Birokrasi, Akses Informasi, dan Siasat Warga Prekariat di Negara Pascakolonial
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47776/MJPRS.001.01.06Keywords:
state-society relation, precarity, citizenshipAbstract
The assumption that the state operates fully rational-formal is increasingly difficult to maintain. The state is much better seen not as a single solid and monolithic entity, but as a formation that continues to shape itself through various processes of internal and external power competition, which cannot be separated from kinship factors, social organizational patterns, and, in certain contexts, the history of colonialism. . Market penetration which has recently become increasingly dominant towards various sides of the state and the bureaucracy has added a new dimension and complexity to the relationship between citizens and the state. This paper intends to show the dynamics of these formalities by revealing the nature of power that underlies state formation. On the other hand, this paper will show how precarious citizens move between rationality as well as irrationality, formality and informality, to access the state space which is considered completely rational and increasingly has a market character.
Downloads
References
Berenschot, Ward. 2019. “Informal Democratization: Brokers, Access to Public Services and Democratic Accountability in Indonesia and India.†Democratization 26(2):208–24.
Berenschot, Ward, and Gerry Van Klinken. 2018. “Informality and Citizenship: The Everyday State in Indonesia.†Citizenship Studies 22(2):95–111.
Bernstein, Anya, and Elizabeth Mertz. 2011. “Bureaucracy: Ethnography of the State in Everyday Life.†PoLAR 34:6.
Bierschenk, Thomas, and Jean-Pierre Olivier de Sardan. 2014. States at Work: Dynamics of African Bureaucracies. Brill.
Gibson, Thomas. 2007. Islamic Narrative and Authority in Southeast Asia: From the 16th to the 21st Century. Springer.
Gupta, Akhil. 2012. Red Tape: Bureaucracy, Structural Violence, and Poverty in India. Duke University Press.
Hamdi, Mujtaba. 2015. “Efek Lapindo: Transformasi Lanskap, Relasi Sosio-Spasial Dan Komensurasi NIlai Di Era Pasar.†Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia.
Hetherington, Kregg. 2012. “Promising Information: Democracy, Development, and the Remapping of Latin America.†Economy and Society 41(2):127–50.
Millar, Kathleen M. 2014. “The Precarious Present: Wageless Labor and Disrupted Life in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.†Cultural Anthropology 29(1):32–53.
Novenanto, Anton. 2019. “Dampak Sosial-Ekonomi Pemindahan Paksa: Studi Atas Penyintas Lumpur Lapindo, Jawa Timur.†Jurnal Masyarakat dan Budaya Volume 21 No. 3.
Nugent, David. 2004. “Governing States.†A Companion to the Anthropology of Politics 198–215.
Nuijten, Monique. 2003. Power, Community and the State. The Anthropology of Political Organization. London, Pluto Press.
Sastro, Dhoho A. dkk. 2010. Mengenal Undang-Undang Keterbukaan Informasi Publik. Jakarta: LBH Masyarakat dan Yayasan Tifa.
Scott, James C. 1998. Seeing like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale University Press.
Sharma, Aradhana. 2018. “New Brooms and Old: Sweeping up Corruption in India, One Law at a Time.†Current Anthropology 59(S18):S72–S82.
Stoler, Ann Laura. 2004. “Affective States.†A Companion to the Anthropology of Politics 4–20.
Subagiyo, Henri, dkk. 2009. Anotasi Undang-undang Nomor 14 Tahun 2008 tentang Keterbukaan Informasi Publik. Jakarta: Komisi Informasi Pusat, ICEL dan Yayasan Tifa.
Wolf, Eric R. 1966. “Kinship, Friendship, and Patron-Client Relations in Complex Societies.†The Social Anthropology of Complex Societies 1–22.
Wolf, Eric R. 2001. “Facing Power: Old Insights, New Questions.†Pathways of Power: Building an Anthropology Ofthe Modem World. Berkeley; Los Angeles.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
