DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jis.23.2.2024.26-44

“BAKAS LEWU”: POLITICAL BROKER IN THE MANDUING TAHETA VILLAGE ELECTION, CENTRAL KALIMANTAN

*Anyualatha Haridison orcid scopus publons  -  Department of Government, Universitas Palangka Raua, Jl. Yos Sudarso Palangka Raya Kalimantan Tengah 73111, Indonesia
Open Access Copyright (c) 2025 Anyualatha Haridison under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Bakas Lewu is a group of elders in the Dayak Ngaju language of Central Kalimantan. Previous studies have been more oriented towards mapping brokers in mobilizing material resources to influence voters. The purpose of this article is to explore the role of Bakas Lewu as political brokers, especially how they work, involving culture and social power, which has been discussed to a limited extent. This study was conducted qualitatively and the main data source came from interviews with key informants who knew about the village head election (Pilkades) cases in Manduing Taheta, then analyzed in depth and interactively. This study shows that Bakas Lewu as political brokers play an important role in mobilizing political support based on social relations, kinship, and local Dayak culture by relying on interpersonal communication, narrative control, and social networks to build community trust and loyalty. This phenomenon emphasizes that political power in the village is more influenced by personal and social relationships than material transactions. This study challenges the dominant approach that sees political brokers in Indonesia as transactional actors, by highlighting the importance of local social and cultural dynamics. These findings indicate the diversity of political brokerage practices and suggest more research on how social relations, such as kinship and loyalty, play a role in mobilizing political support, opening up new perspectives in the study of local politics in Indonesia.

Fulltext View|Download Email colleagues
Keywords: political broker; Dayak culture; village elections; central Kalimantan

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Articles
Language : EN
Most cited articles
Peran Indonesia Dalam Memerangi Terorisme ECONOMIC RESILIENCE PADA INDUSTRI KREATIF GUNAMENGHADAPI GLOBALISASI DALAM RANGKA KETAHANAN NASIONAL More cited articles
  1. Abbiyyu, M. D. (2020). Role of the Botoh as Political Brokers and Gamblers during the Tulungagung Local Election of 2018. Jurnal Politik, 6(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v6i1.284
  2. Abheseka, N. (2019). The Paradox of Incumbency: Patronage, Clientelism, and Incumbent Defeat in Village Chief Elections. PCD Journal, 7(2), 197. https://doi.org/10.22146/pcd.51740
  3. Ainillah, S. R. (2016). Elite Politik Dalam Kontenstasi di Desa dengan menggunakan studi Peran Blater dalam Pilkades di desa Banjar, Galis, Bangkalan Madura. Jurnal Politik Muda, 5(3), 282–290
  4. Ananta, D. D. (2017). Politik Oligarki dan Perampasan Tanah di Indonesia: Kasus Perampasan Tanah di Kabupaten Karawang Tahun 2014. Jurnal Politik, 2(1), 101. https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v2i1.83
  5. Asmawati, A., Tawakkal, T. I., & Muadi, S. (2021). Religion, Political Contestation and Democracy: Kiai’s Role as Vote Broker in Madurese Local Political Battle. Buletin Al-Turas, 27(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.15408/bat.v27i1.15650
  6. Asmawati, Tawakkal, G. T. I., Muadi, S., & Umanailo, M. C. B. (2020). Kemenangan Klebun: Ketahanan Bejingan dan Loyalitas Pemilih. Civic-Culture: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan PKn Dan Sosial Budaya, 4(2), 399–407
  7. Aspinall, E. (2014). When Brokers Betray: Clientelism, Social Networks, and Electoral Politics in Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 46(4), 545–570. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2014.960706
  8. Aspinall, E., & As’ad, M. U. (2015). The Patronage Patchwork: Village Brokerage Networks and Power of the State in an Indonesian Election. Bijdragen Tot de Taal-, Land- En Volkenkunde, 171, 165–195. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134379-17102004
  9. Aspinall, E., & Mietzner, M. (2019). Indonesia’s Democratic Paradox: Competitive Elections amidst Rising Illiberalism. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 55(3), 295–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2019.1690412
  10. Aspinall, E., & Rohman, N. (2017). Village Head Elections in Java : Money Politics and Brokerage in the Remaking of Indonesia’s Rural Elite. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 48(1), 31–52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022463416000461
  11. Aspinall, E., Rohman, N., Hamdi, A. Z., Rubaidi, & Triantini, Z. E. (2017). Vote buying in Indonesia: Candidate strategies, market logic and effectiveness. Journal of East Asian Studies, 17(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/jea.2016.31
  12. Aspinall, E., & Sukmajati, M. (2015). Politik Uang di Indonesia: Patronase dan Klientelisme di Pemilu Legislatif 2014. Yogyakarta: PolGov
  13. Auerbach, A. M., & Thachil, T. (2018). How Clients Select Brokers: Competition and Choice in India’s Slums. American Political Science Review, 112(4), 954–970. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305541800028X
  14. Azwar, A. (2016). Kiai, Money Politic dan Pragmatisme Politik dalam Perspektif Siyasah Syar’iyyah: Studi Kasus Pilkades Plosorejo Tahun 2013. Jurnal Agama Dan Hak Azazi Manuasia, 5(2), 2014
  15. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (Second Edi). California: Sage Publication
  16. Darwin, R. L. (2017). The Power of Female Brokers : Local Elections in North Aceh. 39(3), 532–552. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs39-3g
  17. Fitriyah, F. (2018). Politik Dinasti Pada Kandidasi Perempuan Dalam Pilkada Serentak 2015 Di Jawa Tengah. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, 17(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.14710/jis.17.1.2018.39-52
  18. Gibbings, S. L., Lazuardi, E., & Prawirosusanto, K. M. (2017). Mobilizing the Masses: Street Vendors, Political Contracts, and the Role of Mediators in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Bijdragen Tot de Taal-, Land- En Volkenkunde, 173(2–3), 242–272. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134379-17301004
  19. Haridison, A. (2021a). Framing Issues of Ex-Prisoners, Vote Buying, and Winning Teams: Evidence from Pilkada of the Palangka Raya City. Journal of Governance and Public Policy, 8(3), PROGRESS. https://doi.org/10.18196/jgpp.v8i3.11081
  20. Haridison, A. (2021b). Hapahari and Handep: Cultural Aspects in Village Head Elections in Central Kalimantan. Politik Indonesia: Indonesian Political Science Review, 6(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15294/ipsr.v6i1.28951 ©
  21. Haridison, A. (2024). Why did the common objective be biased in the execution collaborative governance program? The case from Dayak Indonesia. Land Use Policy, 140, 107050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107050
  22. Haridison, A., Yuwanto, Alfirdaus, L. K., & Wijayanto. (2023). The shifting identity of the Dayak in Indonesia. Asian Affairs: An American Review, 51(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00927678.2023.2262356
  23. Hartati, A., Nafisa, A. Y., & Hidayanti, T. T. (2019). Botoh dalam Pilkada: Studi Pola Kerja dan Transformasi Botoh dalam Pilkada Kudus 2018. Jurnal PolGov, 1(1), 121. https://doi.org/10.22146/polgov.v1i1.48301
  24. Hidayat, E., Prasetyo, B., & Yuwana, S. (2019). Runtuhnya Politik Oligarki dalam Pemilihan Kepala Desa: Kekalahan Incumbent pada Pilkades Tanjung Kabupaten Kediri. Jurnal Politik, 4(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v4i1.193
  25. Koter, D. (2013). King makers: Local leaders and ethnic politics in Africa. World Politics, 65(2), 187–232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004388711300004X
  26. Leider, S., Möbius, M. M., Rosenblat, T., & Do, Q.-A. (2009). Directed altruism and enforced reciprocity in social networks. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4), 1815–1851
  27. Metera, G. D. A. (2018). Review of Electoral Dynamics in Indonesia: Money Politics, Patronage, and Clientelism at the Grassroots edited by Edward Aspinall and Mada Sukmajati. Southeast Asian Studies, 7(1), 146–149. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.20495/seas.7.1_146
  28. Nurcholis, H. (2011). Dua Ratus Tahun Demokrasi Desa: Potret Kegagalan Adopsi Nilai Demokrasi Oleh Bangsa Indonesia. Proceeding Semnas FISIP-UT, 552–572
  29. Obstfeld, D., & Borgatti, S. (2008). Brokerage is a process, not a structure: a clarification of social network language. Sunbelt XXVIII, International Sunbelt Social Network Conference, January, 22–27
  30. Paskarina, C., Hermawati, R., & Yunita, D. (2019). Combining Clientelism and Incumbency Advantage: Political Strategy in Candidate Selection for the 2017 Local Head Election in Bekasi Regency. Politik Indonesia: Indonesian Political Science Review, 4(1), 21–42. https://doi.org/10.15294/ipsr.v4i1.13528
  31. Pratiwi, C. S., Bafadhal, F., & Giovani, A. S. (2020). Strategi Marketing Politik Kepala Desa Pertahana Pada Pilkades Di Desa Sidomukti Kecamatan Dendang Kabupaten Tanjung Jabung Timur. JISIP (Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Pendidikan), 4(4)
  32. Ravanilla, N., Haim, D., & Hicken, A. (2017). Brokers, social networks, reciprocity, and clientelism. Unpublished Working Paper
  33. Shrestha, T., & Yeoh, B. S. A. (2018). Practices of brokerage and the making of migration infrastructures in Asia. Pacific Affairs, 91(4), 663–672. https://doi.org/10.5509/2018914663
  34. Sobel, J. (2005). Interdependent preferences and reciprocity. Journal of Economic Literature, 43(2), 392–436
  35. Stokes, S. C., Dunning, T., & Nazareno, M. (2013). Brokers, voters, and clientelism: The puzzle of distributive politics. New York: Cambridge University Press
  36. Stovel, K., & Shaw, L. (2012). Brokerage. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150054
  37. Tawakkal, G.T.I., Kistanto, N. H., Asy’ari, H., Pradhanawati, A., & Garner, A. D. (2017). Why Brokers Don’t Betray: Social Status and Brokerage Activity in Central Java. Asian Affairs: An American Review, 44(2), 52–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/00927678.2017.1307641
  38. Tawakkal, George Towar Ikbal. (2017). Gapit: Jaringan Mobilisasi Suara di Pilkades George. Politik Indonesia: Indonesian Political Science Review, 2(1), 30–45
  39. Tawakkal, George Towar Ikbal, Damayanti, R., Subekti, T., Alfian, F., & Garner, A. D. (2020). Social networks and brokerage behavior in Indonesian elections: Evidence from Central Java. Asian Affairs: An American Review, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00927678.2020.1765473
  40. Tawakkal, George Towar Ikbal, Damayanti, R., Subekti, T., Garner, A. D., & Seitz, T. R. (2018). Jejaring Sosial dalam Pembentukan Tim Sukses Mandiri di Pemilu DPRD Kabupaten 2019. Wacana Politik, 5(1), 1–14
  41. Tawakkal, George Towar Ikbal, & Garner, A. D. (2017). Unopposed but not Uncontested: Brokers and “Vote Buying” in the 2017 Pati District Election. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 39(3), 491–510. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs39-3e
  42. Tjahjoko, G. T. (2020). Fighting Money Politics and Shamanic Practices. Jurnal Politik, 5(2), 169. https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v5i2.241
  43. Van Klinken, G. (2013). Brokerage and the making of middle indonesia. City and Society, 25(1), 135–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/ciso.12007
  44. Wance, M., & Djae, R. M. (2019). Modalitas Dinasti Ahmad Hidayat Mus Pada Pemilihan Kepala Daerah Di Maluku Utara 2018. Sosiohumaniora, 21(3), 256–268. https://doi.org/10.24198/sosiohumaniora.v21i3.21547
  45. Yuningsih, N. Y., & Subekti, V. S. (2016). Demokrasi dalam Pemilihan Kepala Desa? Studi Kasus Desa Dengan Tipologi Tradisional, Transisional, dan Modern di Provinsi Jawa Barat Tahun 2008-2013. Jurnal Politik, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v1i2.21

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-06-21 04:25:16

No citation recorded.