"A medical student asked his colleague, 'Why don't skeletons have housing savings?''Because they have no "body" to live with!' replied the colleague.""Political dynamics and influences permeate all aspects of human life, beyond just the formal structures of government and legislative processes. Politics can be observed in families, friendships, and workplaces where power dynamics and negotiations often dictate interactions and decisions. Politics can be observed in families, friendships, and workplaces where power dynamics and negotiations often dictate interactions and decisions. Political strategies, such as negotiation, persuasion, and compromise, are employed in resolving conflicts and managing relationships. In the business world, politics manifests in corporate governance, office hierarchies, and decision-making processes. Schools and universities also exhibit political behavior through administrative policies, faculty governance, and student organizations," Cananga moved ahead."In our everyday life, decisions about what products to buy, which brands to support, and how to spend money can reflect political beliefs and ethical considerations. For instance, choosing to buy from a local, sustainable brand reflects environmental and economic values; Opting for fair-trade coffee or boycotting certain companies due to their labor practices expresses political beliefs. Even our dietary preferences can be political. Vegetarianism, veganism, or organic food consumption may align with environmental, ethical, or health-related stances.Participation in local community activities, such as neighborhood associations, volunteer groups, and local governance, is inherently political. Our social circles often reflect our political affiliations. We tend to associate with people who share similar views. Engaging in online forums, social media groups, or following specific influencers can be politically motivated. These spaces allow us to express opinions, learn, and engage with others who share our perspectives.Workplace interactions involve power dynamics, hierarchies, and decision-making. Navigating office politics affects our career trajectory. Efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion within organizations are inherently political. Advocacy for equal opportunities and representation is part of everyday politics.Agenda Setting, the media's role in shaping public discourse and influencing opinions is a clear example of politics in action. How different groups are represented in media can reflect and reinforce political ideologies.Social media platforms have become arenas for digital politics: political engagement, activism, and discourse highlighting the political nature of digital interactions. Issues of data privacy and surveillance by governments and corporations are inherently political, affecting individual freedoms and rights. Economic policies and practices that determine the distribution of resources and wealth are deeply political. The dynamics between employers, employees, and unions involve political negotiations over wages, working conditions, and rights.If you own a smartphone, you are involved with politics and it’s involved with you. Wherever you live, the political decisions your government makes are likely to affect what is on your phone and how you can use it. China has banned apps like Facebook and Google. Before the 2021 Ugandan election, the government simply shut down the internet entirely. In India, the government distributes benefits directly to citizens through their phones. In countries that produce smartphones, government regulations—one type of rule that is created through political action—touch virtually every aspect of your phone’s production, sale, and communications. Your phone also enables you to engage in political action. You can use your phone to talk about politics or to call your local representative to express your views. You can organize a campaign through WhatsApp, share videos of police brutality or of peaceful protest, or Venmo contributions to your favorite political cause.You can engage in politics through your phone, and politics can influence how your phone is designed and operated. You can use your phone to learn about politics, political engagement, and what politicians are doing at home and around the world. The political decisions of local and national governments and international organizations can affect the water you drink, the food you eat, the clothes you wear, and the dwelling you call home. Politics and policy can play a role in the most intimate details of your life, including your reproductive rights, marriage rights, and even how your body will be treated after you die.Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman asserts that in 21st-century America, 'everything is political', or in other words, 'politics is everywhere'. Whether or not you care about politics, politics has an interest in you. It underscores the pervasive nature of politics in shaping human interactions, societal structures, and cultural norms. Politics is indeed pervasive—it shapes our choices, interactions, and societal structures. Whether we’re aware of it or not, political forces influence our lives in multifaceted ways. Politics isn’t limited to elections or legislative debates—it’s woven into the fabric of our existence. Each choice we make, and every interaction we have, carries political implications.Politics has existed as long as humans have faced scarcity, have had different beliefs and preferences, and have had to resolve these differences while allocating scarce resources. It will continue to exist so long as these human conditions persist—that is, fo-re-ver. Politics are fundamental to the human condition. Politics means different things to different people. Politics, and related terms like political and politician, can have both positive and negative connotations. The Greek philosopher Aristotle argued that humans were 'political animals' in that only by engaging in politics could humans reach their highest potential. Yet often, the terms political and politician can be used in disparaging ways to refer to individuals using trickery or manipulation to obtain or preserve their status or authority. More formally, a politician is someone running for elective office or serving in it or as a person who is using the skills of a politician in other social interactions. A political actor is anyone who is engaged in political activity. Politics involves all the actions of government and all the people who work for, serve, or challenge it. Politics is about who gets what, when, where, how, and why.Every political event is different. The mass protests in Hong Kong in 2020, inspired by those seeking to protect their political rights, were not the same as the Black Lives Matter protests in the United States or the climate change actions animated by Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg. Yet as varied as political situations can be, there are commonalities across these events and overall political activities. Whenever you seek to understand a political event—whether an election in Tanzania, a protest in Estonia, or a public health program (BPJS) in Indonesia, which was recently service institution criticized (which represents many covered complaints about BPJS rules and services) by the famous Indonesian singer and actor, Ikang Fawzi—it is useful to focus on the following: 'rules', 'reality', and 'choices'. Rules provide constraints and opportunities. Reality presents resources and challenges. The choices participants make in the face of rules and reality determine political outcomes.The importance of rules in politics or life cannot be overstated. In virtually every human endeavor, the most successful individuals are likely to have a keen knowledge of the rules and how to use (or perhaps break) the rules to the advantage of their cause. Ignorance of the rules makes accomplishing your goals more difficult. Rules are everywhere in politics. Your family has rules—even if the main rule is 'no rules', but still, there is the rule—as does your school or campus, or workplace.Rules and institutions are closely related. Alternatively, institutions can be organizations, which are groups of people working together for a common purpose whose actions are governed by rules. Rules might appear to be neutral—that is, they may seem fair and not designed to favor one group over another—but this is not entirely true. For example, in the case of Indonesia, the rules are so often tinkered with for certain interests, the results seem unfair. Rules, such as Robert’s Rules of Order, govern legislatures, the criminal justice system, the tax system, and the national immigration systems are all based, at least in principle, on rules.If rules are frequently altered negatively or to serve specific interests, several detrimental effects can ensue:
- Erosion of Trust. People may lose faith in institutions or systems when they perceive that rules are manipulated unfairly. This erosion of trust can lead to decreased compliance and engagement from the public.
- Unfair Advantage: Constantly changing rules to benefit certain groups can create an uneven playing field, where some individuals or organizations gain undue advantages over others. This can exacerbate inequality and foster resentment.
- Instability. Frequent and negative changes to rules can create an unstable environment. When rules are unpredictable, it becomes difficult for individuals and organizations to plan and operate effectively, leading to inefficiency and uncertainty.
- Loss of Integrity. The perceived integrity of the rule-making body can be compromised. If a governing body or organization is seen as corrupt or biased, its authority and legitimacy can be undermined.
- Decreased Morale. Morale refers to the overall mood, attitude, and feelings of well-being [refers to the state of being comfortable, healthy, or happy. It encompasses various aspects of an individual's life, including physical, mental, and emotional health. Well-being is often considered holistically, taking into account several dimensions: Physical Well-being: This involves maintaining good physical health through proper nutrition, regular exercise, adequate rest, and avoiding harmful behaviors. It also includes access to healthcare and the absence of chronic illness or pain; Mental Well-being: This aspect focuses on cognitive functioning and emotional health. It includes the ability to manage stress, anxiety, and other mental health issues, as well as having a positive outlook on life, good self-esteem, and the ability to cope with life's challenges; Emotional Well-being: involves experiencing positive emotions such as happiness, contentment, and fulfillment, and effectively managing negative emotions like sadness, anger, and frustration. It also includes the quality of personal relationships and social interactions; Social Well-being: This dimension encompasses the quality and depth of an individual’s relationships and social networks. It involves having supportive social connections, a sense of belonging, and positive interactions with others; Financial Well-being: Financial stability and the ability to manage financial resources effectively contribute to overall well-being. This includes having enough income to meet basic needs, as well as financial security and freedom from excessive debt; Environmental Well-being: This involves living in a safe, healthy, and sustainable environment. It includes both the immediate surroundings, such as home and workplace, and the broader natural environment; Occupational Well-being: This relates to job satisfaction, work-life balance, and having a sense of purpose and achievement in one’s professional life. It also includes opportunities for personal and career growth; Spiritual Well-being: For many people, spiritual well-being is an important dimension. It involves having a sense of purpose and meaning in life, which may be connected to religious beliefs, personal values, or a sense of connectedness to something greater than oneself. Overall well-being is achieved when an individual experiences positive outcomes in these various dimensions, leading to a balanced and fulfilling life. It is a dynamic state that can be influenced by personal choices, relationships, societal factors, and environmental conditions], satisfaction, and enthusiasm among a group of people, particularly within a workplace, organization, or team. It encompasses the collective mental and emotional state of individuals and can significantly impact their performance, productivity, and cohesion. High morale is characterized by: Positive Attitudes: Individuals feel optimistic and positive about their environment and their roles; Enthusiasm and Motivation: People are eager to participate, contribute, and put in their best effort; Cohesiveness: There is a sense of unity and camaraderie among group members; Job Satisfaction: Individuals feel content and satisfied with their work and working conditions. Conversely, low morale is marked by: Negative Attitudes: People may feel pessimistic, dissatisfied, or disengaged. Lack of Motivation: Individuals are less likely to be productive or put in extra effort; Conflict and Division: There may be increased tensions, conflicts, and lack of cooperation within the group; Job Dissatisfaction: People feel unhappy or frustrated with their work and working conditions. Factors that influence morale include leadership quality, working conditions, communication, recognition and rewards, job security, and organizational culture. High morale tends to lead to better performance, lower turnover, and a more positive work environment, whereas low morale can result in decreased productivity, higher absenteeism, and increased turnover. In environments such as workplaces or schools, if rules are perceived as being manipulated to favor certain people, it can lead to decreased morale, motivation, and overall satisfaction among those who feel disadvantaged.
- Conflict and Division. Manipulating rules for particular interests can create divisions and conflicts within communities, organizations, or nations. Those who feel unfairly treated may push back, leading to disputes and a lack of cohesion.
- Long-term Consequences. Over time, consistent negative tinkering with rules can lead to systemic problems. It can entrench corruption, decrease innovation, and ultimately harm the long-term health and sustainability of institutions and societies.
In essence, the integrity and fairness of rule-making are crucial for the stability, trust, and functionality of any system or society. Manipulating rules for narrow interests or in negative ways can have far-reaching and harmful consequences.Perhaps the most important set of rules for any institution or organization is its constitution. A constitution is a fundamental legal document or a set of principles that outlines the structure, functions, and powers of a government, as well as the rights and duties of its citizens. It serves as the supreme law of a country or organization, providing a framework for governance and the rule of law. A constitution is typically considered the highest legal authority in a country, meaning that all other laws and governmental actions must conform to its principles. It defines the organization of government, including the separation of powers among different branches (e.g., executive, legislative, judicial) and the relationships between these branches. The Constitution delineates the powers and responsibilities of each branch of government, ensuring a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful. It enshrines fundamental rights and freedoms for citizens, such as freedom of speech, religion, and assembly, and provides mechanisms for protecting these rights.Constitutions usually include procedures for making amendments or changes to the document, allowing it to adapt to evolving societal needs and values. It establishes the legal framework for creating, enforcing, and interpreting laws, often including the establishment of courts and judicial systems. In addition to outlining rights, a constitution may also specify the duties and responsibilities of citizens, such as obeying the law and paying taxes. In federal systems, the constitution may outline the division of powers between national and regional governments, whereas, in unitary systems, it concentrates authority at the central level.A constitution can be written (codified) or unwritten (uncodified). Written constitutions are formal documents, while unwritten constitutions consist of statutes, judicial decisions, conventions, and other sources of legal authority. Regardless of its form, a constitution plays a crucial role in shaping the governance and legal framework of a society. Constitutions are perhaps the most important set of rules in a country because, after all, they are just pieces of paper. The true importance of a country’s constitution depends on the politics of that country. Whether it be the president, the Congress, or any other group or individual in society—is expected to comply with the constitutions. But this is not always the case everywhere. Politicians in any country may be tempted to ignore their constitutions, especially when it comes to the rights they ostensibly guarantee, and whether those politicians prevail depends on whether other political actors are willing and able to uphold the constitution.Rules guide and constrain behavior, but the reality on the ground at any specific time also impacts political outcomes. Because rules affect the allocation of power and other scarce resources, political actors spend substantial time and effort fighting over them. In general, political actors seek to establish rules that benefit them and their allies.Reality—facts—is not a matter of opinion, although people can dispute the nature of reality. Something is a fact, for example, when there is compelling evidence that an event has happened or a condition exists. The sun rises in the East: reality. The United Nations is an international organization: fact (reality). Has the United Nations made the world a better place? That is a matter of opinion, although those who say 'yes' or 'no' can provide facts that support their reality views.In chess, the rules are constant, never changing during the game. The reality changes as play proceeds—at any moment each player has a specific number of pieces in particular places on the board. What happens then depends on the choices the players make. This is as true for politics as for any other game. A key difference between chess and politics is that, in politics, the players themselves can change the rules of the game while they are playing. Politics can be thought of as having the characteristics of a game. The players—anyone involved in political action—make strategic choices, given the rules and the current conditions, in an attempt to 'win' the game by obtaining their goals.Rules provide constraints and opportunities. Reality presents resources and challenges. The choices participants make in the face of rules and reality determine political outcomes. Choice exists whenever political actors face options, which they always do. If there are two candidates in an election for a single position, the voter has to choose between them, not being able to vote for both. Even if there is only one candidate, the voter still has an option: to vote for the candidate or to abstain.In a democracy, and this is the importance of 'the free and fair elections', the winning candidate wins because more voters choose to vote and vote for that candidate, than for other options. The very definition of democracy is that it is a form of government in which the people can choose their leaders or, in some cases, the policies that they will adopt.Political outcomes are always contingent; they cannot be predicted with certainty in advance. That does not mean, however, that outcomes are completely unpredictable. By accounting for the rules, how human behavior works, and existing realities, it is possible to reasonably predict what is likely to happen and explain what does happen.Now we return to the topic of coalition building. The principle of rules, reality, and choices, can also be applied. Coalition building in presidential systems refers to the process by which the president seeks to form alliances with various political parties and factions to secure legislative support for their policy agenda. This practice is more common in multiparty presidential systems, where no single party holds a majority in the legislature. In countries with multiple political parties, the president often needs to form coalitions to achieve a working majority in the legislature. Fragmentation necessitates alliances among diverse political groups with varying interests and ideologies.Coalition partners negotiate policy agreements, often requiring compromise on key issues. Coalitions may involve power-sharing arrangements, including cabinet positions, legislative leadership roles, and other governmental appointments. Presidents seek coalition partners who can provide reliable legislative support to pass critical bills and budgets. Forming a coalition can enhance political stability by ensuring the government has sufficient support to govern effectively.Some examples of coalition building in presidential systems: Brazil’s presidential system is characterized by a highly fragmented legislature with numerous political parties. Coalition building is essential for the president to govern effectively. However, this has also led to challenges such as political instability and corruption scandals.Kenya has a history of coalition governments, particularly after contested elections. Coalition building has been crucial for maintaining peace and stability, though it sometimes results in power-sharing agreements that can dilute policy effectiveness.Indonesia’s president often forms coalitions with multiple parties to secure legislative support. This has helped in maintaining political stability but has also led to complex negotiations and compromises. Dan Slater writes that because presidents shared power much more widely than expected, Opposition did not emerge as automatically as expected after Indonesia democratized. The result has been what Slater calls party cartelization, Indonesian-style.Promiscuous power-sharing is strategically optimal for political parties in Indonesia’s parliament, says Slater, because it allows them to maintain privileged access to state patronage, even when they fare miserably in national parliamentary elections. This is the much less surprising half of the power-sharing bargain. The more puzzling half is that presidents persistently find strategic advantage in building coalitions that are not just oversized, but at times include every single significant party, wiping out party opposition entirely in the process. Indonesian presidents do not adopt anything remotely resembling a 'minimum winning coalition'. To foreshadow: the core intuition is that building wider coalitions does not mean presidents have to share more of their own power or resources. It means each party in the coalition has to share more of theirs. Power-sharing may make directly elected presidents relatively stronger, not weaker absolutely.More further Slater suggests that the most intriguing implication of Indonesia’s experience with democratic power-sharing may be this: Presidents may sometimes see broad coalitions as a source of instead of a drain on their power and resources. Oversized coalitions are typically seen as being more expensive to maintain. Expanding the number of parties in a cabinet “dilutes the executive’s ability to monopolize resources and policy influence.” But this may not be how presidents see things at all, at least under certain conditions. Oversized coalitions may be better conceived as ways for presidents to spread the same amount of resources across more claimants, thus ensuring that no single partner can become too strong as a rival. If nothing else, the persistence and evolution of party cartelization, the Indonesian style suggests that power-sharing should not be seen as an occasion for presidents simply to give.What then, challenges of Coalition Building? Diverse coalition partners may have conflicting priorities, leading to difficulties in reaching consensus on policies. The need to accommodate all partners can result in watered-down policies that lack coherence and effectiveness.Coalitions can be inherently unstable, with partners withdrawing support if their demands are not met. Instability can lead to frequent changes in government, undermining long-term policy planning and implementation.Coalition agreements may involve patronage, where political support is exchanged for government positions and favors, fostering corruption. The president may need to continually negotiate with coalition partners, weakening their ability to provide strong and decisive leadership.Coalitions are often formed out of necessity, especially when no single party has a majority. However, they can be fragile and prone to collapse. Coalitions may prioritize stability over bold policy changes. To avoid internal conflicts, coalition governments often pursue incremental changes rather than radical reforms. This can result in policy inertia or slow progress.Coalition partners may face internal dissent. Within each party, factions may disagree on coalition decisions. Managing these internal conflicts requires skillful leadership.Coalitions may lack a clear policy direction. With multiple parties involved, policy coherence can suffer. Contradictory stances on different issues may confuse voters and hinder effective governance.Voters may perceive coalitions as indecisive or weak. When parties compromise excessively, citizens might view the government as ineffective. This can erode public trust and impact electoral prospects.While Coalition Building can enhance governance by ensuring legislative support and inclusivity, it also poses significant challenges such as policy gridlock, instability, and potential corruption. The effectiveness of coalition building depends on the political context, the ability of leaders to manage diverse interests, and the overall institutional framework within which the coalitions operate.So, what happens if there is no formal opposition party in a presidential system? We will discuss it in the next episode, biidhnillah."
Citations & References:
- Mark Carl Rom, Masaki Hidaka & Rachel Bzostek Walker, Introduction to Political Science, 2022, OpenStax
- Michel Rosenfeld & Andras Sajo (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law, Oxford University Press
- Jason Colquitt, Jeffery LePine & Michael Wesson, Organizational Behavior: Improving Performance and Commitment in the Workplace, 2023, McGraw Hill
- Susan A. David, Ilona Boniwell & Amanda Conley Ayers (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Happiness, 2013, Oxford University Press
- Daniel Kahneman, Ed Diener & Norbert Schwarz (Eds.), Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, 1999, Russel Sage Foundation
- Dan Slater, Party Cartelization, Indonesian-Style: Presidential Power-Sharing and the Contingency of Democratic Opposition, Journal of East Asian Studies, 2018, Cambridge University Press
