Moderation does not constitute a monolithic model and the difference in the moderation process will influence the way a political party manages its internal dynamics. The cases of the AKP and the PKS show that both have different levels of moderation due to the different contexts of their social and political environments. The AKP has to deal with an extreme interpretation of secularism in Turkey that influences the party’s members to refrain from any confrontation with secular strongholds. The PKS has more freedom to express its ideology in the Indonesian democratic political system; hence the party is able to develop internal organisational procedures and programmes based on religious principles. To anticipate difficulties arising from from moderation, the AKP uses an organisational approach to give space for open and dynamic internal management and reduce the role of ideology significantly. The PKS still utilises its ideology in managing the impact of moderation by defining religious values as principles of organisation in parallel with organisational principles. Both parties are relatively successful in convincing their members to trust the party and its leaders in different ways. Party vision and personal charisma are more apparent for the AKP, although the PKS has to rely on interpretation of ideology as the main source of trust. By placing more emphasis on organisation, the AKP employs definition of violation toward party’s rules and decisions based on an organisational approach. In contrast, the definition of violation in the PKS relies on both religious and organisational principles. As a result, the AKP implements policies to dismiss members based on unambiguous principles with relatively insignificant opposition. The PKS has to deal with complaints of dismissal since the policies are taken based on interpretation of procedures and reasons. It is also proven that the AKP is able to convince voters by offering programmes to meet popular demands without relying on a religious agenda. While the PKS has been successful in developing an effective and solid party, it still has many problems in gaining support during elections as its pragmatic adjustment moderation also generates confusion internally and externally.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:566677 |
| Date | January 2012 |
| Creators | Hidayat, Syahrul |
| Contributors | Niblock, Tim |
| Publisher | University of Exeter |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | http://hdl.handle.net/10036/3606 |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds