After not voting, what's next?<\/p>\n
By Mochtar Buchori<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): "You don't have to vote for Golkar, but you must
\nvote!"<\/p>\n
This statement has been often repeated lately. This sounds
\nlogical, logical indeed, but is it correct?<\/p>\n
No! The expression "You must vote!" is incorrect. Voting is a
\nright and not an obligation. There is no basis whatsoever for
\nanyone to say that you must vote. The correct form of expression
\nis "Please kindly vote." It should be a request or a plea, but
\nnot a command.<\/p>\n
Speculations, discussions, and analyses about nonvoting have
\nincreased lately. Never before has a nonvoting phenomenon
\nreceived so much interest from the public. In the 1971 general
\nelection, the nonvoting phenomenon -- known at that time as the
\nGolput (White Group) phenomenon -- was also an item of public
\ndiscussion, but it was primarily limited to a small circle of
\nyoung intellectuals and government bureaucrats, especially
\nofficials within the Department of Domestic Affairs.<\/p>\n
What does nonvoting actually signify?<\/p>\n
Opinion differs in this regard, ranging from those who see it
\nas a kind of subversion to those who consider it an act of
\npolitical protest. Makmur Keliat, in his eloquent article in the
\nJakarta Post (May 5, 1997), sees in nonvoting behavior a sign of
\npolitical disobedience. Helmut Krahmer, on the other hand, sees
\nthis behavior as a political attitude of resignation and voice of
\ndesperation (in his letter to the Post, May 5, 1997).<\/p>\n
Which perception is correct? Both may be correct. As I see it,
\nnonvoting can have many meanings. It depends upon personal
\ncircumstances of each group of nonvoters. But whatever the
\ncircumstances, I do not think that nonvoting can be regarded as
\nsubversive behavior. I have not yet met a person or group of
\npeople who frankly admit that he, she or they are not going to
\nvote in the upcoming general election, or intend to do so with
\nthe purpose of "completely destroying, ruining, undermining, or
\noverthrowing" the government -- these are the various
\nclassifications of subversion.<\/p>\n
The people I have met who admit that they are not going to
\nvote are generally people with no such grandiose intentions. They
\nare people with good intentions about the country, but are very
\ndisappointed with the way politics have been handled in this
\ncountry.<\/p>\n
I do not claim to know about a broad spectrum of would-be
\nnonvoters. I have met with perhaps just a hundred of such people.
\nAs far as I can see, their motivations for not voting range from
\npersonal loyalty to Megawati to disbelief in the present
\npolitical system. This is quite a broad range.<\/p>\n
Those with deep personal loyalty to Megawati do not see any
\nsense in voting in the next general election, because they will
\nnot be able to vote for a political group they believe in. They
\nreason that since their leader and their party have been robbed
\nof their rights to be represented, participation in the general
\nelection has become meaningless to them.<\/p>\n
At this point they ask, "What is the use of participating in
\nsomething which does not have any meaning for me?" Is this
\ndisobedience? Maybe. Is this an act of desperation? Again, maybe.
\nBut it can also be seen as an act of sabotage, that is sabotaging
\nthe general election, but not undermining the country.<\/p>\n
At a greater extreme, I met people who intend to avoid polling
\nstations on May 29 for a very ethical reason. They do not want to
\nbe part of a scheme which, from their perspective, is full of
\ndeceit. They point out a number of things in defense of their
\nposition.<\/p>\n
First, the fact that the ruling group had begun its campaign
\nmuch earlier than the other two contestants. This was under the
\nguise of official trips by government officials who were all
\nacting on behalf of the ruling party. This is a clear indication
\nthat the principle of fair play had been grossly violated.<\/p>\n
Second, the fact that government officials are required to go
\nto polling stations near government offices is another indication
\nthat the government has no intention in giving full psychological
\nfreedom to government officials in expressing their political
\nchoice.<\/p>\n
Third, the color war that went on in Central Java is an
\nindication of attempts to subject the general population to
\npsychological conditioning, that there is only one color --
\nyellow -- the campaign color of Golkar.<\/p>\n
Fourth, various regulations about campaigning are tantamount
\nto blocking the other two political groups from presenting their
\nrespective campaign platform to audiences.<\/p>\n
And fifth, the screening of nominees for legislative seats by
\ngovernment agencies is another indication of the government's
\nintention to control the next House of Representatives.<\/p>\n
This list can be extended ad infinitum. Based on such a list
\nof evidence, plus the perception that we have not made any
\nsignificant progress during the past 10 to 20 years in developing
\na genuine democratic system, people conclude that participation
\nin this general election is just an act of preserving a
\nnondemocratic system.<\/p>\n
These are the two extremes. And between these two, there is a
\nwhole range of nuances. What I see within this spectrum is a
\ncontinuum of passively withholding support of the present
\nelection system, rejection of the present system, and an active
\nsearch for a new, more democratic system -- from a passive act of
\ndesperation to the beginning of the active search for an
\nalternative.<\/p>\n
Helmut Krahmer's warning that nonvoting can be
\ncounterproductive, and that it can deprive nonvoters of an
\nopportunity to participate in political discussion, deserves
\nserious attention. To avoid this pitfall, each and every would-be
\nnonvoter must decide for himself or herself, what he or she is
\ngoing to do after not voting. This requires serious thinking and
\nenlightened discussions. While it is all right to be allergic
\ntowards campaign slogans and indoctrination, we should not stop
\nthere. We must try to actively create opportunities for genuine
\npolitical discussion.<\/p>\n
The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/after-not-voting-whats-next-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }