GEN Z IN TRANSITION: BETWEEN IDEALISM AND PRAGMATISM IN POLITICS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24076/feyj4k42Keywords:
Generation Z, political participation, political motivation, idealism, pragmatismAbstract
The 2024 general election positions Generation Z as a major electoral bloc (33.6% of voters), yet their engagement is often perceived as apathetic. This study examines the motivations of Gen Z’s political participation and their relationship with participation typologies. A mixed-methods convergent design was applied, involving 200 Mataram University students. Quantitative data from questionnaires were analyzed using cross-tabulations, chi-square tests, and ordinal logistic regression, while qualitative data from open responses were thematically coded. Findings show that most respondents were spectators (57%), followed by critics (22%), gladiators (11.5%), and apathetic (9.5%). Idealistic motives (especially voice matters, policy change, and political education) were dominant. Chi-square tests revealed significant links between several idealistic factors and active participation, but in regression only political identity (B = –1.356, p = .005) consistently predicted critic and gladiator roles. Pragmatic motives (e.g., economic reward, mobilization) appear in narratives but lose significance in multivariate tests, indicating their role as situational triggers rather than structural drivers. These results highlight a paradox: Gen Z’s participation is grounded in idealism yet negotiated within pragmatic realities. Politics for Gen Z thus emerges not merely as transactional, but as a space for identity, learning, and normative aspirations.
References
Bossetta, M. (2018). The digital architectures of social media: Comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(2), 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political parties in advanced industrial democracies (6th ed.). CQ Press.
Damsar. (2012). Pengantar sosiologi politik. Kencana.
Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. Harper & Row Publishers.
Easton, D., & Dennis, J. (1967). The child’s acquisition of regime norms: Political efficacy. The American Political Science Review, 61(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/1953873
Fielding, K. S., McDonald, R., & Louis, W. R. (2008). Theory of planned behavior, identity and intentions to engage in environmental activism. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(4), 318–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.03.003
Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305540808009X
Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000). Pay enough or don’t pay at all. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3), 791–810. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300554917
Hafifa, N., Zulkarnain, M., Isnaini, M., & Yanti, F. (2024). Partisipasi generasi muda dalam Pemilu 2024 di Kepulauan Riau. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Politik, 8(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11394268
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton University Press.
Jasper, J. M. (1998). The emotions of protest: Affective and reactive emotions in and around social movements. Sociological Forum, 13(3), 397–424. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022175308081
Komisi Pemilihan Umum. (2023). Data Pemilih Pemilu 2024. Komisi Pemilihan Umum.
Literat, I., & Kligler-Vilenchik, N. (2024). TikTok as a Key Platform for Youth Political Expression: Reflecting on the Opportunities and Stakes Involved. New Media & Society, 26(1), 69–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231157595
Loader, B. D., Vromen, A., & Xenos, M. A. (2014). The networked young citizen: Social media, political participation and civic engagement. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.871571
Megawati, S., Alfarizi, M., Syamsul, M. R., & Pradana, G. W. (2025). Behavioral model integration in studying money politics in the 2024 election: Perspectives of young Indonesian voters. Politica – Jurnal Ilmu Politik dan Komunikasi. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAP-01-2024-0009
Milbrath, L. W., & Goel, M. L. (1977). Political participation: How and why do people get involved in politics? Rand McNally College Publishing.
Mursito, M., Wijayanti, T., Irawan, H., Pradanna, S. A., & Aba, A. (2024). Critical review of millennial generation involvement in government: Opportunities and challenges in building democracy in Indonesia. Unnes Political Science Journal, 8(2), 69–77. https://doi.org/10.15294/upsj.v8i2.15330
Norris, P. (2002). Democratic phoenix: Reinventing political activism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978051161007
Pickard, S. (2017). Politically engaged leisure: The political participation of young people in contemporary Britain beyond the serious leisure model. Angles: New Perspectives on the Anglophone World, 5, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.4000/angles.1252
Putra, A., Asrul, A., Rajab, M., & Nur, L. O. M. A. (2025). Dinamika partisipasi politik generasi muda dalam Pemilu di era media sosial. Jurnal Komunikasi Politik, 11(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.59696/prinsip.v3i3.165
Setiawan, H. D., & Djafar, T. M. (2023). Partisipasi politik pemilih muda dalam pelaksanaan demokrasi di Pemilu 2024. Populis: Jurnal Sosial dan Humaniora, 8(2), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.47313/pjsh.v8i2.2877
van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v1i1.70
Venus, A., Intyaswati, D., Ayuningtyas, F., & Lestari, P. (2025). Political participation in the digital age: Impact of influencers and advertising on Generation Z. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 12(1), Article 2520063. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2025.2520063
Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press.
Wahyuningroem, S. L. (2024). Youth political participation and digital movement in Indonesia: The case of #ReformasiDikorupsi and #TolakOmnibusLaw. F1000Research, 12, Article 543. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.122669.3
Widiastuti, W. (2024). Uninformed choice: Exploring knowledge gaps among first-time voters in the 2024 legislative elections. Proceedings of International Conference on Communication and Media Digital, 1(1), 217–223. Retrieved from https://journal.uir.ac.id/index.php/icommedig/article/download/19355/7477
Yusrin, Y., & Salpina, S. (2023). Partisipasi generasi millenial dalam mengawasi tahapan pemilu 2024. Journal on Education, 5(3), 9646–9653. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v5i3.1842.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Sally Salsabila, Dwi Setiawan Chaniago, Farida Hilmi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish articles in this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Social Politics and Governance journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
