Indonesia today<\/p>\n
It struck me during my recent first visit to Indonesia that
\nmany Javanese cities lack the transformation that is common in
\nEurope and the U.S., and which was made possible by the increase
\nin wealth.<\/p>\n
Looking at the railway tracks, for example, one can see that
\nthe Dutch did not do enough when they were in power to organize
\nrailway transportation according to the same standard as Europe.
\nIn fact, Indonesia was a colony from which wealth was taken and
\nit seems that up to now, this has retarded development of the
\ncountry.<\/p>\n
In sociology, it is common to distinguish between technical
\nand social leadership, which are two quite different tasks. In
\nIndonesia, the question seems to be how the strong social
\nleadership of Soeharto, who comes from the military camp, can be
\ncombined with the new technical leadership which is being
\ndemanded.<\/p>\n
In France, they said their king should be a friend of the
\npeasants, otherwise the bourgeoisie becomes too powerful.
\nHowever, it is from such upper classes that technical leadership
\nis recruited. Though affiliated with the bourgeoisie, the
\nmilitary cannot provide sufficiently educated economists, etc.<\/p>\n
If the "warrior class" wants to keep a grip on the situation,
\nit should realize that this is generally successful in "empires",
\na kind of (enforced) confederation of rather autonomous lands. In
\neach autonomous area, a local bourgeoisie will emerge but this is
\nbalanced somewhat by those of neighboring areas which seek the
\ninterests of their lands first. If no autonomy exists, a too-
\npowerful upper class easily rises in the capital of the empire
\nand continuous conflicts may result.<\/p>\n
Where needed, the Dutch East Indies "empire" allowed much
\nautonomy on the condition that taxes were paid in money or goods
\nfrom the plantations. While this tax was taken from the poor
\npeasants especially and caused retardation of development, the
\nJakarta social leader should do better now and spare the poor
\nworker and support him by paying out a share of oil revenues
\n(with multiplier effects).<\/p>\n
The burden must be put on the shoulders of the rich. Taxation
\nconsists of applying the law and the law is meant to protect the
\nweak against the strong and cunning. The IMF cannot work within
\nthe law and does not know about it. The IMF favors the
\nbourgeoisie with its free market principles.<\/p>\n
Most Europeans that come to Indonesia today profit enormously
\nfrom the rupiah devaluation. How many of them compensate the
\ninflation by paying more for accommodation, transportation, etc.,
\nthan the impoverished average Indonesian can? Instead, they
\nexploit in a new way.<\/p>\n
My purpose in writing is also to get from Indonesians more
\ncontributions for analysis of the situation. A start to this was
\nmade by the President when he said that what the IMF wants is, in
\npart, contradictory to the Constitution. Just realize that the
\ncontradiction counts for any good constitution since the law (to
\nprotect the weaker) must prevail above the power of money.<\/p>\n
JITSE KEIZER<\/p>\n
Amsterdam, the Netherlands<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesia-today-1447899208", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }