<![CDATA[Purpose: This study examines why civilian actors may reject formal military dominance while simultaneously adopting military-derived values, symbols, and leadership styles. Rather than assuming a causal effect on democratic quality, it explores how this paradox is interpreted in relation to civilian authority and democratic governance in post-Reform Indonesia. Design/methodology/approach: An interpretive qualitative case study was conducted in North Maluku Province. Semi-structured in-depth interviews with government officials, traditional political elites, and media leaders were carried out between September and October 2025. Participants were selected purposively until recurring themes reached theoretical saturation. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis combined with elements of critical discourse analysis, focusing on recurring meanings attached to military involvement and military-derived authority. Findings: Respondents rejected active-duty military control of civilian institutions but regarded retired officers and military participation in disaster response as acceptable under specific conditions. Military symbols, discipline, hierarchy, and decisiveness were also adopted by civilian actors as sources of legitimacy and social order. These practices were reinforced by post-conflict memory, security narratives, and local historical traditions. Within the North Maluku case, these patterns are interpreted as civilian militarism: the cultural reproduction of military-derived authority without direct institutional domination. Practical implications: Strengthening civilian institutional capacity, transparent oversight, and participatory leadership may help prevent military-style efficiency from substituting for democratic accountability and deliberation. Originality/value: The study shifts attention from military intervention to civilian agency in reproducing militaristic authority.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
