Globalization and Citizenship: A Review

Urry, J. (1998). Globalisation and citizenship. Paper presented at World Congress of Sociology. Montreal. Retrieved from http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/resources/sociology-online-papers/papers/urry-globalisation-and-citizenship.pdf

While the idea of citizenship has long been associated with the nation-state, the increasing cross-border mobilities of objects, ideas, cultures, and humans are challenging this notion. Urry (1998) in his essay argues that in today’s era of globalization, it is strikingly important to take a closer observation on how the disjuncture of state-borders, in terms of its economic, politics, as well as cultures reconfigure how the citizen perceive and practice their citizenships.

Urry explains that globalization has two distinct characteristics, which include: (1) the compression of space and time, and (2) the advancement of the machines and technologies that enable the creation of ‘global’ networks. These two amplify the flow of cross national-borders ideas, commodities, people—and to some extent beyond the countries’ ability to control.

Dangdut, Popular Culture dan Citizenship di Indonesia: Prospektif kah?

Jika pembicara pada beberapa kelas sebelumnya lebih banyak bicara tentang citizenship menggunakan pendekatan antropologis, teoritis, atau bahkan pendekatan hukum, maka Dr. Bart Barendregt menawarkan cara yang sedikit berbeda, yaitu dengan menggunakan popular culture sebagai perspektif.

Meskipun memiliki latar belakang studi antropologi, Pak Bart juga memiliki pengalaman penelitian tentang mobile media dan social media di Indonesia, juga riset tentang musik. Hal ini yang menjadikan paparan beliau tentang pendekatan popular culture dalam memahami praktik citizenship di Indonesia menjadi berbeda sekaligus menarik. Lebih tepatnya, beliau menggunakan istilah “popular culture as framing device.”

Let’s Talk About Citizenship in Indonesia

Berenschot, W., Nordholt, H. S., & Bakker, L. (2016). Introduction: Citizenship and democratization in Southeast Asia. In W. Berenschot, H. S. Nordholt, & L. Bakker (Eds.), Citizenship and democratization in Southeast Asia (pp. 1-28). Leiden; Boston: BRILL.

This year will mark the 20^th anniversary of a monumental phase in the Indonesian political sphere popularly called as reformasi. Back in 1998, following the collapse of Suharto’s authoritarian regime, many taught that Indonesian political trajectory would move toward a more democratic system. It means that the practice of Korupsi, Kolusi, and Nepotisme (KKN)—corruption, collusion, and nepotism—would eventually be dismissed, and the society could practice the freedom of speech without being afraid of any censorship or persecution from the state. Yet, what is currently happening in Indonesian politics is quite different compared to what was hoped at that time. In contrast to a democratic society idealism, some socio-political problems like the spread of identity politics, ethnoreligious conflicts, clientelism politics in local elections, and collective corruptions in various level of governance are increasingly becoming major concerns in Indonesia.

The questions are: why are these issues emerging in spite of political reformation in Indonesia? What did we miss in our effort to bring our political system toward a more democratic one? What are the factors contributing to these problems?