What’s in a Symbol? Emerging Parties and Anti-Corruption Symbols in Indonesia’s 2014 National Legislative Election Campaigns

Abstract

This thesis explores the use of anti-corruption symbols during Indonesia’s 2014 legislative elections from a national party and individual candidate perspective. Anti-corruption has long been a political issue in Indonesia, and the entrenched nature of associated rhetoric facilitates the ongoing emphasis on anti-corruption symbols. However, recent history and the perceived misuse of such symbols by some political parties meant that mobilizing them carried risks in 2014. This study addresses two key empirical questions: why were anti-corruption symbols adopted by emerging parties and their candidates, and how were these symbols used? Examining these questions allows us to consider a broader paradox in Indonesia; that while anti-corruption rhetoric is prominent, so too is corruption—including money politics and vote-buying during political campaigns. Theoretically, the thesis speaks to the literature on electoral campaigns and the diffusion of ideas across scales, drawing on Edelman’s conceptualization of political symbols as signifiers of morality and aspiration that are ultimately intended to sway audiences in order to gain power. The application of Edelman’s theory of symbolic politics to the Indonesian case provides an opportunity to extend theoretical discussions of the use of symbols as tools of persuasion during elections. The incorporation of diffusion theory to interpret the parameters and constraints of campaigning represents an original approach to the study of electoral campaigns, not just in Indonesia but more widely. The combination of these theoretical frameworks presents an innovative way of understanding enduring questions regarding coexisting, yet contradictory, political phenomena in Indonesia. Focusing on case studies from three different emerging parties, this thesis finds that the employment of anti-corruption symbols varied considerably between the national level and the candidates, even if the symbols adopted were ostensibly the same. Parties’ executive committees embraced anti-corruption symbols because they believed voters would respond favourably to them, in spite of the inherent hazards involved. However, candidates exercise great autonomy in the construction of their personal campaigns, and could choose to adopt or ignore their party’s anti-corruption symbol. In the cases examined here, the extent to which the symbol was adopted depended heavily on a candidate’s personal history, through which personal ‘ownership’ of the issue was established. The nature of intra-party relations and traditional campaign techniques in Indonesia reinforced these intrinsically different campaign arenas, often referred to colloquially as the ‘air campaign’ (national level) and ‘ground campaign’ (candidate level). Given the different audiences and interactions with voters in each arena, there was scope for discrepancy even though national party committees and individual candidates essentially shared the same goal of wanting to maximize votes. The thesis argues that the disconnect that exists between the anti-corruption symbol constructed in national campaigns and local practice is inherently linked to the simultaneous prominence of anti-corruption rhetoric and money politics in campaigns. At the same time that parties compete to be seen as the ‘cleanest’, individual candidates are pressured to buy votes, knowing that it may be their best chance for success. The inconsistency in the presentation of anti-corruption symbols leads voters to believe that the issue is being manipulated for political purposes rather than reflecting a genuine desire to combat corruption, compromising its persuasive value. The incongruity between what happens in different campaign arenas not only demonstrates the fragmented nature of political parties, but also confirms that the values and decisions of candidates play a crucial role in the perpetuation of money politics. This finding challenges the normative assumption that political parties are single, coherent entities and advances a new way of understanding the relationships between anti-corruption rhetoric and election campaign outcomes for Indonesia’s emerging parties.