"In a twist of fate that could only be described as a plot straight out of a soap opera, Lembusura, our hero with the jumping prowess of a kangaroo on steroids, faced a 25-meter-high wall. Despite his impressive 14-meter leap, this wall was his Everest. Enter ‘The Guardian of Kingdom,’ a cameo appearance so unexpected it could rival a surprise guest on a reality TV show. With a wave of his hand, the wall shrank to a mere 7.5 meters, making it more of a speed bump than a barrier. This situation isn’t just a win for Lembusura; it’s a jackpot for all the other creatures stuck behind those towering walls, like Taksaka, Naga Basuki, and Wilmuka. Who knew chaos could be so inclusive?But hold your applause! King Penthung, ever the party pooper, wasn’t about to let Lembusura have his moment of glory. The King, in a move that screams ‘culinary sabotage,’ prepared a pot of ‘Rawon Buntut’ soup, a dish so delicious it could distract even the most focused of jumpers. The aroma alone was enough to make Lembusura’s stomach rumble louder than a thunderstorm.And if that wasn’t enough, rumrumoursors are swirling that the infamous roulette machine, the one used for cheating in the last competition, might make a comeback. This machine, a relic from the days when fairness was just a suggestion, had a knack for turning the odds in favour of whoever held the controls. King Penthung, with a sly grin, hinted that it might just find its way back into the game.Meanwhile, Lembusura, ever the strategist, pondered his next move. Should he call upon ‘the Star,’ his secret weapon, to counter the delectable distraction of ‘Rawon Buntut’? This star, rumoured to have the power to shine so brightly it could blind opponents, was Lembusura’s ace in the hole.As the kingdom’s citizens gathered, placing bets and munching on popcorn, the tension was palpable. The air buzzed with excitement and the occasional whiff of Rawon Buntut. The stage was set for an epic showdown, one that would be talked about for generations.But just as Lembusura was about to make his move, a mysterious figure appeared on the horizon. Clad in a cloak that shimmered like the night sky, this stranger’s identity was unknown. Whispers spread through the crowd – was this an ally or another obstacle? The figure raised a hand, and the ground beneath the wall began to tremble. Could this be another twist in the tale, or the final piece of the puzzle?In the world of politics, where the only constant is change, who knows what will happen next? Will Lembusura leap over the wall and claim his victory, or will King Penthung’s culinary concoction and roulette trickery prevail? And who is this enigmatic newcomer? Stay tuned for the next episode of ‘As the Kingdom Turns,’ where drama, intrigue, and a dash of absurdity are always on the menu.""Political instability is a significant factor that can weaken a nation, it creates a cascade of negative effects that undermine the very foundations of a nation's strength, including its economy, social fabric, institutions, and security. Political instability often leads to inconsistent or weak governance. Frequent changes in leadership, unclear policies, and ineffective law enforcement undermine the rule of law, creating an environment where corruption, crime, and civil unrest can thrive," Cattleya moved on."Political instability refers to a situation in which a government, political system, or nation is unable to maintain consistent and effective governance due to frequent changes in leadership, political unrest, conflict, or significant challenges to its authority. It often involves uncertainty, unpredictability, and a lack of continuity in policies and governance, which can lead to various forms of disorder and disruption within a country.Political instability is often accompanied by widespread public dissatisfaction, leading to protests, strikes, or other forms of civil unrest. These events can further destabilize the government and exacerbate the situation. Political instability may escalate into violent conflicts, including civil wars, ethnic clashes, or insurgencies. These conflicts disrupt the normal functioning of the state and can lead to significant loss of life and property.Governments in politically unstable environments often struggle to enforce laws, deliver public services, or maintain order. This weakness can lead to corruption, inefficiency, and a breakdown in the rule of law. Political instability can arise when the government or ruling authority loses legitimacy in the eyes of its citizens. This loss of legitimacy might be due to perceived corruption, electoral fraud, or the failure to address pressing social and economic issues. In some cases, political instability can be exacerbated by external actors, such as foreign governments, international organizations, or non-state actors who may have an interest in influencing the outcome of a political crisis.Libya after the 2011 Arab Spring uprising and the subsequent overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi. The country has been divided between rival governments and militias, leading to ongoing conflict and a lack of central authority. Zimbabwe under the later years of Robert Mugabe's rule and the political turmoil that followed his ousting in 2017. The country has faced economic collapse, hyperinflation, and political repression, leading to instability. Myanmar since the 2021 military coup, which overthrew the democratically elected government. The coup has led to widespread protests, armed resistance, and international condemnation, creating a highly unstable situation.Political instability begins to exist under certain circumstances that disrupt the normal functioning of a government or political system. The extent of this instability can vary, ranging from mild uncertainty to severe crises. Political instability can arise when there are frequent changes in government leadership, such as through elections, resignations, coups, or assassinations. This constant turnover can prevent the government from implementing long-term policies and create uncertainty about the country's direction. The instability may be mild if the changes are peaceful and within a democratic framework, but it can be severe if leadership changes are violent, sudden, or involve unconstitutional methods, such as a military coup.Widespread dissatisfaction among the population, often due to economic hardship, corruption, or perceived injustice, can lead to protests, strikes, or riots. Civil unrest indicates that a significant portion of the population is unhappy with the current political situation. The instability might be limited if peaceful protests result in constructive dialogue or reform. However, if protests turn violent, are met with repression, or lead to widespread chaos, the extent of instability can be profound, potentially destabilising the entire country.A government that is weak or lacks the authority to enforce laws and policies may struggle to maintain order and govern effectively. This can occur in situations where the government is deeply divided, lacks a clear mandate, or is unable to control certain regions or factions within the country. Political instability may be moderate if the government is only temporarily weak or if there are efforts to strengthen it. However, if the government remains fragmented or loses control over significant parts of the country, the instability can become severe, leading to a power vacuum and potential anarchy.Deep-seated ethnic, religious, or regional divisions can lead to conflict and political instability, especially if one group feels marginalized or discriminated against. These tensions can be exacerbated by political leaders who exploit them for personal or political gain. The instability might be moderate if tensions are managed through dialogue and inclusion. However, if tensions escalate into violence, ethnic cleansing, or secessionist movements, the instability can be extensive, threatening the country's unity and stability.Disputed elections, where the results are contested or perceived as fraudulent, can lead to political instability. This often happens in new democracies or in countries with weak electoral systems, where the legitimacy of the election process is questioned. If disputes are resolved through legal or peaceful means, the instability may be temporary. However, if the disputes lead to widespread protests, violence, or a breakdown in the political order, the instability can be significant, potentially leading to a prolonged crisis.Economic hardship, such as hyperinflation, unemployment, or a sudden economic downturn, can lead to political instability, particularly if the government is perceived as responsible for or incapable of addressing the crisis. The instability might be mild if the government can manage the crisis effectively. However, if the economic situation deteriorates further and leads to mass poverty, strikes, or unrest, the extent of instability can become severe, undermining the government's authority and legitimacy.Political instability can also be triggered or exacerbated by external factors, such as foreign intervention, support for opposition groups, or threats from neighbouring countries. External actors might exploit internal divisions to further their interests. The instability may be mild if external interference is limited or if the country can resist or manage it. However, if external forces are powerful and persistent, they can significantly destabilize the country, leading to long-term conflict or even regime change.A constitutional crisis occurs when there is a breakdown in the legal or institutional framework of the country, such as a dispute over the interpretation of the constitution, the balance of powers, or the legitimacy of certain institutions. The instability might be limited if the crisis is resolved through legal mechanisms or compromise. However, if the crisis leads to a paralysis of government functions, the extent of instability can be severe, potentially leading to a complete breakdown of the political system.The existence of a political cartel within a nation can weaken the country in several ways, primarily by undermining democratic principles, reducing political competition, fostering corruption, and stifling policy innovation. A political cartel refers to a coalition or alliance of political parties, organizations, or leaders that collaborate to maintain power, control political competition, and prevent new or smaller parties from gaining influence. This concept is often used in the context of discussions about political systems where established parties dominate the political landscape, limiting democratic competition and ensuring their continued dominance.The concept of a political cartel has evolved, with its historical perspective reflecting changes in political systems, party dynamics, and democratic practices. In the 19th century, political machines in cities like New York and Chicago exhibited early forms of cartel-like behaviour. These machines were often controlled by a single party or leader who used patronage and party loyalty to maintain power. They controlled political resources and limited competition, ensuring that rival parties had minimal influence. In Europe, political cartels began to emerge as established parties sought to consolidate their power. Parties in some countries began to collaborate on electoral strategies and policies to maintain their dominance and manage political competition.The term 'cartel party' was formally introduced by Richard S. Katz and Peter Mair in the late 20th century, but its roots can be traced to early 20th-century developments. As political systems matured and became more institutionalized, established parties in many democracies began to work together to protect their interests and maintain control over the political system. Changes in electoral systems, such as the introduction of proportional representation and the consolidation of party systems, contributed to the rise of cartel behaviour. Established parties sought to prevent the entry of new or smaller parties that could challenge their dominance.After World War II, many European democracies experienced the rise of cartel parties. In countries like Germany and Italy, established parties formed alliances and agreed on key policies to stabilize their political systems and prevent extremist parties from gaining traction. Political cartels in this era often involved agreements on economic management and state control. Established parties collaborated to control economic resources and state institutions, reducing competition and ensuring stability.The concept of political cartels was formally theorized by Katz and Mair in the 1990s. They argued that political parties in modern democracies often act like cartels, using their control over state resources and electoral systems to maintain their dominance and limit competition. The phenomenon of political cartels is not limited to any single region. In Latin America, Africa, and Asia, political cartels have emerged in various forms, often characterized by collusion among established parties to control the political landscape and suppress opposition.In a political cartel, the major political parties may work together, either explicitly or implicitly, to limit competition. They may agree on certain rules, practices, or policies that make it difficult for new parties or outsiders to challenge their power. Political cartels often control key aspects of the electoral process, such as access to media, campaign financing, or the rules governing elections. This control allows them to shape the political landscape in their favour. By controlling political resources and access to power, a political cartel can exclude or marginalize new or smaller parties, ensuring that they remain at the periphery of the political system. Political cartels are usually focused on maintaining the status quo and their positions of power. They may resist reforms or changes that could threaten their dominance, even if such reforms are necessary for broader democratic health. While parties in a political cartel may still compete on some issues, they often coordinate on key policies that ensure their collective interests are protected. This can lead to a lack of real policy differentiation between the major parties.In some discussions, the term 'political cartel' has been used to describe the 'Grand Coalitions' in Germany, where the two largest parties (the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD)) have formed coalitions, effectively reducing competition and maintaining control over the political system.Mexico's PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party)'s dominance in Mexico for much of the 20th century is another example. The PRI maintained power through a combination of electoral control, patronage, and alliances with other political entities, effectively operating as a political cartel.Several concerns have been raised about the tendency of political cartels in Indonesia. the extensive power-sharing among political parties has led to a lack of clear opposition. This has stunted the development of a robust democratic opposition, making it difficult to hold the government accountable. Despite having resilient elections, Indonesian democracy is seen as defective in other areas. Compromises with corrupt politicians have weakened democratic principles, human rights, and the rule of law. After the fall of President Suharto in 1998, Indonesia saw the emergence of political cartels as a way to stabilize the new democratic system. Presidents often formed broad coalitions that included multiple political parties, regardless of their ideological differences. According to the views of foreign media, President Joko Widodo has also relied on broad coalitions to govern. His administration has included parties that were initially his rivals, reflecting the ongoing trend of political cartels in Indonesia.Political cartels in Indonesia have a significant impact on policy-making. Due to the power-sharing arrangements among various political parties, policies often need to be negotiated and agreed upon by multiple stakeholders. This can lead to compromises and watered-down policies that may not fully address the issues at hand. The need to maintain coalition stability can result in a reluctance to implement bold or controversial policies. This can slow down the policy-making process and lead to incremental rather than transformative changes.Political cartels can foster environments where patronage and corruption thrive. Policies may be influenced by the need to reward political allies and supporters, rather than being based on merit or public interest. With blurred lines between the government and the opposition, holding policymakers accountable becomes challenging. This can lead to a lack of transparency and reduced public trust in the political system.Addressing the issue of political cartels in Indonesia requires a multifaceted approach. Enhancing the independence and capacity of political institutions, such as the judiciary and electoral commission, can help ensure fairer and more transparent political processes. Implementing reforms to the electoral system, such as reducing the threshold for party representation in parliament, can encourage a more diverse and competitive political landscape. Encouraging political parties to adopt more democratic practices internally can reduce the dominance of party elites and foster greater accountability.Implementing robust anti-corruption measures and ensuring strict enforcement can reduce the influence of patronage and corruption in politics. Strengthening civil society organizations and promoting greater public participation in the political process can help hold political parties and leaders accountable. Increasing public awareness about the importance of democratic principles and the dangers of political cartels can empower citizens to demand better governance.These solutions aim to create a more transparent, accountable, and democratic political system in Indonesia.Political cartels often lead to reduced competition, as they create barriers for new entrants and limit the choices available to voters. With limited competition, political cartels can result in policy stagnation, as the dominant parties have little incentive to innovate or address new challenges. Voters may become disillusioned with the political system if they perceive that the major parties are colluding to maintain power rather than genuinely representing their interests. A political cartel represents a situation where dominant political actors collaborate to maintain their hold on power, often at the expense of democratic competition and broader political participation.The formation of a political cartel is typically caused by a combination of factors that drive established political parties or elites to collaborate to maintain their power and control over the political system. These factors can include institutional incentives, self-interest, external threats, and the desire to minimize uncertainty. Certain electoral systems, such as proportional representation or systems with high entry barriers, can encourage the formation of political cartels. For example, if the electoral system favors large, established parties and makes it difficult for new parties to gain representation, established parties may collude to maintain the system that benefits them. If the rules governing political financing are structured in a way that advantages established parties, they may form a cartel to protect these financial benefits and exclude new entrants from accessing the same resources.Political elites may form a cartel to secure their positions of power and influence. By cooperating with other established parties, they can reduce competition and increase their chances of staying in power. Political cartels often form around the control of valuable resources, such as state funds, media access, or patronage networks. By collaborating, the cartel members can ensure that these resources remain within their control. Established parties may perceive new or populist movements as a threat to their dominance. In response, they may form a cartel to collectively resist these movements, using their combined power to marginalize or suppress them. During periods of crisis, such as economic downturns or social unrest, established parties may band together to prevent the situation from spiralling out of control. They might argue that cooperation is necessary to maintain stability, even if it limits competition.Political competition introduces uncertainty, as elections can lead to changes in leadership and policy direction. By forming a cartel, established parties can reduce this uncertainty by agreeing to share power or by implementing policies that protect their mutual interests. Cartels may also form to ensure that policy outcomes remain predictable and in line with the interests of the cartel members. This can involve agreeing on key policies or dividing areas of influence so that each party knows what to expect.In some countries, political cartels form because of historical precedents where parties have traditionally worked together. This can be a result of shared ideology, regional ties, or past collaboration during critical periods. In political systems where elitism is entrenched, a culture of collaboration among the ruling elites may naturally lead to cartel-like behaviour. This culture discourages competition and promotes the idea that only certain parties or individuals are fit to govern. If the opposition is weak, fragmented, or lacks resources, established parties may feel emboldened to form a cartel. Without a strong opposition to challenge them, the cartel members can more easily dominate the political landscape. Established parties may also co-opt potential rivals by offering them a share in the benefits of the cartel, such as access to resources or political appointments. This reduces the likelihood of serious challenges to their dominance.Political cartels can lead to democratic backsliding, as they often prioritize the interests of the cartel members over the principles of democratic competition and representation. With limited competition, policy innovation may be stifled, leading to stagnation and an inability to address new challenges effectively. The perception that the political system is controlled by a cartel can lead to public disillusionment, reducing trust in democratic institutions and potentially driving voters toward more extreme or populist alternatives.The existence of a political cartel within a nation can weaken the country in several ways, primarily by undermining democratic principles, reducing political competition, fostering corruption, and stifling policy innovation. Political cartels reduce genuine political competition by colluding to maintain power and exclude new or smaller parties. This undermines the democratic process, as voters are presented with limited choices, often leading to voter apathy and reduced participation in elections. As political cartels entrench their power, they may weaken institutions like the judiciary, electoral commissions, and the media to ensure their dominance. This erosion of checks and balances can lead to authoritarianism or the consolidation of power in the hands of a few elites. In Russia, the dominance of the United Russia party, along with its collaboration with other political entities, has led to a reduction in meaningful political competition and criticism that the country has shifted towards authoritarianism.With power concentrated among a few parties or leaders, political cartels often create environments where corruption can thrive. The lack of competition and oversight enables cartel members to engage in corrupt practices, such as embezzlement, bribery, and patronage, with little fear of being held accountable. Political cartels can manipulate state resources, government contracts, and public services to benefit their members, often at the expense of the general public. This lack of transparency and accountability can lead to widespread corruption, weakening the effectiveness and legitimacy of the government. In many African countries, political cartels have been associated with high levels of corruption, where ruling elites use state resources for personal gain, undermining development and governance.Political cartels often resist reforms that could threaten their dominance, even if those reforms are necessary for economic or social progress. This resistance can lead to policy stagnation, where the government fails to address pressing issues like economic inequality, healthcare, or education. The lack of competition and fresh perspectives within a political cartel can result in a government that is slow to adapt to new challenges, such as technological changes, environmental crises, or shifting global dynamics. This can weaken the nation’s ability to remain competitive and resilient in a rapidly changing world. In Italy, the dominance of certain political parties in the post-war period led to policy stagnation, contributing to economic challenges and a lack of innovation in addressing new societal needs.When citizens perceive that their political system is dominated by a cartel that prioritizes its own interests over the public good, they may lose trust in the government. This disillusionment can lead to decreased voter turnout, increased cynicism, and a sense of powerlessness among the electorate. The perception that political elites are colluding to maintain power can also fuel the rise of populist or extremist movements, which capitalize on public anger and frustration. These movements can further destabilize the nation, leading to social unrest and political polarization. In many Latin American countries, public disillusionment with political cartels has contributed to the rise of populist leaders who promise to break the hold of entrenched elites, sometimes leading to further instability.Political cartels often prioritize their own interests over sound economic management, leading to inefficient allocation of resources. This can result in economic mismanagement, where resources are directed towards projects that benefit the cartel rather than the broader economy, leading to slower economic growth or even economic crises. The existence of a political cartel can discourage foreign investment, as investors may perceive the country as politically unstable or corrupt. This can weaken the nation’s economy by reducing opportunities for growth, job creation, and technological advancement. In Zimbabwe, the dominance of political elites and their control over economic resources has led to economic decline, hyperinflation, and reduced foreign investment, weakening the nation significantly.Political cartels can exacerbate social, ethnic, or regional divisions by using identity politics to maintain their power. By favouring certain groups or regions, they can deepen social cleavages, leading to increased tension and potential conflict. When political cartels exclude certain groups from power, these marginalized groups may feel alienated and disenfranchised. This can lead to social unrest, protests, or even insurgencies, further weakening the nation’s stability. In Nigeria, political cartels often align with ethnic or regional groups, exacerbating tensions between different communities and contributing to ongoing conflicts and instability.Citizens can play a crucial role in countering political cartels by engaging in various activities that promote transparency, accountability, and democratic governance. They can actively participate in exercising the right to vote in elections. By voting for candidates and parties that prioritize transparency and accountability, citizens can influence the political landscape. Educating themselves and others about the political system, the dangers of political cartels, and the importance of democratic principles can empower citizens to make informed decisions.Engaging with or supporting NGOs and advocacy groups that work on issues like anti-corruption, human rights, and electoral reforms can amplify citizens' voices and hold political leaders accountable. Attending town hall meetings, public forums, and debates allows citizens to voice their concerns, ask questions, and hold politicians accountable for their actions. Joining political parties and advocating for internal democracy and transparency can help reform parties from within.Leveraging social media platforms to raise awareness, share information, and mobilize support for democratic reforms can create a powerful collective voice. Actively monitoring government activities and reporting instances of corruption to relevant authorities or watchdog organizations can help curb corrupt practices. Encouraging and supporting independent journalism that investigates and reports on political corruption and cartel behaviour can help keep the public informed and hold leaders accountable.By taking these actions, citizens can contribute to a more transparent, accountable, and democratic political system.Several countries have successfully addressed challenges related to political cartels and similar issues. While Mexico still faces significant challenges with drug cartels, there have been efforts to reform political and law enforcement systems. For instance, the introduction of the National Anti-Corruption System in 2016 aimed to create a more transparent and accountable government.South Korea has made strides in combating political corruption through the establishment of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC). This body has been instrumental in promoting transparency and accountability in government.Italy has a long history of dealing with organized crime and political corruption. The establishment of the Anti-Mafia Directorate and the implementation of stringent anti-corruption laws have helped reduce the influence of criminal organizations in politics.These examples show that while the process can be challenging, it is possible to make significant progress through comprehensive reforms and strong institutional frameworks.Indonesia can draw several valuable lessons from the experiences of countries like Mexico, South Korea, and Italy in overcoming political cartels and corruption. Raising public awareness about the dangers of political cartels and the importance of democratic principles can empower citizens to demand better governance. Educational campaigns and civic education programs can play a crucial role in this. Ensuring that law enforcement agencies are free from political influence and capable of independently investigating and prosecuting corruption cases is essential. This includes providing adequate training and resources to law enforcement personnel. Collaborating with international organizations and other countries to share best practices and receive support in implementing anti-corruption measures can enhance Indonesia's efforts. By learning from these examples, Indonesia can develop a more robust and effective strategy to counter political cartels and promote good governance.In summary, a political cartel can weaken a nation by undermining democratic principles, fostering corruption, stifling policy innovation, causing public disillusionment, leading to economic mismanagement, and undermining social cohesion. These factors collectively erode the nation's ability to govern effectively, respond to challenges, and maintain social stability.Our discussion on political turmoil rages on, biidhnillah."Afterwards, Cattleya captivates us with a poem about the shadowy world of political cartels,In shadows deep, they weave their schemes,A web of power, built on dreams.Voices silenced, truth concealed,In the cartel’s grip, the fate is sealed.
Citations & References:
- Fabrizio Saccomanni, Managing International Financial Instability: National Tamers versus Global Tigers, 2008,Edward Elgar
- Robert O. Paxton, What is Fascism?: From the Anatomy of Fascism, 2004, Vontagebooks
- Richard S. Katz & Peter Mair, Democracy and the Cartelization of Political Parties, 2018, Oxford University Press
- Hans Keman & Ferdinand Muller-Rommel (Eds.), Party Government in the New Europe, 2012, Routledge
