Indonesia's political elite has no statesmanship<\/p>\n
By Mochtar Buchori<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Political education has been a \"traditional\"
\nout-of-school activity among Indonesian intellectuals.
\nIndependent discussions about politics among students, from
\njunior high school up to university, has been a common feature of
\nnonformal political education.<\/p>\n
During the Japanese occupation this kind of activity was done
\nsecretively, and limited to selected students. One of the leaders
\nwho provided this kind of political education during this era
\nwas the late former vice president Mohammad Hatta.<\/p>\n
After the proclamation of independence in August 1945,
\npolitical education became an open activity. During the days of
\nGuided Democracy and for much of the New Order era, the concept
\nof political education was twisted, and what eventually emerged
\nwas political indoctrination. Today, uncorrupted political
\neducation is a prerequisite for guiding our current reform
\nmovement along a meaningful course.<\/p>\n
Who needs political education, and what kind of political
\neducation is required?<\/p>\n
Prior to the June elections, most people thought it was
\nprimarily people at the grassroots level who needed political
\neducation. This notion sprang from the observation that most
\nIndonesians, particularly those at the grassroots, determined
\ntheir support for political parties on the basis of their like or
\ndislike of political leaders.<\/p>\n
It is only among the politically informed that affiliation to
\npolitical parties is decided by ideological considerations. A
\ncase in point is the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI
\nPerjuangan). Most people have flocked to this party not because
\nthey really understand what democracy is, but primarily because
\nthey love Megawati Soekarnoputri, the party's chairwoman.<\/p>\n
This is a form of political primordialism, a condition which
\nis too primitive to serve as the basis of political organization
\nin a modern democratic society. Loyalty to personalities should
\nnot be the only basis for attracting members to a political
\norganization, and driving them toward goals that may be too novel
\nand alien for most of them.<\/p>\n
In addition, or in its stead, loyalty to party ideals or party
\nideology should be gradually nourished. It is this kind of
\npolitical education that in the recent past was thought an urgent
\nmatter in our society.<\/p>\n
Events during and after the June elections, however, have
\nshown that it is our political elite who most urgently need
\npolitical education. At the grassroots level, people demonstrated
\nquite convincingly they understood the historic meaning of the
\ngeneral election. They knew how to behave to ensure their wishes
\nfor a new society with a new political climate would be duly
\nnoted by the entire nation and the world, and would not be
\nbetrayed by political power brokers and horse traders.<\/p>\n
They played their part in the elections process quite
\nadmirably, and the elections proceeded without serious incident.<\/p>\n
It is at the level of the political elite that the sense of
\nresponsibility is lacking. The constant bickering among members
\nof the General Elections Commission and the refusal of 27
\ncommission members to endorse the results of the elections are
\nundeniable evidence of their lack of understanding of their
\nproper function at our current stage of political development.<\/p>\n
In addition, the actions of the commission show the members of
\nour political elite lack the sincerity and responsibility to
\ncarry out their political mission. If they understood that in a
\ndemocratic society the function of politics was to continuously
\nimprove the practice of governance, they would not use the
\npolitical power entrusted to them to obstruct the process of
\nforming a legitimate government.<\/p>\n
If they had learned that \"Public sentiment is to public
\nofficers what water is to the wheel of the mill\" -- to borrow the
\nphrase of Henry Ward Beecher -- they would not blatantly ignore
\nthe public passion for a new and respectable government.<\/p>\n
But apparently these political leaders do not know what the
\nfunction of politics is. Nor do they seem to possess the
\nslightest intention of respecting current public sentiment.<\/p>\n
What the commission eventually did was to show their true and
\nugly political inclinations, which is -- to paraphrase Henry
\nAdams -- to use politics as a vehicle for the systematic
\norganization of hatred.<\/p>\n
It is these kind of politicians who most urgently need
\npolitical education. It does not mean that people at the grass
\nroots level do not need political education.<\/p>\n
What it means is that providing political education for
\nordinary citizens is not as urgent as providing this same
\neducation for political leaders. This is because in the end, it
\nis the political leaders who will have to politically educate
\nordinary citizens. It would be completely irresponsible to leave
\nthe political education of ordinary citizens in the hands of
\ncorrupt political leaders.<\/p>\n
What is the proper course of such political education, what
\nshould be the format and who should carry it out?<\/p>\n
I believe political education of this kind must cover two
\naspects: Intellectual and moral. The ingredients of the
\nintellectual aspect must, in my opinion, cover the following
\npoints: The function of politics in democratic countries, the
\npolitical history of the country, the cultural basis of the
\nvarious political systems that have existed in the country and
\nthe political systems that will most likely emerge in the future.<\/p>\n
Again in my opinion, the moral aspect must emphasize political
\nethics, the moral implications of the principles of good
\ngovernance and value systems inherent in a democratic political
\nsystem.<\/p>\n
What I would like to emphasize here is that responsible
\npolitical leadership requires comprehensive knowledge of the
\ncondition of the country and its people, and commitment to an
\nagreed upon political course. It is precisely these two things
\nthat certain members of our political elite are lacking.<\/p>\n
Are our political leaders willing to attend lectures about
\nsuch issues? I don't think so. Thus the only format for this kind
\nof political education is nonformal: Discussions, dialogs,
\nworkshops and structured seminars for small groups.<\/p>\n
Who will be the educators? In the first place, they should not
\nbe referred to as \"educators\". They will in effect be
\nfacilitators who will act as discussion leaders, partners in
\ndialogs, leaders of workshops and leaders, consultants,
\nrapporteurs and participants of seminars.<\/p>\n
Will such political education ever take place in our society?<\/p>\n
I think so. If we genuinely long for a fundamental change in
\nour political culture, events of this sort will eventually take
\nplace. In the end we should not forget that, as Joss Ackland, a
\nBritish actor and dramatist, said recently, success in any
\nendeavor depends on ambition, luck and determination.<\/p>\n
Soeharto's historic resignation on May 21, 1998 is, in a way,
\nour national luck. Do we have the necessary ambition and
\ndetermination to achieve our national dream? I think we do.<\/p>\n
The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesias-political-elite-has-no-statesmanship-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }