State Bureaucracy in Indonesia and its Reforms: An Overview

New Public Management (NPM) as a part of neoliberalism has increasingly become a global phenomenon and has transcended national boundaries, irrespective of whether they are English-speaking countries or non-English-speaking countries. This label of public management has not been interpreted and implemented in a single language, but has been adapted and implemented based on the contextual condition of given nations in terms of their socio-culture, history and formation, ideological inclination, and polity system. This article aimed at providing support to the above supposition, taking Indonesian public governance reforms as an example. The review of Indonesian reforms on public governance is expected to enrich the proliferation of international reforms on public governance in terms of how NPM has been travelling global and has been recontextualized in the existing values of Indonesian people.     

Religious parties and democracy: A comparative assessment of Israel and Turkey

Discussions of the role of religious parties in democracies can be highly misleading when they take the parties' ideologies at face value and assign them to the binary categories of moderate vs radical. Only by a careful review of how religious parties use religious and secular symbols in defining their political stances can we evaluate their roles vis-à-vis liberal democracy. The competing political ideologies of the Mafdal and Shas Parties in Israel and the National Action Party, the Prosperity Party and the Justice and Development Party in Turkey are foci of this analysis. Two controversial concepts, ‘redemption’ in Israel and ‘secularism’ in Turkey, are used to question how these parties appropriate religious symbols in their policies towards secular public and institutions. The arguments draw on a set of interviews with the religious party leaderships and a content analysis of party ideologues' views. The findings suggest that parties that adopt the strategy of sacralization (that is, assigning religious meanings to secular ideas thereby treating them as sacred) appear more moderate yet they are more likely to support authoritarian policies. However, the so-called radical religious parties tend to be more inclusive and are more likely to secularize their respective religious tradition internally by redefining secular terms. Despite their novel political agendas both groups fail to exhibit principled commitment to liberal values and fail to provide inclusive and coherent alternatives to their secularist counterparts.