Search

This study analyzes political party systems(or the effective number of parties)in terms of votes at the basic unit of competition in the first democratic elections before and after authoritarian interlude in South Korea and Indonesia. Specifically, it deals with the 1960 and 1988 Korean parliamentary elections, and the 1955 and 1999 Indonesian parliamentary elections. This historical comparative and cross-sectional analysis intends to test the key hypotheses in the comparative literature on political party systems:Duverger’s law and hypothesis, Taagepera and Shugart’s generalized Duverger’s rule, Cox’s M+1 rule and interaction hypothesis. I find, first, that bipartism is the exception rather than the rule even under simple and pure plurality rule, which implies that the thesis of strategic voting is misleading. Second, the interaction of high social diversity and weak electoral structure does not necessarily increase the effective number of parties(or candidates). Third, the immediate and most crucial determinant of political party systems is the winner’s(leading political party’s) vote share, regardless of electoral systems or district magnitude. More precisely, the effective number of parties is an inverse function of the winner’s vote share. Check author’s web site for an updated version of the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the impact of Muslim organizations and Muslim political parties in Indonesia and Malaysia. Questions addressed are as follows: How does the political system (broadly described) facilitate or constrain the goals of various Muslim organizations (both groups in society and political parties)? What roles do these Muslim organizations play in impacting politics and where (or in what areas of) in the political process are they most effective? Under what circumstances have Muslim associations and/or parties been a force for (or antagonistic to) democratization? Given the ethnic and regional diversity in Malaysia and Indonesia, the initial hypotheses for these questions are as follows: under authoritarian and semi-authoritarian rule Muslim organizations actually have greater opportunities to polarize rhetoric as they appeal to citizens based on claims of moral legitimacy, fulfillment of social welfare needs, and some level of criticism of a restricted or corrupted political order. As a result, PAS, the lead Muslim party (and the dominant opposition party) has limited appeal to voters. Under more democratic conditions, Islamic groups or parties may need to moderate their appeals, and/or build coalitions with secular or non-Islamic groups in order to win power and influence in the larger political system. Muslim political parties exist in both Malaysia and Indonesia; their power and influence has varied over time. This project aims to explain why these parties have had more support at some times than others and under what conditions they may moderate their demands and policy choices to accommodate pluralist leanings. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comparative scholarship suggests that democracy in ethnically-diverse societies is likely to be fostered by the development of broad-based, aggregative and multi-ethnic political parties, rather than fragmented, personalised or ethnically-based party systems. However surprisingly little attention has been given to how party fragmentation can be addressed or how broad-based parties can be sustained, despite institutional experiments in conflict prone societies including Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Fiji and Papua New Guinea aimed at influencing party system development. Drawing on these various cases, this paper identifies four strategies of political engineering that have been used to promote broad-based, cross-regional or multi-ethnic political parties in new democracies around the world. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the factors that support for moderate Islamic parties with an individual level quantitative analysis of Indonesia, Iran, Morocco and Turkey. It compares the attitudes and other socio-economic characteristics of people who support moderate Islamic parties with other population.

The article discusses the study on the factors that influence choices of voters in the political party politics in Indonesia. It states that regional and ethnic difference have significant impact on the voting behavior of voters. It notes that the social changes in the country caused by rapid economic development are less important on voting behavior than traditional and historical factors. It mentions that structure of political cleavage can change with social changes and strategic actions.

The article examines the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) in Indonesia and the Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) in Malaysia, noting the roots of the respective parties. The extent of the parties' moderation are analyzed, highlighting the strategic choice to form alliances, the political incentives for moderation, and the learning process parties have experienced, focusing particularly on changes in opportunities for women and non-Muslims.