Paper short abstract:

Based on the unfortunate story of two petty traders involved in a rich man's election campaign, this paper revisits the idea of patronage as a mode of employment. It shows how such relationships of dependency are rooted in a morality of inequality and discusses their promises and perils.

Paper long abstract:

When Dinda and Ahmad became part of Pak Myron's election campaign, they thought they were in luck. It was their chance to enter the social circle of a wealthy businessman, earn his favor, and gain access to resources otherwise out of their reach. All they had to do was hand out microcredits to secure strategic votes for their candidate. The program had all been set up by Pak Myron, funded by a large state-owned company's corporate responsibility program to empower small businesses, according to the official purpose. Dinda and Ahmad were flattered to be entrusted with a program of such scope and financial magnitude, and dazzled by Pak Myron's generosity. Therefore, it never occurred to them that "buying" votes through loans might be a questionable endeavor. Nor did it ever occur to them that the rich man who had lavished them with gifts might turn on them and leave them alone to vouch for the loans made in his name.

My paper traces the complex dynamics of the relationship between Dinda and Ahmad and the wealthy Pak Myron as a case of patronage employment - which I understand as a mode of employment that is based on a morality of inequality and operates through the socio-economic asymmetry between a ‘patron’ employer and a ‘client’ employee. It shows that such dependency relationships are not only a last resort in the struggle for livelihoods, but also a projection screen for futures that otherwise seem unattainable.