratic trajectory. This has been supported by the widespread perception that a majority of Indonesians no longer believe in the values of democracy and are instead more open to authoritarian alternatives.

The political parties have also been destabilized by the rise of a “threshold” system in which the number of votes needed to secure legislative seats is increased. This has made it harder for independent parties to develop and to contest elections. It also has helped to ensure that political parties grow into power groups, with the potential of a party machine controlling the national political agenda.

Moreover, the threshold has been used to impose restrictions on a wide variety of activities that would otherwise be permitted under the rules of the political system. This includes the right of individuals and civil society organizations to challenge corrupt practices by government agencies.

It is also used to prevent the media and other civil society organizations from exposing corruption and other abuses by security forces. In addition, journalists and publishers are subject to extra-judicial retaliation by the wealthy capitalists who control the country’s economy and religious organizations that seek to influence policy through intimidation and violence.

Finally, the increasing number of ethnic minorities has caused a rift in the country’s social fabric and has given rise to some serious societal tensions. The Chinese-Indonesian community, for example, is often a scapegoat in times of crisis because of the wealth they allegedly possess. This has exacerbated ethnic tensions and eroded the social cohesion that had been one of Indonesia’s most impressive features under the New Order.

While some progress has been made, the country is still far from reaching a state of complete democracy and remains on a path toward democratization that will require a lot of hard work and compromise by local leaders. A major issue for the Indonesian people is how to build a strong and stable democracy that can meet future challenges while still maintaining its integrity.