Daring the middle classes<\/p>\n
Leonard Simanjuntak and Sugianto Tandra, Staff, IMPARSIAL
\n(Indonesian Human Rights Monitor), Jakarta<\/p>\n
It is a fact that the current government is a coalition
\ngovernment and a pragmatic one at that, led by pragmatic
\npoliticians. Naturally, it is a government desperate to hold onto
\npower for as long as it can, regardless of its obliviousness to
\nits moot performance.<\/p>\n
As the general elections draws closer, these politicians are
\nmaking every effort to enable the current administration to stay
\nin power. At the same time, many politicians on the periphery of
\ngovernment are ready to join those in power in aiming for the
\nsame goal. If those in power do have principles, they seem ready
\nto compromise these for the sake of some stake in the future
\ndivision of power.<\/p>\n
Thus, it is reasonable to assume that strategies and tactics
\nfor the upcoming general elections are being carefully tailored,
\nboth by pragmatic forces within government and those aspiring to
\njoin government, but who are currently on the outside.<\/p>\n
The nature of electoral politics being played out in Indonesia
\nappears to be based on monopolizing the demands for security and
\nstability within urban society, especially among its middle class
\n-- thanks in large part to the ongoing U.S. war on terrorism.<\/p>\n
Indonesia's middle class has been estimated by various sources
\nat between 8 and 10 percent of the country's total voting public.
\nThis is roughly a constituency of 10 million voters. Given that
\nthe elections will be contested by 24 parties, this is a
\nsignificant figure. If these votes are added to the number of
\ntraditional voters, the parties of the present government -- and
\nthose aspiring to join them -- look set to retain the status quo
\nwhen middle-class votes are fought over in April next year.<\/p>\n
To date, various surveys indicate that the middle class is
\nstill largely undecided in their preferred party, let alone
\nlegislative candidates. The question is: How can the status quo
\nwin these middle-class votes? What are their electoral politics?
\nWhat do the parties of the status quo have to offer the middle
\nclass, supposedly the swinging voters of the general elections?<\/p>\n
It seems the electoral strategy is worryingly hinged on what
\nwe call here a security-and-stability approach to politics. If
\nour swinging voters buy into this approach, then Indonesia is
\ncertain to slide back into authoritarianism and another
\nrepressive political era.<\/p>\n
However -- at least until now -- the middle class still holds
\nthe agency of power. If they realize the dangers of voting for
\nthe status quo forces, then they should resort to what we call
\nprotest voting. This is in contrast to the recurring calls for
\nnon-voting, or golput in Indonesian parlance.<\/p>\n
We believe protest voting -- if exercised -- could be
\ntantamount to public recall voting against a poor-performing
\ngovernment, one which seems to be using our longing for stability
\nand security as a justification for repressing our political and
\ncivil liberties. This is the conclusion we have arrived at after
\nexamining the creeping tendency in government toward a return to
\nauthoritarianism.<\/p>\n
Take the recently passed Antiterrorism Law. This is a law
\npurposely intended to strengthen the roles of the National
\nIntelligence Agency (BIN) and the military -- in particular, the
\nArmy -- in fighting "terrorism". But, as many observers have
\nrepeatedly forewarned, the law would be prone to abuse. These
\nwarnings now appear to be vindicated.<\/p>\n
In the name of "national security", a number of human rights
\nand environmental activists in Garut, Porsea and Manggarai have
\nbeen threatened with arrest based on this draconian law. Several
\nothers, including South Sulawesi farmers protesting what they
\nbelieved to be illegal occupation of their land by state-backed
\ncorporate actors, have been added to the police's wanted list.
\nIronically, these occurrences all happened -- and are indeed
\nstill happening -- amid the nation's transition toward democracy.<\/p>\n
Many human rights activists have been targeted simply because
\nthey have helped to voice the plight of the powerless who have
\nbeen deprived of their social, economic and cultural rights by
\nstate actors. Lamentable though it may be, it is probably only a
\nmatter of time before activists of the Urban Poor Consortium
\n(UPC) or the Sanggar Ciliwung are arrested for siding with the
\npoor.<\/p>\n
The above cases are not unique. There are many others, such as
\nthe fatal shooting in Bulukumba district, South Sulawesi, of two
\nfarmers -- who, along with hundreds of others, were lawfully
\ndemonstrating against publicly listed PP London Sumatra Indonesia
\nrubber plantation -- by the police.<\/p>\n
More blatantly, a case that has received significant attention
\nfrom concerned sectors of the middle class -- especially the mass
\nmedia and intellectuals -- is the case of evictions by the
\nJakarta administration. Yes, Jakartans do crave order and
\ncleanliness for their city, but claiming to be providing this by
\nevicting the poor from their ramshackle homes is certainly beyond
\nany thinking person's comprehension. "Sort out the root causes,
\nstupid!", has, we believe, been the general public response to
\nthe Jakarta administration's action. Again, the evictions are far
\nfrom unique, and occur regularly across many cities in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
If this is the case, then there must be something terribly
\nwrong with this country's development strategy. Indeed, we
\nbelieve that Indonesia's development strategy is one that is by
\nnature anti-poor, not anti-poverty. Simply put, the above
\nincoherent policies are aimed at rooting out the poor from the
\ncities while simultaneously targeting poverty reduction.<\/p>\n
This, then, is the backdrop to the unfolding electoral
\npolitics of the status quo. The government appears to be --
\nperhaps deliberately -- missing the point in believing that human
\nrights activists should be treated as terrorists. Furthermore,
\nneither should radical Islamist activists be treated as
\nterrorists. What needs to be tackled are the roots causes of
\npublic dissatisfaction with what is still a corporate- or elite-
\nbiased development strategy. That is, assuming Indonesia does
\nactually have a development strategy.<\/p>\n
So, should we resort to non-voting, or voting the status-quo
\nforces back in, or should we instead resort to protest voting? We
\nrecommend the latter. It is worth considering the academic
\nfindings of Ronald Inglehart in his 1997 book, Modernization and
\nPostmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43
\nSocieties, by Princeton University Press.<\/p>\n
Inglehart found in his research that the voting behavior of
\ngrowing numbers of the world's middle classes was based more on
\npostmodern values such as freedom, democracy, beauty and the
\nimportance of ideas than on purely economic or materialistic
\nconcerns.<\/p>\n
The oppression of civil and political liberties in the name of
\neconomic growth and political stability should therefore be
\nconsistently rejected. A government that resorts to these
\nstrategies should be voted out.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/daring-the-middle-classes-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}