While TDD provides a novel, integrative, and mathematically grounded framework for understanding democratic degradation, its limitations highlight the need for empirical refinement, stochastic modeling, and cross-context validation. Future research can expand its predictive and normative utility, offering emerging democracies a robust tool for safeguarding political stability and fostering accountable governance.
IX. References
1. Aspinall, E., & Sukmajati, M. (2016). Electoral dynamics in Indonesia: Money politics and clientelism. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 47(2), 205--230.
2. Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Free Press.
3. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. Wiley.
4. Buehler, M. (2017). Clientelism, vote buying, and democracy in Indonesia. Pacific Affairs, 90(1), 1--25.
5. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press.
6. Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press.
7. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597--606.
8. Indonesia Corruption Watch. (2022). Legislative monitoring report: Performance and accountability in Indonesia. Jakarta: ICW Publications.
9. Marini, R. (1984). Alienation and social theory: A sociological approach to Marx's ideas. Cambridge University Press.