Map Of the Ideological Shift of Political Party in Indonesia (Special reference to Legislative elections of 2004, 2009, 2014 and 2019)

Map Of the Ideological Shift of Political Party in Indonesia
(Special reference to Legislative elections of 2004, 2009, 2014 and 2019)

Sri  Zul Chairiyah, Riko Riyanda
Faculty of Social and Political Science, Padjadjaran University, Indonesia 

 Introduction                          

     Political parties have an important role in the political system. Its functions such as political recruitment, political aggregation, education politics and political socialization have been positioned in the basic structure of the democratic system. According to Nina Andriana, [1]In the era of reformation of almost all political parties in Indonesia was born accidentally without good preparation, it just becomes an expression of the power of the political elite above him, so that political parties do not have their own ideology or even identity. According to Firmanzah,[2] ideology is the identity of a political party that helps voters in determining their alignment. Added by Firmanzah, that on the side voting community, the clarity of the value system and understanding will make it easier for them to identify and distinguish one party from another, on the other hand own political party, this also makes it easier for positioning and packaging the language communication to be conveyed to their target voters.   In this sense ideology is very important as a guide for party actionpolitics and as a benchmark for voters to assess how far the political elite is fulfill his promise during the campaign is Firmanzah’s book review which discusses about how to manage a political party by using ideology and good communication to constituencies.  The ideological battle stopped when New Order came to power. The New Order’s deideology was based on the assumption that ideology was the cause of political instability. Deideology led to the establishment of Pancasila as the only principle in life society, nation and state. The implication is that political parties are actually allowed to have an ideology that does not conflict with Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. However, many parties identify their ideology as Pancasila. In the end, the problem of party ideology emerged. Especially regarding the weak function of ideology within the party. The function of ideology as a mass base puller or in a representative system known as a bridge between representatives and their constituents is not optimal. This has been going on since the reform elections in 1999 until 2019. Understanding of ideology with party principles among party officials is very minimal and weak, they consider party ideology to also mean the principle of political parties, between the two there is almost no difference.   In every country or political system that wants to be based on democracy, two institutions that must exist are political parties and elections. In terms of its ideological mission, as a formal institution, a political party has a function to systematize political interests and aspirations in line with its ideology, to carry out ideologicalization (guidance, education, debriefing, regeneration) to perpetuate the political ideology that became the background for the founding of the party. In this case, political parties have the obligation to accommodate the political aspirations of the people that are in line with their ideology, this can be understood as an articulation of interests which is a function of political parties that must be carried out by every political party to find out the political aspirations of the community, which then political parties provide political education for people who are in line with party ideology. This is where the relationship between the political ideology of political parties with the function of political parties. Political ideology owned by political parties will be implemented in every election that takes place. In this case, the role of political ideology from political parties is very important in relation to society as a society voters, where he will choose a political party with an ideology that is in line with people’s minds. During the 5 times the reform election, starting from the 1999 election to 2019, the political parties that always won the sympathy of voters were Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP), Working Group Party  (Golkar)  and United Development Party (PPP). However, political parties with Islamic ideology always change and even experience setbacks, for the next election where at the beginning of the reformation National Mandate Party (PAN) emerged as representing Islamic ideology, rivaling United Development Party  (PPP), and many more political parties with Islamic ideology, namely Star Moon Party (PBR), National Awakening Party (PKB), Prosperous Justice Party  (PKS) which was previously called the Justice Party in the general election. 1999 and changed its name in the 2004 election to the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS). In the 1999 general election, PDIP won, and Golkar won the second place. However, in the 2004 election, Golkar replaced the position of PDIP and won. Furthermore, until the last election, the 2 political parties won, except in the 2009 election, the democratic party emerged victorious, but PDIP and Golkar remained the second and third winners. In this case, it means that from the 5 reform elections there are 2 political parties that are quite stable, namely PDIP and Golkar and a political party with the Islamic ideology PKS, but one political party emerged, namely Gerindra which is a splinter from the Golkar party which also represents the nationalist ideology in the 2019 elections. description of political parties during the reformation period, each of which represents their political ideology, namely nationalist, marhaen/nationality and Islam. A description of the political ideology of the political party that you want to research to see the map and the shift in the ideology of political parties from each election that has taken place during the reformation period.  The map of political alliances in Indonesia has changed since after the 2014 Presidential Election. Coalitions of political parties have changed, political parties which were originally opposed to the government, some have turned into parties supporting the government. The phenomenon after the 2014 Presidential Election at least shows the occurrence of political pragmatism which is marked by an identity crisis, and the blurring of the ideology of political parties in Indonesia. The purpose of this research is to map the ideology of political parties and see the shift of political party ideology in the four reform era elections that have taken place, where this type of study is descriptive research. So in this case the research title is “Maps and Shifts in Political Party Ideology in Elections in Indonesia (A Study of Political Analysis 4 Elections 2004-2019)” Research Question As explained in the summary, the introduction that this research originated from the symptoms that occurred since the beginning of the New Order government had occurred de-ideologization in political parties. Based on law number 2 of 2011 concerning political parties it is stated in article 9 paragraphs 1 and 2 that the principles and characteristics of political parties may not conflict with Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. The implication is that political parties are actually allowed to have an ideology that does not conflict with Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. However, many parties identify their ideology as Pancasila. Subsequent developments regarding political ideology in political parties began to be seen since the reformation election, namely from the 2004 election to the 2019 election, of the 4 elections that prominently represented political ideology namely nationalism, marhaeniesm and Islam, it was represented by 3 political parties namely PDIP, Golkar and PKS. Based on the description above, what will be studied is or will be tried to be understood, namely the map of shifts in political ideology during the 4 post-New Order elections in each election result at the national level. The main substance in this research is to know the ideology of the political parties participating in the 2004, 2009, 2014 and 2019  general elections for four periods  Legislative elections in Indonesia?  Theoritical Framework

Political  Ideology

Political ideology is a political theory that belongs to the categorization of theories that have value/normative characteristics/valuetional theory. The term ideology seems to have emerged from theorists and ideologies in the post-enlightenment era who interpreted it as “science of ideas”. For them ideology is a way of discovering truth and dispelling illusions. Ideology is more of a set of logically related ideas.

Joseph La Palombara defines ideology as a set of values, beliefs, hopes and certain descriptions of society. According to Miriam Budiardjo, political ideology is a set of values, ideas or norms, beliefs or beliefs that are owned by a person or group of people on the basis of which he determines his attitude towards the events and political problems he faces and which determines his political behavior. Political ideology which contains values and ideas frames a person’s way of thinking and political behavior which is then used to drive activities and actions. According to Macridis, some of the functions of political ideology are:

1. Functions in general political ideology as a set of ideas and beliefs shared by a number of people or groups of people determines what is valuable and what is not, what is maintained and what must be changed, of course shapes thoughts, behaviors and actions political actions of groups of people who adhere to the political ideology. In other words, besides provoking ideology, it also provides the basic framework for these political actions.
2. Specific functions in this case, political ideology has several functions, namely:
3. Providing legitimacy (legal / legal)
4. Means of mobilizing and forming solidarity
5. Shows the importance of leaders to manipulate (mastermind) the messages to be conveyed
6. Means of communication and expression
7. As a basis for political action

Splits Of Indonesian Ideology[3]

Kevin Evans divides Indonesian ideology into 2 spectrums, namely:

1. Left-Right

The term Left-Right in Indonesia is not synonymous with Socialist and Capitalist like in the west but is more focused on Left (Secular) and Right (Islamist). At the far left of the spectrum is placed the Indonesian Communist Party and various other leftist groups, including those who are aggressively opposing any recognition or granting of a special position to Islam (or any religion) in Indonesia. On the right is occupied by Islamic parties that support the transformation of Indonesia so that it becomes the Islamic Republic of Indonesia.

2. Top-Down

Top-bottom is identified with the elitists and populists. according to the elitists, personal loyalty and identification with the party’s national leadership were considered less important, than attachment to a political process or policy position. These people try to judge their leaders and parties more often by their actions and policies than by symbolic behavior. They also tend to have a more internationalist vision in their approach to actively addressing issues.

For those at the bottom, the relationship with the national leader of his party needs to be more emotional and even mystical through his own local leadership network.

Chart 1. Ideological Divide  Lines Between Political  Parties  In Indonesia

The issue of ideology for political parties is very crucial considering that with the existence of ideology, political parties will be able to uphold the promises they make to society, he gives not to happiness when he is able to give something to others. Affirmation of its ideological mission, as a formal political party institution has a function to systematize political interests and aspirations in line with its ideology, carry out ideologicalization (coaching, education, debriefing, regeneration) to perpetuate political ideology which is the background for the establishment of parties, produce quality leaders and national vision, and continuously produce political programs.

Ideological Distance

An Italian political scientist named Giovanni Sartori in Ramlan Surbakti,[4] has a different opinion about the party system, that it is not a matter of the number of parties, but rather the ideological distance between the existing parties. According to him, the classification of party systems is based on the poles (Polar), the distance between the poles (Polarity), and the direction of political behavior. Furthermore, Sartori classifies the party system into 3 = three, namely simple pluralism, moderate pluralism, and extreme pluralism.

Partnership System According To Sartori[5]

Bipolar is the actual activity of a party system that is based on two poles, even though the number of parties is more than two because this party system does not have sharp ideological differences. Multipolar is a party system that is based on more than two poles which usually consist of more than two parties and between the poles there are sharp ideological differences. However, what is important is not only the number of poles but also the distance between them. The great polarization is the ideological distance between the extreme poles, one with the left ideology (communism), the other with the right ideology (capitalism). In other words, the ideological differences between parties are sharp. This large polarization is an indicator showing the absence of a basic consensus on the principles and goals of the society – the country to aim for. In this case, it is necessary to pay attention to the direction of political behavior in each party whether towards the center or towards national integration (centripetal) or away from the center or want to develop a separate system (centrifugal). If the trend towards party behavior is away from the center, this symptom is referred to as a process of radicalization which will result in unresolved divisions. On the other hand, if the tendency towards party behavior is towards the center (national integration) this phenomenon is called depolarization which in turn will reach a basic consensus.

Literature ReviewIn this connection, it will be explained first that there have been observers who have previously studied the political ideology practiced in every political party. The study of ideological mapping of political parties in Indonesia, it is fitting to refer to the works of previous figures, such as Herbert Feith and Lance. Castle, Kevin Raymond Evans, who presents an overview and scheme of the ideological mapping of political parties in Indonesia.               Asep Nurjaman, who raised the theme of his research on the New Map of Political Party Ideology in Indonesia, in particular, grouped the ideologies of political parties participating in the 2004 election into 4 categories, namely Islam, Religious Nationalist, Secular Nationalist and Christian[6]. As previously explained, political ideology can be traced from various thoughts that have been put forward both by political circles and from theoretical circles. Among them is Soekarno’s thought which mapped the ideology of political parties in the Nationalist, Religious and Communist (Nasakom) groups, while from academic circles, namely Herbert Feith and Castles[7],  4 mapped political ideology in five streams in the political thought of the Radical Nationalist (PNI) group, Javanese Traditionalism ( PNI-PKI-NU), Islam (NU, Masyumi), Democratic Socialism (PNI-Masyumi) and Communism (PKI).Husin M. Al-Banjari as one of the research team has also conducted a thesis research[8], on the role of political ideology in the process of forming coalitions of political parties (Case Study on Regional Head General Elections in West Java 2005-2008 Period).Sri Zul Chairiyah, researched the Ideological Maps of Supporting Political Parties in 3 Regional Elections for the Governor of West Sumatra, namely 2005, 2010 and 2015 (A Comparative Analysis of Politics).[9] The conclusion from this research is that the maps of the political ideology of the political parties in the three regional elections revolve around Nationalist ideology and Islamic ideology. Political parties with Islamic ideology such as PKS, PBB and PBR while political parties with Nationalist ideology such as PDIP, Gerindra, Hanura. Furthermore, Bambang Hermanto’s research[10].This article analyzes the ideological positioning of political parties in the formation of the Adil Makmur Coalition in the 2019 Presidential Election. The conclusion of the research results is that ideology cannot be used as a preference for political party coalitions in absolute terms. Because it is proven that the composition of the coalition is not always formed on the basis of ideology. This explains that the formation of coalitions is the basis of non-ideological or office-seeking political interests to gain a share of power. Yeby Ma’asan Mayrudin,[11] with his research title Dynamics of Political Parties and Positioning of Idea in the 2014 Election, the party system in Indonesia is still modeled on extreme pluralism, characterized by 12 political parties participating in the national elections and 3 local parties in Aceh. Based on the results of the mapping, it can be explained that there are 3 forms of division of political parties by looking at the ideological distance and ideological positioning of Left (Nationalist-Secular), Right (Islamic), and Center (Catch-Al Party).The same ideology should be the main factor for a political party to form a political coalition during regional elections, so that it is possible for the coalition political parties to have the same vision and mission and make it easier later in the process of making policy programs. But in fact, political parties with Islamic ideology do not form coalitions with each other because they do not have exemplary figures. The reason is because so far political parties do not have good cadres who can be nominated. The parties that grew after the reformation showed a typology of forms that were not clear between the two poles. Acting more as a pragmatic party than an ideological party.

RESEARCH FRAMEWORK

TITLE

Map Of the Ideological Shift of Political Party in Indonesia

(Special reference to Legislative elections of 2004, 2009, 2014 and 2019)

Research Methods

This research is about shifts in political party ideology in legislative elections in the four national election periods in Indonesia. This research is descriptive in nature and uses a qualitative approach[12] Where the implementation uses library research to collect references and secondary data. The library method is a type of qualitative research method whose location and place of research is carried out in libraries, documents, archives and other sources. This literature study research is a study in which the object is sought with various library information, from various sources that do not require observation or interviews in collecting data. The meaning of qualitative research is research that aims to explain and understand phenomena that are understood by research subjects. This research is also presented descriptively with the technical scientific method used also in the form of analytical data presentation steps.

Results And Analysis

A Reflection Of Political Parties That Have An Ideology

The ideology of political parties can also be observed in non-organizational or individual matters such as how to dress, body language and functionalist character of the party, as well as the candidates to be run. Ideological political parties are reflected in the following matters:[13]

Vision and Mission of Political Parties Political parties.

The vision and mission of political parties established to facilitate the political interests of a community group so as to provide institutional clarity for their struggles and aspirations. So the establishment of a political party is preceded by a clear vision of why a political party was formed. This vision statement is also related to the values and ideology that he adheres to and provides the basis for his struggle. While the mission of the party is the short term goals and long term goals of political parties.

This method is possible as long as the parties to be invited to coalition are consistent with the ideology of political parties which invite coalitions and do not only pursue practical goals, namely winning elections. Regarding political coalitions, countries that use a multi-party system tend to build coalitions in forming a government. The political coalitions that tend to be built are based more on similarities in political interests, political ideology, and similarities in political policies or political programs. The political ideology of political ideological parties is also reflected in the policies of political parties, both internal and external.

Political Party Platforms

The party’s platform on national issues is an important benchmark in the implementation of party ideology. The way a political party views, analyzes, and proposes solutions to various national problems reflects the ideology it adheres to. For example, if the political party has a capitalist orientation, they tend to provide solutions in terms of lowering taxes and reducing government interference in the economy. Meanwhile, when political parties are socialist, the programs they propose will tend to increase taxes, income distribution and increase government interference in the economic sector.

Fundamental differences concerning the direction of political party policies are very clearly determined by the political ideology adhered to by each political party. Meanwhile political party policies are also carried out internally. For example, in the preparation of the reword and punishment system for political parties. The way political parties give awards to party elites who excel and punish functionaries or party elites who make mistakes is the implementation of the ideology they adhere to.

Meanwhile, the regeneration system follows the political ideology prevailing in the political party concerned. For example, if the party’s ideology is development, the regeneration that is carried out is to instill a spirit of development in all aspects of life. This relates to general guidelines and an outline of party policy directions in their contribution to the problems of the nation and state. This relates to work programs and political issues.

The platform of a party can also be referred to as enthusiasm and commitment in contributing to the problems of the nation and state, besides that it is also related to matters that are fundamental and a priority for political struggle, the platform is also related to the goals and basic principles of the political party concerned. For example, PKS makes Islamic principles as party principles. PKS aims to create a just and prosperous society that is blessed by Allah SWT, and based on Pancasila. Whereas the Democratic party has a democratic nationalist party platform, this is reflected in the statement on the party principle which clearly states that the Democratic Party is based on Pancasila. The goal of the Democratic party is to realize people’s participation in determining the course of a government that is modern and has a religious nationalist spirit in order to build a new Indonesia that is peaceful, democratic and prosperous.

While related to political issues, it must depart from the problems that exist in society. Political issues are topics and discussions that reflect current issues being faced by society. The logical consequence is that political parties must continuously update data and information about the conditions faced by the community. Political parties are expected to play an active role in analyzing various actual problems that occur in society and provide alternative solutions or resolve problems faced by society.

The Ideology Of Political Parties Is Not Rooted In Every Elections

Ideology is a very important thing for all institutions including political party institutions. Ideology determines the identity of political parties. Ideology is a reflection that political parties are not only a tool of power, but more than that, namely as a guide to achieving the goals of the nation and state. Ideology in the history of the development of political parties in Indonesia has experienced an ideological crisis in the dynamics of political parties. It has been recorded in history since Indonesia’s independence until after the reformation that the ideological crisis has continued to be inconsistent with the statutes of political parties (AD ART Parpol)[14]

During the Guided Democracy era, political ideological power struggles, both Islamic and Nationalist, were intentionally “banged against” who had the most power to run the Indonesian government. The ideological dichotomy of political parties which are considered to be opposites and different points of view have led to unavoidable divisions between political parties, both Nationalist parties and Islamic parties have their own way to reach power and win the election for the first time.

Then continued during the New Order era, there was ideological indoctrination carried out by Suharto which did not reflect the true nature of democracy. The ideology of Pancasila democracy pursued by Suharto is a legitimacy way to perpetuate and maintain the “status quo” (power) as long as possible without any democratization practices. Then even this ideological crisis continued after the reformation, the battle of political parties both electorally and in a complex political system apparently only put forward things that were symbolic and artificial in nature.

Criticism between elites, the movement of party cadres and the death of political parties is not merely an ideological-philosophical political struggle. Politics is degraded into a commodity between elites and elites and society. The party’s ideology should naturally become a guideline for party cadres. Ideology determines the identity of the party, understands the party’s way of thinking and how the party should behave. Officially, the party’s ideology can be seen from the party’s statutes. Although this ideology should also be seen from the political activities carried out by political parties. But often written ideology is not in line with the activities of members of political parties.

Political parties in Indonesia in terms of post-New Order policies and ideology are almost difficult to distinguish one party from another. Broadly speaking, the Indonesian political parties that pass the electoral threshold have Islamic and non-Islamic political parties, but these ideologies really have nothing to do with programs and areas of social policy and public interest.

The researcher quotes from his opinion Giovanni Sartori, 21 a political scientist from Italy, formulates a party system on the criteria of the number of poles (polarity), the distance between the polarities (polarity), and the direction of encouragement of political interaction. Sartori divides three models, namely simple pluralism, moderate pluralism, and extreme pluralism. Referring to Sartori’s view, Indonesia has an extreme pluralism system, because it has many poles or systems of many parties that are far apart and contradictory, highly polarized (left pole: socialist, right pole: Islam and Christianity, democracy and radicalism, middle pole: nationalist). , and encouragement of centrifugal political activity (away from the center).

Unfortunately, the political facts in Indonesia that took place were not the same as Sartori’s predictions. Even though in Indonesia there are many parties which are feared that there will be violent clashes due to ideological differences, all the parties that exist today are almost uniform in their pattern of ideological tendencies. Their jargon in every election is relatively the same, namely people’s economy, democracy and religion. This is in stark contrast to the categorization of party ideology during the New Order era. The three-party diffusion has provided a certain ideological style that is identical to each party.

The reality of pragmatic ideology experienced by almost all parties is exacerbated by the enactment of an open election mechanism. The tendency of the figure that is carried is very influential on the election of the party. So, it is a logical consequence if in every election there are popular figures who are not party cadres drawn to gain votes. Artists, artists, athletes or anyone who is considered to have popularity can get a recommendation from the party to run as a candidate for legislature or even President.

In fact, the above is not a violation, but the recruitment and regeneration as a normative function of the party is neglected. Put it suddenly before the election many political parties apply for famous figures to be carried without going through a long cadre process beforehand. Apart from that, this could injure the cadre of the party itself. Imagine, on the basis of donations to the party, many business people suddenly hold strategic positions in the party structure.

Pragmatism is an ideology adhered to by our political elite. This is in line with Lopalombara and Weiner’s expression which defines a party as a group of human beings who are organized in a stable manner with the aim of seizing and maintaining power in government for material leaders and ideals for its members. The two scientists ignore the ideological factor as the motivation and unifier of a party. It is also possible that this opinion was influenced by views in the west at that time that ideology was dead.[15]

Geovani Sartori’s opinion was also reinforced by a political scientist named Dan Slater and Kuskridho Ambardi who argued that Indonesian politics was dominated by cartels. The meaning of a cartel here is where a party is characterized by a shared desire to share office rations (spoil of office). The party is no longer focused on ideology or policies that are in accordance with the original objectives of the party’s establishment. As a result, Indonesian parties are very open to forging vast “rainbow coalitions”. Ideologically diverse, and consists of Islamic and non-Islamic parties.[16]

The same thing was also expressed by Eep Saefullah Fatah. He revealed that in the four elections that had been held by the KPU from 2004 to 2019 according to researchers the effectiveness of political parties tended to be irresponsible and not responsive to their constituents. Eep Saefulloh Fatah stated that four bad behaviors of political parties as an institution seem easy to observe, namely: no ideology, no identity, personalistic and tend to be oligarchic types, and non-constituents,[17]

First, non-ideology. The party seems to have no ideological symptoms except pragmatism. Throughout the New Order era, ideology was suppressed. After Suharto’s death, ideology did not necessarily grow. In general, the parties in the reform era were almost uniform, in fact parties chose to try to be uniform, this symptom began to be seen from the 2009 election to the 2019 election.

For example, the National Mandate Party (PAN), the National Awakening Party (PKB), the United Development Party (PPP) self-consciously declared to be an open party for the homes of various groups in society. PKS, which initially had a base from Islamic circles, eventually expressed the idea of becoming an open party or “PKS for all” on the grounds that PKS is a party that upholds plurality (diversity). What Islamic parties are doing by becoming open parties and targeting the voter segment from any circle is more to political marketing (electoral achievements). Targets of Islamic parties pass the threshold in parliament.

The same situation also occurs with the Democratic party which simultaneously claims to be a party for all. These political parties follow more electoral logic by becoming parties that target a wider segment of voters (catch all parties), so that the reach of the voter market will be statistically larger. In relation to the ideology of political parties, what happens to these political parties is more of an electoral issue, the ideology attached to political parties is no longer the identity of the party’s struggle to gain votes.

Islamic ideology becomes blurred or vague if it becomes a more open party. This dynamic was evident from the 2009 election to the 2019 election. As another example, non-Muslim citizens who register candidates from the PAN party are still accepted by the party in order to gain votes from other segments of voters, even though they have different religions. In other words, ideology has shifted from what originally characterized the identity of an Islamic party, to now leading to an open party that is open to any group.

Second, non-identity. Our parties in this reformation era, almost without exception, have not had the firm orientation of 1999 until now. All political parties, trying to deal with everything, cover all dimensions of the problem. They are not interested in sharpening their political orientation and programs to problem sectors, or specific issues that live in society. Consequently, physically we have many parties, but it is difficult to distinguish one political identity from another. Almost all the parties without identity also failed to represent the diverse aspirations of the voting public. They float because they address various issues without a platform.

This situation is exacerbated by the abstention from political parties in fighting for issues related to efforts to eradicate corruption. Instead of strengthening the Corruption Eradication Committee, it appears to weaken the KPK’s work by making a second amendment to Law Number 30 of 2002 concerning the Commission for Corruption Crimes to become Law Number 19 of 2019. The presence of this law seems to show that parties are not in accordance with the party’s platform, namely eradicating corruption to its roots.

The party no longer represents the people’s voice but the party only represents the voice of the faction. The same thing happened with the issuance of Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation on October 5 by the DPR. The law does not involve public participation in the drafting process. With the size of the coalition that exists in parliament today, cartel politics is more dominant than politics which interprets equality, fairness, distribution and people’s prosperity.

Third, the personalistic type and tends to be oligarchic. Currently, there are only two types of party in Indonesia, namely the progmatic type and the personalistic type. The progmatic type focuses on program activities carried out by the candidate, such as: Programmatic type which focuses on the program activities carried out by the candidate, such as: Golkar Party, PKS. While the personalistic type is a party that relies on strong patronage with leaders who are considered charismatic, such as: PDI Perjuangan, PAN, PKB, Gerindra, Hanura, Democratic Party, Nasdem Party, Berkarya Party, PPP, Garuda Party, PKPI, Perindo Party, and the Crescent Star Party. Even so, in general political parties persist in the character of oligarchic leadership and organization.

The center of power grew around a few main elites at the top of the party organization, making it difficult to implement a party autonomy system. Interests in the hands of a handful of parties, this is a reality of party oligarchs. In fact, of course, populist aspirations from the grassroots are often difficult to convert into party policies. This shows that normatively political parties are indeed the place for every cadre to work, but in real politics, political parties are the world of elites with autocratic characteristics.

In that sense, it is not surprising then that various political events within the party and outside the party, whether in the form of conflicts or consensus and big celebration events organized by political parties, are more determined by exclusive forces behind the scenes originating from the aspirations of the elites. In fact, the involvement of the masses and cadres is actually only superficial. Nothing more than cheerleaders and give legitimacy to the will of the elite.

We can see from the process of nominating regional heads that in the end the final decision rests with the elite group. Blessings and recommendations from the chairpersons of political parties are a must for regional head candidates. In fact, the blessing must be obtained by paying a “dowry” to the candidate in order to get a ticket from the bearer’s party. This means that the current party oligarchic command system does not reflect party autonomy at all. The ideology that should provide opportunities for cadres who have the capability and capacity is hindered by a group of elites who have an interest in the candidates they are promoting in the regional elections in various regions.

Fourth, the main thing, non-constituents. In general, most parties approach the public when they need votes in elections. Political parties approach when they need voters and immediately move away and then disappear as soon as their needs are successfully (or failed) met. Reform actually provides an opportunity for political parties to raise and maintain constituents. However, when constituents feel abandoned by political parties, it seems that there is no special bond between political parties and constituents.

From the point of view of the constituents, the relationship between parties and elections is adhoc (temporary) and disbands after the elections. This shows that the substance of the election only takes place in a matter of eight hours (07-00-13.00), after the quick count is finished, the people’s relationship with political parties and the representatives they are expected to represent them are released. As a consequence, the relationship with constituent support is ultimately unstable, this situation influences the development of political parties, in which the direction of development is more influenced by external factors, such as: the mass media which controls public opinion and transactional political efforts (money politics) which are considered to be able to fulfill the demands and pragmatism needs of voters. Meanwhile, party ideology, programs, competencies and management have not had much influence on the direction of policy and party development.

However, along with the low degree of party ideology, it can be said that today’s political parties are nothing more than political vehicles for a group of elites who are in power or intend to satisfy their own ‘lust’ for power. Political parties only function as a tool for a handful of lucky people who have succeeded in winning the votes of the people who are easily fooled, to force the enactment of certain public policies ‘at the expense of the general will’ or the general interest.

Which essentially and substantially degrades the role and function of political parties to become a political commodity of the economic and political oligarchs. Political parties lose forms of expression of ideas, values and political paradigms that are philosophical and visionary. This is of course a contradiction with democratic efforts and the rich history of political ideology in Indonesia in the period 1920-1966.[18]

As a result, constituents have a negative perception of political parties, because it is only for the sake of the moment to raise the voice of political parties. This condition is understood by the political party community as merely imaging, and this is common in almost every electoral district. Constituents’ disappointment with political parties is unavoidable because many political parties then only make promises during elections but in practice make no real contribution to the interests of the people.

Political Party Ideology Is Still Based On Voters In Determining Their Vote In Elections

In an analysis, political ideology is the identity of political parties, with ideology attached to political parties helping voters to determine their political attitude or alignment with a political party. Like it or not, the way voters vote in elections is a complex process. It becomes a complicated matter to explain when the identity of each political party is like a “chameleon” which does not have a clear identity for each party. Because they don’t have color clarity, people can’t distinguish one party from another. This is because parties only focus on campaigns in the mass media, and use transactional politics which are considered the most effective in winning elections.

As a result of the behavior of political parties that are not clear in terms of political party identity, it affects the public to become apathetic, abstain or simplify the process of voting. In the end, people’s voting behavior is not too important in terms of political ideology, but voters are more likely to look at the figure or candidate that their party supports rather than choosing their political party.

However, not all political ideologies have no effect on the people in determining their political choices in general elections. This is because there are still groups of people who tend to be oriented towards the influence of party political ideology so that they provide voting support more based on political ideology desired by the competing political parties. This can be seen in various political parties in Indonesia using various political ideologies.

This can be seen in various political parties in Indonesia using various political ideologies. For example, in the 2019 elections the PDI-P (Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle) won because it has a nationalist, democratic and socialist political ideology. So that the basis of political support comes more from the segmentation of society with a socialist ideology, especially in Central Java. Meanwhile, the Gerindra Party, which received significant political support in second place, also uses nationalist, democratic and socialist political ideology based on supporters who are more oriented towards a society with a democratic and socialist ideology.

The same is true of PKB (National Awakening Party) and PAN (National Mandate Party) which use religious nationalist political ideology with the main support base being the Islamic community so that they gain significant votes in elections. Meanwhile, the PPP (United Development Party) with an Islamic nationalist ideology also received significant support in the elections. Party political ideology is a complex dimension, therefore a comprehensive approach is needed to analyze party political ideology. From the content aspect, for example, there are oration figures displayed, the vision and mission of political parties, party political strategies, party organizational structures, communication media, and political issues offered to the public.

“The Ideology Of Political Parties Shift Become More Pragmatic”

Ideally, the ideology of political parties can be observed in non-organizational or individual matters, such as how to dress, body language and the functionalist character of the party, as well as the candidates to be promoted. However, the problem of political parties in Indonesia today basically lies in the character of pragmatism which is getting stronger. The party is considered to have lost its ideological spirit, causing the policy directions advocated by the party to become poor in identity. The public and the electorate have difficulty distinguishing the party’s policy orientation because parties often respond to day-to-day national issues based solely on:

First, electoral interests, in which parties reject or support a policy based solely on vote counts in elections. The opposition party will always reject the ideas of the ruling party and vice versa. The ruling party will always oppose the opinion of the opposition party.

Second, political parties are faced with the problem of increasingly weak institutionalization. This is marked by the tendency to personalize political parties, the narrowing of some of the functions of political parties merely as political vehicles for candidates in direct Pilkada, problems with financial transparency, tend to persist in an oligarchic organizational structure where the circulation of party leadership revolves around the same figure, and the worst of it hijacked by a number of powerful businessmen as a means to achieve their personal interests. The institutional ideology of the party has not been strengthened.

Party identification at this time is sometimes inconsistent. For example: democrats who were born from a nationalist womb called themselves a religious nationalist party in the future, and this religious nationalist ideology was also used as a new jargon for democratic parties to claim that religious parties are the same as parties with Islamic ideology. The reason for giving a religious name, of course, has more intent and purpose for this party to approach the segment of the Muslim electorate more broadly and openly.

Then what happened to PKB which was synonymous with NU preferring to be called an open party, including for non-nahdiyin, PPP, PAN, PBB and even PKS also did the same thing. At the beginning of reform, we can still remember very well how these parties claimed to be parties that accepted anyone in their party. PAN, for example, openly recruits Chinese cadres, and even some of them are not Muslim. Most recently the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) appointed non-Muslim woman Evalina Heryanti as the PKS Expert Council. The joining of non-Muslim cadres shows evidence that PKS is a political party that is open to all children of the nation regardless of ethnicity or class. This is a strange situation because all this time PKS has been known as a party that is a fanatical voter towards Islam.

In terms of perspectives and policies which are the markers of an ideology of the clergy, there is no significant difference. Golkar, Democrats, and PDI-P did not show a different character when they took power. In fact, they claim to be on a different spectrum ideologically. The identity segment, which, although there are slices, is also partly divided, where the nationalist Golkar, religious nationalist democrats, and PDIP are the underprivileged parties (abangan, marhaen). Facing the burden of the state budget, for example, they are equally implementing reductions in subsidies, fuel and electricity. There is no significant difference when everything is in the circle of power control.

The Islamic party is also not really showing any new offers. Their Islamic identity has not been followed by fundamentally new policy offers from the point of view of substantive Islamic values, such as pro-justice, honesty, defending the common people and eradicating arbitrariness and corruption. Their Islamic advocacy is still focused on policies that are formalist in nature: producing sharia rules that boil down (again) to identity, such as the obligation to wear the headscarf, recite the Koran, not gamble, and not drink alcohol[19].

The implication of all this ideological stagnation is that voters do not find the comparative advantages of each party and have difficulty identifying the party that best represents their interests. Finally, personal closeness, social ties, and often also money through buying and selling votes determine where their support will go. But the party was not formed for that purpose. The formation of parties that originally existed as a forum for interests then shifted to widen the identification of the social pattern of society. The political goals then became very short term, namely the five-year power struggle, which originally was the struggle for resources for a handful of people, and not long term, namely strengthening the nation-state, empowering communities, fighting for justice, and protecting the underprivileged[20].

It is at this point that it becomes crucial to reaffirm the importance of ideology for the institutionalization of political parties. Ideology underlines ideas, not segments (identities). Ideology goes beyond the segment (identity). People can come from anywhere, any ethnicity, embrace any religion, bear a different set of identity attributes, but they can be bound together in the same big idea, which becomes a common goal and interest, which we call ideology.

As illustrated in almost every election, the choice of political parties tends to be “segmented” among political parties in Indonesia after the reform era rather than confirming their ideological style, the pattern of political parties that tend to be segmented is actually very unfavorable for long-term political goals, if the party wants to become a political party the big one.

The results of this segmented pattern of political parties are clearly illustrated by the votes acquired by the parties from time to time which have not experienced any significant changes. Golkar, Democrats and PDI-P continued to win, but the percentages were never really dominant, in the tens to twenty percent range. And the parties that passed their party’s parliamentary threshold were the same. New parties seem difficult to compete to pass the threshold. The data can be seen in the following table:

Legislative Election Results for the 2004 Period

Table.1.1

Configuration of parties that passed the parliamentary threshold

 in the 2004 election year and their political ideology

The election results, the number of political parties that won seats in the DPR decreased from 21 political parties to 16. However, the parties that passed the electoral threshold increased from six to seven, namely the Golkar Party, PDI-P, PKB, PPP, PAN, democrat and PKS.

Meanwhile, nine political parties, namely PBR, PDS, UN, PPDK, Pioneer party, PKPB, PDI Party, PKPI and Marhaenism Party, failed to cross the threshold. Meanwhile, eight other parties, namely the Regional Unity Party (PPD) PIB Party, PNBK, Pancasila Patriot Party, Social Democratic Labor Party (PBSD), Sarikat Indonesia Party, Freedom Party and PNUI Party, failed to cross the threshold and failed to win seats in House of Representatives.

The election law is Law no.12 of 2003 and the party law is Law no.31 of 2002[21].

Legislative Election Results for the 2009 Period

Table. 2

Configuration of parties that passed the parliamentary threshold

in the 2009 election year and their political ideology

           Source: Processed from Election Results From KPU Data

The Electoral Threshold was replaced with a Parliamentary Threshold of 2.5%. With this new threshold, parties that do not reach it do not need to join and change their names and symbols to take part in the next elections. Consequently, if they do not reach the threshold, they are willing not to sit in Senayan. However, apart from threshold transactions, the revision of the election law also contains other conspiracies. The 16 political parties discussing the revision of the Election Law agreed to insert a clause that all political parties that have seats in the DPR will automatically participate in the 2009 election. Thus, they no longer need to undergo verification at the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights or the KPU. This clause is in Article 316 letter d of Law No. 10 of 2008 concerning Elections[22].

The results of the election have an effect on the parliamentary threshold effect which drastically cuts down the political parties that enter Senayan. Only nine political parties can sit in the DPR. The number of political parties that won parliamentary seats was the lowest during the reform era.

Legislative Election Results for the 2014 Period

Table. 3

Configuration of parties that passed the parliamentary threshold

 in the 2014 election year and their political ideology

Legislative Election Results for the 2019 Period

Table. 4

Configuration of parties that pass the parliamentary threshold

The 2019 Election Year and Its Political Ideology

The social configuration of the party changes rapidly in order to secure the political market segment which is its target. The formation of this new segmentation explains the new pattern of parties, some of which at the beginning of the reform claimed to be open nationalist parties, but now tend to become more segmented. Gerindra and PAN are the most concrete examples. PAN is a party that initially declared itself open, including to non-Muslims. Likewise Gerindra, who identify themselves with nationalist circles, which in turn are closer to Islamist voters. Now, both PAN and Gerindra along with PKS, whether they realize it or not, are increasingly synonymous with Islamism, and also attack the ruling party with sectarian issues (religion, race, and foreignness) more often than with issues of unprofessional policies. people, for example environmental issues, land grabbing and unhealthy mining.

The party prioritizes pragmatism in the struggle for power. Political pragmatism is more about ensuring a secure position. In order to get a secure position, political parties follow religious issues that are good to be sold for mere imagery as if the party cares about intolerance and SARA. They talk a lot about religion because at this time, religion is being sold, for example talking about issues of radicalism and intolerance. Since the case of religious blasphemy that occurred during the 2007 Jakarta election, there are parties that gain and lose.

The party is fragmented with issues of religion and Pancasila, a perception appears as if religion is clashing with Pancasila. Islamic parties and nationalist parties try to enter as defenders and take advantage of religious issues. Issues that are viral and national trends are ultimately only short-term oriented and never consistent in fighting for the people, actors who are good at playing roles will get sympathizers and it could just be acting as if they are defenders of the people when in fact they are just a stage.

Judging from the point of view of voters, an unclear party ideology is also very detrimental. Voters cannot identify with certainty the programs and policies that best suit the political economic interests of voters. Voters also do not have many opportunities to ensure the consistency of political parties advocating for these programs and policies through people’s representatives who win seats in the representative council because the possibility of a turnaround is very large. The loss of political party identity because it relies solely on social identity and even if it has a relatively vague ideology, as a party’s political orientation, as discussed above, is certainly not good news for the process of maturing democracy and strengthening governance.[23]

Unclaimed  Political  Party  Ideology  In The  House Of  Representatives  Of  The  Republic  Of Indonesia  In The 2004-2019 Election

After we know how the strength of each party in the DPR RI, we will try to combine the strength of the party in the form of the number of seats held in parliament with the ideology that becomes the party’s platform. In this case we will try to report the model with the chart that was coined by Lijpart. Lijparth describes political parties based on the spectrum of ideology and vote acquisition, where parties are distinguished from the far left to the far right. As for the middle position, it is a party that has closeness to the two ideological poles.

This coalition process becomes a very important arena related to its various goals. In a simpler way, we can see from two approaches, coalition theory which focuses on ideological similarities and coalition theory on the basis of minimal winning (Ambardi, 2009). This ideological approach assumes that the importance of ideological similarities and party policies as a consideration in forming coalitions, politicians do not make power positions as the ultimate goal, but as a means to implement certain policies.[24]

The size of the coalition is not the main criterion in embracing or sidelining a party. Electoral links will materialize when the party’s ideological commitment campaigned before and during the election continues to color party decisions in selecting coalition partners. Swann: 1973 in ambardy). Then the second approach is the theory of minimal winning coalitions or minimal vote-based coalitions. The main logic of this approach is that forming coalitions is basically an effort to win competition based on quantity. Victory in parliament will be determined by a majority vote. In short, coalition participants will focus on the votes needed to win the battle in the legislative arena.[25]

After analyzing theoretical approaches to coalitions, the process of forming coalitions that took place in the DPR RI at the elite level, political parties in coalitions are on average power-oriented and victory-oriented rather than policy-oriented. This can be seen from the coalition process formed by parties that see more strength and victory orientation than the ideology of Islamic parties such as PKB and PPP, which have been around for a long time claiming to support Jokowi, while PKS will support Prabowo, recently PAN emerged. who also supported Prabowo.

For the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle this election is a very important moment to maintain victory. After winning the 1999 elections, in the 2004 elections and the 2009 elections the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle had to accept defeat. In the 2014 general election, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle won another victory in both the legislature and the executive by successfully reaching the position of president. The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle chose the candidate Joko Widodo whom he has successfully supported since becoming mayor of Surakarta, Governor of the Special Capital Region of Jakarta until becoming President in 2014.

For other nationalist parties such as Golkar, Nasdem, the Hanura party, Jokowi as the incumbent candidate is considered to have many conveniences to achieve victory. By continuing to support Jokowi, it will be easier for a series of interests to be realized. The Golkar Party, the Nasdem Party, and the Hanura Party also have cadres who serve as ministers. As a political party that is quite large with the power of seats and votes in elections that always compete with parties that win elections, the Golkar party should be able to nominate its own candidates or become a coalition leader, but because there are no strong enough candidates, the Golkar Party prefers to be with the ranks. PDI Perjuangan coalition.

The Islamic party that supports Jokowi is the National Awakening Party, PKB considers Islam as an ideology and is open to various differences. PKB presented itself as a Nahdiyin group party, but still respected differences in the 2019 presidential election, PKB had long prepared to become a vice presidential candidate.

The 2019 General Election left a story of political history in the journey of the Indonesian nation. The 2019 election also illustrates the existence of Islamic political parties. In the early era of reformation, many Islamic political parties emerged.

This is suspected due to several reasons, due to ideological factors which say that religion cannot be separated from politics, sociological factors in which the majority of Indonesian people are Muslims, historical factors in which the history of the nation’s struggle cannot be separated from the struggles of Islamic political parties, as well as reformation factors that provide wind fresh for the growth of Islamic political parties.[26]

Islamic political parties are thriving with various faces, some are trying to maintain the politics of sects, some are wanting to form a new face.[27] However, during these two candidates for the reform journey, have these Islamic political parties maintained their ideological lines in a big way? The coalition of political parties in the 2019 general election will provide an answer.

First, oriented victory. The motives of political parties in the 2019 election coalition are more motivated by victory than ideological and policy orientations. This can be seen from the coalition process carried out by political parties ahead of the election. Both Islamic political parties and nationalist political parties all talk about seat counts. How many seats do they have, and what seats will they get if the candidate wins. As for the discourse of an unconditional coalition, a coalition without sharing seats has not been realized, both the political parties taking shelter in the working Indonesia coalition and Indonesia Adil Makmur are both more oriented towards victory.

Second, the ideology of political parties is increasingly blurred. The luxury of ideology carried by political parties is increasingly blurred. Which party has an Islamic ideology, which party is increasingly burying the dreams of uniting Islamic political parties in one coalition. The community and voters are increasingly confused about channeling their ideology. In order to distinguish one political party from another, it is more about who the leader of the party figure is and who the party’s voter bases are.

Third, the electoral system and the blurring of the ideology of political parties, the existence of an election threshold and the increasing number of seats and the minimum number of votes required for political parties as a requirement for nominating presidential and vice-presidential candidates have not been effective in simplifying the number of political parties. Political parties responded to the requirement for a minimum number of votes and a minimum number of seats by building coalitions without considering ideology. As long as the minimum number of votes and seats are met, this coalition will immediately nominate its own candidate.

There is a difference in the coalition process carried out by all political parties, both Islamic-based political parties and political parties carried out by nationalist-based political parties. In forming coalitions, all political parties have a victory orientation that is stronger than ideology and policy orientation. The ideology of Islamic political parties is also increasingly blurred, the public looks more at who the general chairperson or party president is than what the party’s ideology is. The public will see who or what group is the party’s main voter rather than looking at party policies, the electoral system that works also influences the party’s ideological line.

Indonesian Civil Society Circle observer Ray Rangkuti thinks that there are no ideological political parties in Indonesia. On the other hand, Ray said that more parties show pragmatic political interests. The absence of a coalition between political parties is not merely due to ideological or DNA differences, but because they have not yet found a wedge of common political interests.

In line with what was conveyed by Ray Rangkuti, Political Observer M.Djadijono also expressed the same thing, based on the foregoing several conclusions can be drawn as follows[28]:

First, that the ideology supported and included in the Articles of Association of Political Parties does not function as a unifier for the elites in the political parties. This can be observed from the divisions that occurred in almost all political parties, including those with a certain religious ideology. The mindset and behavior patterns of the elites in the political parties do not seem to be fully demanded by and based on the ideology adhered to by the political parties concerned. This may be due to the fact that the definition of a political party is loaded with the content of seeking political power. Because of this, the political elites seem to be more concerned with seeking political power for themselves than fighting for the unity and unity of their organization.

Second, if the patterns of political behavior of the political party elites sitting in the DPR are examined, what is more visible is not the struggle to implement the principles or ideology of the party to be implemented into state policy for the greatest possible welfare of the people, but is more concerned with gaining position and personal and class benefits.

Third, the ideology adhered to and included in the Articles of Association of each political party is also not strictly practiced to manage relations between one political party and another. This can be seen from the cases of coalitions between political parties that have different principles or ideologies in the pairing of presidential and vice presidential candidates as well as pairs of regional head candidates. In other words, there has been a fluid ideological relationship between political parties. Once again this may be due to the diffusion of the political parties themselves namely: as a means of seeking political power.

This suggests that what appears to be used as the ideology of political parties in the practice of everyday political life is not the principle stated in the Statutes of each political party, each political power and possibly political advantages over one another. In other words, the ideology that dominates political parties is political pragmatism and perhaps indirectly also economic pragmatism.

Fourth, that the ideology practiced by political party elites in everyday political life does not appear to be to build a new world in the form of a political system that is democratic and in order, but is more concerned with gaining power and political position for themselves, their own groups and parties.

Fifth, it seems that cases like this are not the fault of anyone, nor is it the fault of the definition of political parties. But it seems that this is the practical political rationale for gaining and maintaining political power. However, what seems to need to be a collective reflection to be implemented in the future is that this position and political power can really be utilized for the welfare of the people. Because in a democratic political system, the source of political position and power is the people and therefore its use must truly benefit the people.

Causes Of  The  Shift  Of Political  Parties From Ideological  To A Catch-All Party

The phenomenon after the 2004 and 2009 elections at least shows the occurrence of political pragmatism which is marked by an identity crisis, and the blurring of the ideology of political parties in Indonesia. This made the direction of the party’s struggle unclear and it was difficult to distinguish one party from another. According to Macridis,[29] in such developing conditions, political parties become very pragmatic, because they no longer involve ideological issues. According to Macridis,[30] the strictness causes ideological factors or debates to erode and blur.

Apart from that, the meaning of the ideological basis that is increasingly fading by parties and/or their elites is because they are more focused on how to gain power and win elections. So that in a situation like this, according to Kirchheimer[31] there will be a shift phenomenon that underlies the party transformation process from an ideological party to a catch-all party. The birth of the catch-all party concept was actually based on Anthony Downs[32]‘s study of the perspective of rational behavior. He argues that the more modern a society is, the more it will prioritize the principles of pragmatism and rationality. Therefore, the presence of a catch-all party is to offer a program and general policy, not to offer ideological issues.

Therefore, the position and function of political parties underwent a fundamental change and diluted the tension between the “left camp” and the “right camp”. This party format also accepts pluralism, is inclusive and non-sectarian and prioritizes development horizontally, accommodates various issues and agendas from various groups in society[33]. Then the question that arises is whether the shift in ideological party positioning to a catch-all party form is a must?

In practice, shifts in the ideological positioning of parties receive sharp criticism. First, the

catch-all party’s conception of pragmatism and rationality that relies on the cost-benefit model (ibid) has created inconsistencies in party actions in programs and policies. The party concerned prioritizes its goal of winning every political contest. Coupled with Downs’ argument which states that a party and its elite must have policy flexibility to move left-right, in order to achieve maximum results[34] (Klingemann, 2000:41). In response to this, the public responded strongly to the attitudes of political parties and their elites.

The second criticism of the catch-all party form is the reduction of political party ideology. In this context, parties and their elites are allowed to engage in politics without plots, without ideological distortions42[35], and regardless of ideology (Klingemann, 2000:41.)[36]. Whereas ideology should be a code of conduct for parties, elites and their cadres[37]. Without an ideological basis, a party cannot make standards for interpretation and evaluation. If this happens, then the function of providing references to society should be carried out by the party as an institution, instead held by the elite as individuals. In the end, the catch-all party format actually gave birth to an undemocratic regime[38].

Shifts In Political  Ideology During The  Four  Election  Periods

Table. 5

Shifts and Positioning of Political Parties in Indonesia

From the table above, the authors see that the ideological maps of these parties are actually based on three ideological variations:

First, Pancasila (including the 1945 Constitution). Parties based on this are parties with the ideological line of Secular Nationalists. Parties that fall into this category are the Nasdem Party, PDI-Perjuangan, Gerindra, and PKPI.

Second, based on Islamic ideology, such as PKS, PBB, PPP, PKB and PAN. There are interesting things in mapping and identifying the ideology of PKB and PAN. Even though the two parties clearly state their ideology as Pancasila, they still base their distinctive religious values, as PKB in its AD/ART states that: “The principle of the Party’s struggle is devotion to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala. Upholding truth and honesty, upholding justice, maintaining unity, fostering brotherhood and togetherness in accordance with the Islamic values of Ahlussunnah Waljama’ah.” Meanwhile, PAN in its AD/ART states that “National Mandate Party is based on political morality based on religion which brings mercy to all of nature.” Therefore, the authors include PKB and PAN as Islamic political parties;

Third, the combination of the two (Pancasila and Islam) which is mentioned by the party in the AD/ART with the term Religious Nationalists. Parties in this category are Central parties or catch all parties, because in this format a party accepts pluralism, is inclusive, and is non-sectarian (Imawan, 2004:11.). The parties included in this category are the Democratic Party, the Golkar Party and the Hanura Party.

Based on the above mapping, the authors found three divisions of parties based on ideological distance and ideological positioning, namely “Left” (Nationalist-Secular), “Right” (Islamic) and “Central” (Cacth-all Party). See table below:

Table 6

Grouping Positioning of Political Parties

in the Republic of Indonesia’s House of Representatives

How To Grow A Mass-Programmatic Party

     In some literature on political parties, it is stated that there is an organizational development or evolution of political parties. Political scientists such as Maurice Duverger were probably the first to create a typology of political parties. Where in this typology political parties are divided into 2 (two) major streams. The first is an elite-centred party that relies on a unifying charismatic figure, who is imaged as the machine of this party, besides being elitist, it is also patronist as well as populist. The second is the mass-programmatic party, which grows and develops from mass social cohesion. The party belongs to a mass that is well organized both vertically and horizontally, and has an ideological and systemic work program[39].

In the practice of political culture oriented towards winning elections and controlling parliament, the first typology is more dominant. Elite-centred parties will evolve according to the political context of a country. Furthermore, it is this oligarchic political culture in this elite-centred party which then evolves into a catch-all party’, a party that does not have a clear political color, but is solely oriented towards attracting voters through political discourse on contemporary issues and short-term political interests. which is developing and getting attention in the public space. In the context of interest politics, a catch-all party’ is an effective political party.

Katz and Mair[40] in their analysis of ‘catch-all parties’ say that the pragmatic character of these parties can develop into cartel parties which stop being a vessel for people’s aspirations, instead political parties become government agents. The typology of these parties is solely oriented towards winning elections with the most votes (vote-seeking party) and controlling strategic spaces in parliament and government (office-seeking party).

In the cross-evolution of the center party elite, catch-all party, cartel party, political party ideology is slowly but surely being replaced by short-term pragmatic interests. In this context, political wing organizations are only used as a political tool to mobilize votes in elections, not as a grassroots part of the party itself. The party political machine is only turned on before the election, while during periods outside the election schedule, political parties and their political party wings are in static justice.

Most Indonesian political parties are currently in a catch-all party typology, even parties close to power have entered the cartelization stage. This can be proven by the rampant corruption practices carried out by ministers and their staff in ministries which are political posts from political parties in the coalition government.

In general, political parties in Indonesia have also begun to lose their ideological differentiation, especially when faced with pragmatic political choices and interests that politically benefit the party. Organizational wings of political parties will only thrive and be effective for democracy in Indonesia, if Indonesia restructures the political party system to become a mass-programmatic party. In contrast to elite-centred parties, in mass-programmatic parties, political parties have strong emotional ties with their wing organizations and their sympathizers.

Sympathizers not only have emotional ties but also have clear membership status in the political party structure. Each member has shares in the political party. The quality of membership in a mass party is not a pressure point from the power of a mass party, but the voluntarism power that is fostered by the party towards the party’s members. This resulted in a very high sense of belonging to political parties. As a mass party, political parties do not only greet constituents ahead of and during election campaigns, but political parties and their wing organizations are active throughout the year by having a clear, measurable and directed work platform.

The mass-party concept was developed by several Panebianco political scientists by providing an additional point of emphasis for the progmatic mass party (mass-progmatic patty) as follows: (1) strong membership patty, strong vertical organizational ties and has electorate (has a good number of memberships in quantity and strong quality, strong vertical relations and has a strong attachment for its members to choose the party, (2) collegial leadership (having collegial leadership not relying on one figure alone, (3) financing through membership fees and collateral activities, party cooperatives and unions ( financing of political party contributions and membership contributions, through independent businesses, such as cooperatives and other businesses, (4) stress on ideology (emphasizing the importance of party ideology) and (5) an umbrella organization of several active and milia smaller groups (political parties become umbrella for active and militant wing organizations.

The collegial character that existed in the above progmatic mass parties ultimately led to the orientation of political parties to redefine patronage and elitist political culture. Mass political parties have an orientation to change the direction of the paradigm by providing alternative policies. Mass political parties are also often referred to as policy-seeking parties. With a democratic and participatory political system, the paradigm of political parties can be gradually reformed (redefined) with a modern-day political party system. With this system and paradigm, political parties can actually carry out their socio-political function to impart political knowledge to citizens. Political party wing organizations can also provide socio-political and cultural roles to the community without having to wait for the election campaign period.

Conclusion

Ideology is more sidelined by the role of character, then what the general public considers when making their choice is not what ideology they hold, this is a consequence of direct election.

It is the personage who then becomes the target or the one pursued by ideology through political parties with the aim of benefiting from political power. Image politics then stands out in the tug of war for support in elections. With the role of the media that is so big, both print and electronic media. On the one hand, it is easier for the public to recognize the candidate through what is seen through the media, but on the other hand, the general public is easily fooled by the image they have built. Conditions like these often lead to disappointment in society in the future.

On the other hand, there has been a shift in the role of ideology, ideology which should be used as the basis for political parties and their cadres in carrying out political work involving many things but ideology is used as imagery content which is often manipulative. Ideology then only becomes an accessory of political parties, ideology is defeated by the short-term interests of political party elites in pursuing personal interests. This can be seen from the number of political party elites moving from one party to another. Ideology cannot bind the behavior of political party elites, elite behavior sometimes does not reflect the ideology of political parties, whether from immoral acts, corruption, or policies that are contrary to party ideology when they become state officials. Of course the phenomenon makes it difficult to get the right candidate, not because of limited information but because of the amount of information offered by figures with their imagery through existing media, it is hoped that we will be more careful in making choices (in elections).

Based on the ideological distance put forward by Giovani Sartori, in concluding the maps and ideological shifts of political parties from the 4 elections that have been described in the discussion of this research, there are two major parties that carry out centrifugal force, a movement away from the center of the pole. Meanwhile, political parties outside the dominant parties, namely PDIP and Golkar, such as PPP, Nasdem, Hanura, PAN and PKS have carried out a centripetal force or movement towards the center of power. However, Golkar and the democrats on the one hand did the centrifugal force but were not strong enough to attract PKB and PPP. However, in this case, the figures promoted by the two parties are not comparable to those of PDIP and Gerindra. The center here is Jokowi and Prabowo.

What is the trend in the 2024 election, is it still the same as the events in the 2019 election, the figure that is the center of the pole is of course there are old and new figures, if the presidential threshold is still maintained at 20%, then there will be 2 polar centers as centrifugal force and what is the tendency towards parties politics that will play the centripetal pole.

Bibliography

1. Amal Ichlasul (Ed), Sejarah, Fungsi dan Tipologi Partai-partai, Teori-teori Mutakhir Partai Yogyakarta, PT Tiara Wacana, 1988
2. Adriana Nina,      Arti      Penting      Ideologi      bagi       Partai      Politik,
   1. Dalamejournal.politik.lipi.go.id/index.php/jpp/article/view/502,
3. Ardiansyah Nur Rofiq. (2019). Koalisi Partai Politik Islam Pada Pilpres 2019: Antara Ideologis dan Pragmatis. Politea Jurnal Pemikiran Islam, 2(2),
4. Budiardjo Miriam, Partisipasi dan Partai Politik, Jakarta : Gramedia, 1981
5. Bungin Burhan (Ed), Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif, Aktualisasi Metodologis ke Arah Ragam Varian Kontemporer, Jakarta : PT.Radja Grafindo Persada, 2001
6. Croissant Aurel, Gabriele Bruns dan Marei John, Politik Pemilu di Asia Tenggara dan Asia Timur, Penerjemah, Hermawan Sulistyo, Iing Anwarini, Olisias Gultom dan Riris Irawati, Jakarta : Pensil-234 untuk Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) Indonesia,
7. Denzin Norman and Lincoln Yvonna S, Hand Book of Qualitatif Research,diterjemahkan oleh Dariyatno, Dkk, Yogyakarta : Pustaka Pelajar, 2009
8. M, Ideologi Partai Politik. Centre For Strategic And International Studies (CSIS), 2006
9. Downs Anthony, ,An Economic Theory of Democracy, new York : Harper and Row, 1957, dalam Saiful Mujani, W.Liddle dan Kuskridho Ambardi, Kaum Demokrat kritis, Analisis perilaku pemilih Indonesia sejak Demokratisasi, Jakarta : KPG (Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia), 2012
10. Efriza, Eksistensi Partai Politik Dalam Persepesi Politica, 10(1), 2019
11. ——-, Politik Explore, Sebuah Kajian Dalam Ilmu Politik, Bandung Alfabeta, 2012
12. Evans, Kevin Sejarah Pemilu dan Partai Politik di Indonesia, Jakarta: PT. Arise Consultancies, 1997
13. politik.lipi.go.id/index.php/jpp/article/view/502,
14. Feith Herbert & L.Castles, (Ed), Pemikiran Politik Indonesia 1945-1965, Terjemahan dari USAID, Jakarta : LP3ES, 1988
15. Firmanzah, Mengelola Partai Politik; Komunikasi dan Positioning Ideologi Politik di Era Demokrasi. Jakarta : Yayasan Obor Indonesia, 2008
16. Galang (2019). Idelogi dan PArtai Politik: Menakar Ideologi Politik Marhenisme di PDIP, Sosialisme Demokrasi di PSI dan Islam Fundamentalisme di PKS. Politicon: Jurnal Ilmu Politik, 1(2)
17. Hans Dieter Klingemann Dkk, Partai Kebijakan dan Demokrasi, Terjemahan, Sigit Jatmika, Yogyakarta : Pustaka pelajar, 2000, dalam Yeby Ma’asan Mayrudin, Jurnal of Governance, Desember 2017
18. Hermanto,Bambang, Positioning Ideologi Partai Politik dalam Pembentukan Koalisi Indonesia Adil Makmur Pada Pemilihan Presiden Tahun 2019, dalam Jurnal Transformative, 5, Nomor 1, Mei 2019
19. Husein Harun, Pemilu Indonesia, Fakta, Angka, Analisis, dan Studi Banding, Jakarta : PERLUDEM , 2014
20. Imawan, Riswandha . “Partai Politik di Indonesia: Pergulatan Setengah Hati Mencari Jati Diri,” Naskah pidato pengukuhannya sebagai Guru Besar Ilmu Politik FISIPOL UGM yang disampaikan pada 4 September 2004
21. Irawan, I Ketut Putra. dkk. . “Membangun Model-model Transformasi Kepartaian di Indonesia,” dalam Agung Djojosoekarto dan Utama Sandjaja. ed., Transformasi Demokratis Partai Politik di Indonesia: Model, Strategi dan Praktik. Jakarta: Kemitraan, 2008
22. Irawan Prasetya, Logika dan Prosedur Penelitian, Jakarta : PT.Repro-Internasional, Tahun 1999
23. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, Pemilu Legislatif tahun 2004, Jakarta : LIPI, Vol.1 1 2004
24. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, Kisruh Pemilu 2009, Jakarta : LIPI, 6 No.1 2009
25. Jurnal Partai Politik dan Pemilu, Peta Ideologi Partai Politik Pendukung dalam 3 Pilkada Gubernur Sumatera Barat, yaitu 2005, 2010 dan 2015 (Suatu Analisa Perbandingan Politik, Jakarta : UI Press, Volume 1, Nomor 1, Tahun 2016
26. Katz, Richard S. dan Mair, Peter. The Cartel party Thesis: A Restatement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2009
27. Laila Kholid Alfirdaus. (2018). Dari Identitas ke Idiologi: Penguatan Arah Kebijakan Progmatik Partai Politik. Junral Ilmu Pemerintahan, 3(2),.
28. Mayrudin Yeby Ma’asan, Dinamika Partai Politik Dan Positioning Ideologi: Studi Tentang Pergeseran Positioning Ideologi Partai-Partai Politik Peserta Pemilu 2014, dalam Journal of Governance, Desember 2017, Vo.2.No,2
29. Mirza Satria Buana. (2109). Tantangan Organisasi Sayap Partai: Melemahnya Ideologi dan Menguatnya Catch All Party. Http://Law.Uii.Ac.Id.
30. Neumann Lawrence, Social Research Methods : Qualitative and Quantitative Approach, Boston : Allyn and Bacon, tahun 2000
31. D, Party Ideology and Policy Outcome in The American States, Social science Quarterly, Vo.63, No.3, 1982, dalam Laila Kholid Alfirdaus, Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan, Vol.3 No.2, 2018,
32. NurzamanAsep,Peta Baru     Ideologi  Partai Politik  Indonesia,        dalam          http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/bestari/article/view/126
33. Reily Benyamin, Democracy in Divided Societies : Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management, dalam buku Kerangka Kerja Pengembangan Partai Politik yang Demokratis, NIMD (Netherlands Institute Multyparty Democracy, diterbitkan , Den Haag : The Netherlands Institute for multiparty democracy, 2006
34. Romli Lily, Partai Islam dan Pemilih Islam di Indonesia, dalam Jurnal Penelitian Politik, 1 No.1, Jakarta : LIPI, 2004
35. Salim Agus, Teori dan Paradigma Penelitian Sosial, Buku Sumber untuk Penelitian Kualitatif, Yogyakarta : Tiara Wacana, 2006
36. Sanit Arbi, Tarik Menarik Antara Politisi Ulama dan Politisasi Pengusaha, dalam Syamsuddin Haris (Ed) Pemilu Langsung di tengah Oligarki Partai, Jakarta : Gramedia, 2005
37. Sartori Giovanni, Parties and Party Systems : a Framework for Analysis, Cambridge
    1. University Press, 2005
38. Surbakti Ramlan,. Memahami Ideologi Politik, Jakarta: Gramedia Widia sarana Indonesia, 1992
39. Tesis, Husin M.Al-Banjari, Peran ideologi politik dalam proses pembentukan koalisi partai politik ( Studi Kasus Pada Pemilihan Umum Kepala Daerah Di Jawa Barat Periode 2005-2008), Bandung : Pasca Fisip, Unpad, 2010
40. Ufen Andreas, Political Parties in Post-Suharto Indonesia : Between Politik
    1. Aliran and Philippinsation, Giga Working Paper, dalam Mirza Satria Buana,
41. R.K , Case Study Research and Applications : Design and Methods, SAGE
    1. Publications, 2018
42. Ware Alan, Political Parties and Party System, New York : Oxford University Press,1996
43. http://news.unair.ac.id/2015/12/25/pragmatisme-sebagai-ideologi-partai-politik/, dikases tangggal 29 Januari 202
44. https://tirto.id/cJKc, diakses tanggal 31 Januari 2022 artikel tentang “Corak Ideologi Partai-Partai di Indonesia”
45. https://www.kompasiana.com/joana2707/607e91b03d68d5102051d0f6/peran-ideologi-dalam-partai- politik

Footnote:

[1]. Nina Andriana, Arti Penting Ideologi bagi Partai Politik dalam ejournal politik Lipi.go.id/index.php/jpp/article/view/502, Resensi Buku Firmanzah, Jakarta : LIPI, 2010, hal.136
[2]. Firmanzah, Mengelola Partai Politik, Komunikasi dan Positioning Ideologi Politik di Era Demokrasi, Jakarta : Yayasan Obor, 2011, hal.111.
[3]. Kevin Raymond Evans. Sejarah Pemilu dan Partai Politik di Indonesia. 1997. Jakarta: PT. Arise Consultancies. Hlm: 8-11
[4]. Ramlan Surbakti, Memahami Ilmu Politik, Jakarta : Gramedia, 1992, hal.127
[5]. Giovanni Sartori, Parties and Party Systems : a Framework for Analysis, Cambridge University Press, 2005, hal.116
[6]. Asep Nurzaman, Peta Baru Ideologi Partai Politik Indonesia,dalam http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/bestari/article/view/126
[7]. H.Feith & L.Castles, (Ed), Pemikiran Politik Indonesia 1945-1965, Terjemahan dari USAID, Jakarta : LP3ES, 1988,h.li
[8]. Tesis, Husin M.Al-Banjari, Peran ideologi politik dalam proses pembentukan koalisi partai politik ( Studi Kasus Pada Pemilihan Umum Kepala Daerah Di Jawa Barat Periode 2005-2008), Bandung : Pasca Fisip, Unpad, 2010
[9]. Jurnal Partai Politik dan Pemilu, Peta Ideologi Partai Politik Pendukung dalam 3 Pilkada Gubernur Sumatera Barat, yaitu 2005, 2010 dan 2015 (Suatu Analisa Perbandingan Politik, Jakarta : UI Press, Volume 1, Nomor 1, Tahun 2016
[10]. Bambang Hermanto, Positioning Ideologi Partai Politik dalam Pembentukan Koalisi Indonesia Adil Makmur Pada Pemilihan Presiden Tahun 2019, dalam Jurnal Transformative, Vol. 5, Nomor 1, Mei 2019, hal.1
[11]. Yeby Ma’asan Mayrudin, Dinamika Partai Politik Dan Positioning Ideologi: Studi Tentang Pergeseran Positioning Ideologi Partai-Partai Politik Peserta Pemilu 2014, dalam Journal of Governance, Desember 2017, Vo.2.No,2, hal.163
[12]. R.K.Yin, , Case Study Research and Applications : Design and Methods, SAGE Publications, 2018
[13]. https://tirto.id/cJKc, diakses tanggal 31 Januari 2022 artikel tentang “Corak Ideologi Partai-Partai di Indonesia”
[14]. https://www.kompasiana.com/joana2707/607e91b03d68d5102051d0f6/peran-ideologi-dalam-partai- politik) diakses 31 Januari 2022
[15]. Op.Cit, Ramlan Surbakti, 1992, hal.116
[16]. Baca selengkapnya di artikel “Corak Ideologi Partai-Partai di Indonesia”, https://tirto.id/cJKc, diakses tanggal 28 Januari 2022
[17]. Efriza, . Eksistensi Partai Politik Dalam Persepesi Publik. Politica, 10(1), 2019, Hal. 17–38.
[18]. Galang Geraldi. (2019). Idelogi dan PArtai Politik: Menakar Ideologi Politik Marhenisme di PDIP, Sosialisme Demokrasi di PSI dan Islam Fundamentalisme di PKS. Politicon: Jurnal Ilmu Politik, 1(2), 134–157.
[19]. Laila Kholid Firdaus, Dari Identitas ke ideologi : Penguatan Arah Kebijakan Pragmatik Partai Politik, dalam Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan, Vol.3, No.2, 2018, hal.99-108

[20]. Nice.D, Party Ideology and Policy Outcome in The American States, Social science Quarterly, Vo.63, No.3, 1982, hal 556 – 565, dalam Laila Kholid Alfirdaus, Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan, Vol.3 No.2, 2018, hal.106
[21]. Harun Husein, Pemilu Indonesia, Fakta, Angka, Analisis, dan Studi Banding, Jakarta : PERLUDEM , 2014, hal.185-186.
[22]. Ibid, Harun Husein, 2014, hal.187
[23]. Benyamin Reily, Democracy in Divided Societies : Electoral Engineering for Conflict Management, dalam buku Kerangka Kerja Pengembangan Partai Politik yang Demokratis, NIMD (Netherlands Institute Multyparty Democracy, diterbitkan , Den Haag : The Netherlands Institute for multiparty democracy, 2006, hal 14
[24]. M. Nur Rofiq Ardiansyah, Koalisi Partai Politik Islam Pada Pilpres 2019: Antara Ideologis dan Pragmatis.
[25]. Politea Jurnal Pemikiran Islam, Vol.2, No.2 2019, hal. 189–198.
[26]. Efriza, Political Explore, Sebuah kajian dalam Ilmu Politik, Bandung : Alfabeta, 2012, hal.325
[27]. Lily Romli, Partai Islam dan Pemilih Islam di Indonesia, dalam Jurnal Penelitian Politik, Vol.1 No.1, Jakarta : LIPI, 2004, hal 29-48
[28]. Andreas Ufen, Political Parties in Post-Suharto Indonesia : Between Politik Aliran and Philippinsation, Giga Working Paper, dalam Mirza Satria Buana, hal.11
[29]. M.Djadijono. (2006). Ideologi Partai Politik. Jakarta : Centre For Strategic And International Studies (CSIS), 2006
[30]. Yebby Ma’asan Mayiudin, Dinamika Partai Politik Dan Positioning Ideologi: Studi Tentang Pergeseran Positioning Ideologi Partai-Partai Politik Peserta Pemilu 2014. Journal Of Governance, 2017, Vol 2, No.2, 163–185
[31]. Macridis, Roy C. (1996). “Sejarah, Fungsi dan Tipologi Partai-partai,” dalam Ichlasul Amal, ed., Teori- teori Mutakhir Partai Politik. Yogyakarta, PT Tiara Wacana, hal.26 – 29
[32]. Kirchheimer, Otto. (1996). “Transformasi Sistem-sistem Kepartaian Eropa Barat” dalam Ichlasul Amal, ed., Teori-teori Mutakhir Partai Politik. Yogyakarta, PT Tiara Wacana, 1988, hal.40-45
[33]. Anthony Downs,An Economic Theory of Democracy, new York : Harper and Row, 1957, dalam Saiful Mujani, R.W.Liddle dan Kuskridho Ambardi, Kaum Demokrat kritis, Analisis perilaku pemilih Indonesia sejak Demokratisasi, Jakarta : KPG (Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia), 2012, hal 182.
[34]. Riswandha Imawan. “Partai Politik di Indonesia: Pergulatan Setengah Hati Mencari Jati Diri,” Naskah pidato pengukuhannya sebagai Guru Besar Ilmu Politik FISIPOL UGM yang disampaikan pada 4 September 2004, Hal.11-13
[35]. Hans Dieter Klingemann Dkk, Partai Kebijakan dan Demokrasi, Terjemahan, Sigit Jatmika, Yogyakarta
[36]. : Pustaka pelajar, 2000, dalam Yeby Ma’asan Mayrudin, Jurnal of Governance, Desember 2017, Hal.41
[37]. Op.Cit, Riswandha Imawan. 2004, Hal.11
[38]. Ibid, Hans Dieter Klingemann, 2000, hal.42
[39]. Irawan, I Ketut Putra. dkk. . “Membangun Model-model Transformasi Kepartaian di Indonesia,” dalam Agung Djojosoekarto dan Utama Sandjaja. ed., Transformasi Demokratis Partai Politik di Indonesia: Model, Strategi dan Praktik. Jakarta: Kemitraan, 2008, hal.323
[40]. Op.Cit, Riswanda Imawan, 2004, hal.13
[41]. Mirza Satriana Buana, Tantangan Organisasi Sayap Partai: Melemahnya Ideologi dan Menguatnya Catch All Party. Http://Law.Uii.Ac.Id.
[42]. Katz, Richard S. dan Mair, Peter. The Cartel party Thesis: A Restatement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2009, hal.753